Christofacist Godbag Stacy McCain asked for civility lessons from Harpy feminist Mellissa McEwan, then showed her how much of a hypocrite she is;
Let me begin this response to Melissa McEwan by citing Ann Coulter, not because she is a woman — certainly not one of those “liberal women constantly talking about their vaginas suddenly pretending to be offended by the word ‘slut’” — but because Coulter dared to tell the truth about Max Cleland’s Vietnam war injuries.
Flashback to 2002 (and I should include a “trigger alert” for liberals traumatized by that year’s mid-term elections) when Cleland was running for re-election to the Senate in Georgia. His Republican opponent Saxby Chambliss hit Cleland hard for having insisted on union rights for Homeland Security employees, Democrats claimed this was an attack on Cleland’s patriotism and, because of Cleland’s status as a disabled Vietnam War veteran, when Chambliss won the election, “Democrats began citing Cleland’s lost Senate seat as proof that Republicans hate war heroes,” to quote Coulter.
Among those who worked to craft that false narrative was notorious liar Eric Boehler, who said “Cleland lost both his legs and his right hand to a Viet Cong grenade” — which is a damned lie: Cleland was not wounded by hostile enemy action. His was not a combat injury, but inflicted by an American grenade that somebody dropped at at a division assembly area where Cleland decided to “have a beer with some friends.” Cleland himself never claimed to have been a hero, but liberals dishonestly did so, as part of a calculated strategy of playing the “chicken hawk” card against George W. Bush in the 2004 campaign.
Then rape and victimhood…or how all republicans are just dirty old men just waiting for the opportunity to sexually assault any woman they see;
Well . . . rape.
Can we just begin this part of the discussion by making clear that nobody is in favor of rape? Certainly, Republicans are not pro-rape, but maybe Juanita Broaddrick would have something to say about the Democrat policy on rape. (“Better put some ice on that.”) It should not be necessary to issue disclaimers like this — I’m also anti-burglary, anti-car-theft and anti-aggravated-assault — except that liberals have spent so much time trying to turn rape into a partisan issue. Exploiting rape to elect Democrats is acceptable (ask Todd Akin), but is grievously wrong when Republicans do it. In 1988, Democrat concern for Willie Horton’s victims Cliff and Angela Barnes manifested itself mainly as Mike Dukakis blathering on about his ACLU membership and liberals accusing Republicans of racism.
So when it was reported that Cleveland “house of horrors” rapist Ariel Castro is a registered Democrat, this was the kind of fact liberals were certain to ignore. The media was happy to have the Cleveland story (and the Jodi Arias verdict) as an excuse not to cover the Benghazi hearings, but now that we know the perpetrator was a Democrat, we’re likely to see a bit less coverage. And given how the media have spent the past four years endlessly trying to pin the Tea Party label on a mass murderer — from Tucson to Aurora to Boston — there must have been a huge letdown for liberals when they learned Ariel Castro is not a Rush Limbaugh listener. And, because this is National Offend a Feminist Week . . .
So Stacy, bringing up Healy, decides to step off the field for a breather whilst he researches and thinks up a proper response to Mizz McEwan;
Well, I’m willing to drop this and move on. Healey’s First Law of Holes, and all that. But neither am I going to be lectured about decorum by deranged hate-filled moonbats. So I’ve considered what arguments I might make if these fanatics decide to belabor the point.
Did I mention she’s crazy? No, but she did.
And it’s still National Offend a Feminist Week, you know.
On the lighter side, maybe Mizz McEwan just needs a little tenderness and our friend in the ether, Bob Belvedere shows us how it’s done;
10 May 2013 @ 07:35
I’ve taken part in National Offend A Feminist Week since the great Stacy McCain created it in 2009. During each annual event, I’ve posted many bits of solid and enduring wisdom on how a woman should behave for her husband, how a husband should treat a woman who knows her place and those who refuse to follow Nature, and why every single, solitary thing about the Women’s Liberation Movement is wrong and sucks rotten eggs.
The most popular non-Rule 5 specific post I’ve published in the last five years, with over 20,000 page views and counting, has been my brilliant treatise on Wife Spanking. I have to modestly admit that it is quite the tour de force of Reason, logic, prudence, and wisdom. The information presented in it is timeless and that is why I’m republishing it here, now [that and I also have to help Mrs. B. with cleaning chores].
So, without further adieu [or adon’t], herewith, a brief primer on…
SHOULD WIVES BE SPANKED?
Now I bet that some of you out there think, based on mypastNOAFWpostings, you know my feelings well enough to say: ‘Oh that’s easy: Bob will say yes; after all, he is the Bobby Riggs of The Blogosphere’. Well, your wrong panty hose breath. My position is, shall we say, ‘nuanced’. Herewith is a brief primer on my way of thinking on this matter, complete with a lot of pictures for you gals so you can understand and for you former Bolshe males who still suffer from the permanent damage done to your brain matter…
Wife spanking is not something new in Western Civilization. For many centuries, it was the right of the husbands to perform the task as a way of keeping wives in line, especially those suffering from Hysteria [a common occurrence amongst women, even today]: