Friday, April 27, 2007


GenderGappers 2007 – 018


Love may be better the second time around but presidential campaigns are not. We were Gored once and even though we can all agree he is a smart man with lots of experience, he has no stomach for a ballot fight.

Both Kerry’s and Gore’s campaigns were just one disaster after another as they dithered and dathered and put us to sleep with rhetoric and bombast. And at the end both John and Al lacked the guts to fight for the victory they had won at the polls.

Both gave practically the same excuse - that it would be harmful for the country to prolong the battle. Early on the signs were there as Al turned his back on President Clinton, supposedly to “be his own man” and had to have a consultant to get him dressed.

Kerry tried to emulate Bush’s productive photo-ops and fell flat on his face. His antics were what made the Swift Boater’s lies believable to many in the country. From his bird hunting costume to wind surfing when he should have been campaigning, he projected the playboy image.

Both have shown where their niche lies and done so admirably. We need Al at the forefront of the environmental movement; we need John in the Senate where he is so affective and so at home.

The country has had enough of nice-guy Democratic losers; you know the type women swoon over and far-Left Wingers believe are the Second Coming. The White House is in need of a good housecleaning; along the lines we have seen when Speaker Nancy Pelosi took charge of the House of Representatives.

We need someone who will be “in it to win it”; someone who is smart and tough and who will fight tooth and nail to the end for the last ballot. We need a strong, intelligent, experienced woman to clean up, not only the White House but our hideous reputation in the world today.

We need a woman because she won’t spend her time dressing up in soldier suits and parading on the decks of battle ships playing sailor boy. Most women put their toys away at adulthood while men never do consistently.

Just let the martial music play and there they are urging one bunch of uniformed hulks to kill the other bunch of uniformed hulks without a thought for anything as long as the beer and franks keep coming.

As many writers have noted before us, “the best man for the job of president is a woman”, and we Democrats have a fighter this time – Hillary Rodham Clinton.
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change address or comment: or in GenderGappers Blog - NEW! the GenderGappers link page: GenderGappers articles may be forwarded if you wish, and translated into other languages, but please keep them intact. All issues are archived at the following site:

Friday, April 20, 2007


GenderGappers 2007 – 017


All sorts of reasons are put forth by Democrats concerning why they will not vote for a certain Democratic candidate. Some take their cue from the Republican’s FOX News and Talking Points; others may object to the candidate’s inexperience, color, gender or funding source.

But the most idiotic reason we have heard is that if “another Clinton” is elected that would mean, “Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton. Horrors! A dynasty in the making rather than the democracy we aspire to continue.”

When did it happen that a woman taking her husband’s last name when married [as is customary] make her in his image or blood line? Are we still governed by the Book of Ruth? Did the Constitution not get changed to include women as independent human beings instead of their husband’s chattel?

Obliteration of women is best seen in our history and still persists in our genealogies. The male child lives on; the female is transformed or ignored for the most part. There are exceptions:

Hillary Rodham Clinton is NOT of the lineage of William Jefferson Clinton any more than any woman is demoted from human stature at marriage or becomes a descendent of their husband.

Women are more, often much more, than the man they marry, yet when they die they are usually identified in the first paragraph of their obituary as, “the wife of…” Have you seen many males ID’d as “the husband of?”

Liz Daley died at the age of 68. She was a life long LIBERAL writ large. She was long active in Vermont politics recently endorsing Peter Welch for Congress.

She often surprised people with her independence and outspokenness. Marcelle Leahy, who had known Liz since high school said, “She was an energy-giver who exemplified New England stamina and Green Mountain gumption. She worked courageously to help other Vermonters struggling against cancer. She helped make Vermont a better place.”

“She was a strong courageous voice for common sense and independence in the Vermont tradition” declared Vermont Governor Douglas.

During the 2004 campaign, Liz put a Howard Dean for President sign in the front yard. She once described herself as “an opinionated LIBERAL with my mother’s big mouth” unable to keep her views to herself.

She was married for 25 years, except for a hiatus of 8 years, to Senator Jim Jeffords, a life-long Republican. Some may remember how he got a gutful of the present government and finished his term as an Independent, voting with the Democrats.

Liz and Jim had two children. Liz chose to raise them in Vermont, not caring for the kind of society she would have been expected to hob knob with in D.C. as the wife of a Republican legislator.

Liz was always her own person – no more a descendent of Jim’s than he was of hers. Vermont has lost a giant.
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change address or comment: or in GenderGappers Blog - NEW! the GenderGappers link page: GenderGappers articles may be forwarded if you wish, and translated into other languages, but please keep them intact. All issues are archived at the following site:

Friday, April 13, 2007


You don’t have to listen to Fox news and related programs to hear Democratic candidates for president being savaged. Just check out most Democratic Lists and Blogs.

We googled out quite a few internet sites to see how prevalent gnashing their own is because we were gobsmacked when we encountered a particularly disgusting and ignorant offering recently.

We found that no Dem candidate was spared, but the top three, called the front runners, get the most negative attention. It seems that many Dems are incapable of only supporting their own choice but must denigrate other Democratic candidates.

In contrast, aside from a few low key remarks such as commenting on Giuliani’s marriage record, Republicans write positive things about the candidate of their choice and do not trash the others.

John Edwards appeared to have the least ugly things written about him. But there were vile remarks about using his wife’s illness to further his candidacy. In addition, mild disapproval was shown with his attention to his coif – just not the manly thing, ya know.

Barack Obama has his critics that find him inexperienced and pushy. He is faulted for thinking he can replace charm for taking strong political stands; and for stealing his message and funding strategy from former Vermont Governor, Howard Dean.

The most insidious and potentially harmful charges against him backfired on the Democrat who initially presented them to implicate Senator Clinton. However some damage was done to Senator Obama because that Democrat had a connection to his campaign and this stuff gets recycled.

But for shear nastiness, misinformation and ignorance, posts concerning Senator Clinton outweighed the ones against the male candidates. The great majority of them was against her as a woman and contained phrases right out of the late Don Imus Show. HRC was routinely called "evil" and "Satan" by Imus--not in a joking manner. Few if any Democrats protested, instead, many echoed Imus’s sexism and hatred for women on their Lists and Blogs.

Although we found some adult blogs and lists, most seemed populated by juveniles who bombarded any support for Clinton with nasty comments. Overall, pro-Hillary comments were discouraged by this violent response – so much for Democracy!

In this present anti-Imus flap, Imus is attacked for his sexism as well as his racism and we are finally seeing women like NOW President, Kim Gandy on TV. Now if an aroused populace would go after Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Savage, Tucker and all the other hate mongers spreading sexism and racism.
The post that led us to check out more occurrences of Dems eating their own sadly originated from a woman. It exemplifies the reasons why most men were against the idea of women voting – that they weren’t intelligent enough, too flighty, and too emotional to gage a person’s qualifications. Her post instructed on what you, like her, should base your vote, she urged you:
-- to watch Hillary and note that she “still looks self-centered and without empathy”. Whereas, if you meet Obama “you feel you have known him since the beginning of time”. Edwards, she has not seen in person but considers him to be committed, a gentle man, but not egotistical enough. Isn’t it just amazing to have such powers? She could out Imus, Imus. It reminds us of the idiot Bush looking into Putin’s eyes and knowing all about him. May the Force protect us from Democratic women voters like her.
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change address or comment: or in GenderGappers Blog - NEW! the GenderGappers link page: GenderGappers articles may be forwarded if you wish, and translated into other languages, but please keep them intact. All issues are archived at the following site:

Friday, April 06, 2007


Who should women vote for? The answer is: ANYONE THEY WANT TO. But it is important that all women pay homage to the sacrifice of the many women who made the advances of women toward equality possible.

That means that American voters must support Senator Clinton’s run for office by insisting that she be treated as they themselves would want to be treated. Women especially should insist on fairness for the woman who is breaking a barrier for all of us. No special favors requested – just an even playing field.

Women are sexually and religiously humiliated all over the world and in many cases other women condone this or even defend this as “customary”.

We all know that politics manifest as word-wars. It seems permission is given by the electorate to attack one’s political opponent any which way they choose. Truth need not be a factor of an attack.

Nevertheless, Americans still have a modicum of fairness left and it is to this that we appeal. Is it fair that one candidate is slurred because of her gender while another is protected from slurs by our society?

We are all familiar with the highly derogatory words, sexual overtones and phrases used over the eons that derogate women. This has reached a crescendo over the candidacy of Senator Hillary Clinton. The major agenda of these “Swiftboat-like” tactics is to prevent a woman presidency by appealing to the macho with salacious descriptions, lies and innuendo.

The Repug campaign is never alone in their use and abuse. Pundits gleefully jump on board along with Talkers and some Bloggers to incessantly drag any woman through the mud with the tried and true slurs aimed to frighten off possible voters.

It’s not just here that it happens. If you are old enough to remember how former P.M. Margaret Thatcher of Great Britain was chewed up over the years you know how vicious and blatant the sexism can be.

Now imagine that the pundits, media and Blogs went after Barac for his racial characteristics? Hey, don’t scream, it used to be customary! Some very horrible things have been said and believed about Blacks throughout history. These have been given life in films, in books and in present day rap lyrics. It wasn’t right then and it isn’t right now!

Actually, some Bloggers have ventured into the realm of tit for tat – ie, if you are going to play the sexist game, we will play the racist game. But listen to the wailing and gnashing of teeth from the media rushing to scream racism as they ignore and contribute to sexism!

“It’s not the same thing”, they scream in fury, “it’s customary to say these nasty things about women, and it’s customary to use words with a sexual reference that are derogatory and humiliating to women.

Yeah, it’s customary all right. We women hear, see and experience it everyday. Sad to say many of us put up with it thus encouraging even more sexist slurs. Even now there are those women creaming for a blonde whiteboy or a brunette blackboy [oops, can’t say “blackboy”, can we?] instead of standing up for a woman candidate with the courage to stand up for them.

Most of the reasons women have for disliking Senator Clinton comes from the right wing propaganda machine Talking Points [repeated endlessly by the media] that have been feeding lies about her since Bill Clinton ran for president.

Ask yourself, “Why is it that you know Repugs for the liars they are yet find all their propaganda relating to Hillary Clinton is true?” And check out what honorable, honest people like Representative Charlie Rangel, who really know Hillary, have to say.

Our Foremothers fought for the abolition of slavery. Our Foremothers fought for the right of Blacks to vote. As a result of their fight, Black MEN were allowed to vote.

Women kept on fighting until ALL women were given the right to vote. It’s time all women think about the sacrifices made for them by their foremothers and fight for the right for themselves and their daughters to be protected from sexual slurs just as Blacks are protected now from racial slurs.

GenderGappers invite you to support and contribute to this brave woman as we have.

To subscribe, unsubscribe, change address or comment: or in GenderGappers Blog - NEW! the GenderGappers link page: GenderGappers articles may be forwarded if you wish, and translated into other languages, but please keep them intact. All issues are archived at the following site: