Oh, Uncle Sugar — please save me from my raging libido!

Support Local Journalism

LOGIN
REGISTER

With the recent implosion of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s presidential chances, the last thing the Republican party needed was a sucker punch from ironically cuddly Presidential has-been Mike Huckabee, at the Republican National Committee’s winter meeting last week:

“If the Democrats want to insult the women of America by making them believe that they are helpless without Uncle Sugar coming in and providing for them a prescription each month for birth control because they cannot control their libido or their reproductive system without the help of government, then so be it!”

But wait, there’s more:

“The fact is the Republicans don’t have a war on women, they have a war for women, to empower them to be something other than victims of their gender.”

And:

“Women I know are outraged that Democrats think that women are nothing more than helpless and hopeless creatures whose only goal in life is to have the government provide for them birth control medication. Women I know are smart, educated, intelligent, capable of doing anything that anybody else can do.”

Wow. It’s such easy pickings, it’s almost embarrassing to respond. Yet, just as my cat must attack her catnip mouse, so must I pounce on the ranting of this baby-faced buffoon.

Mr. Huckabee, you poor, sad, confused man. Let’s get some things straight:

Federally funded birth control isn’t about “the women of America.” It’s about low-income women who can’t afford contraceptives or don’t have insurance coverage. Deny them birth control, and they’ll have unwanted pregnancies, resulting in federally funded abortions or federally funded welfare, medical care and food stamps for the next 18 years. Federally funded contraceptives, or federally funded abortions and poverty. You decide.

Next, a simple biology lesson. Women don’t get pregnant because they can’t control their libido. There’s another libido involved here — and that one contributes the sperm. It takes two uncontrolled libidos to make an unwanted pregnancy, and one of them has a Y chromosome. So, let’s not casually toss unwanted pregnancy under the “wicked, wanton female” umbrella, with its cute little Scarlet A logo.

As for empowering women to be “something other than victims of their gender.” Say what? Women are not victims of their gender. Rather, women have been historically, repeatedly, chronically victimized by those of the other gender! Women do not self-victimize any more than they self-impregnate. Again, you conveniently ignore half of the equation and, more important, most of the culpability.

As for your backhanded comment that women are “smart, educated, intelligent and capable of doing anything that anybody else can do,” true, true, true and … not so much. Women can do anything men can do except one: Have sex whenever we like without the risk of pregnancy. We need birth control in order to enjoy our own bodies in the same way that men always have.

So, listen up, Mr. Huckabee, and the Republican party too: As long as women are the only ones who can get pregnant, we’re the only ones with the right to make birth control decisions. So, how ’bout you all just crawl out of our vaginas and get back to work on housing, national debt and government spying and whatnot.

Just one more Huckabee nugget: “Democrats rely on women believing they are weaker than men and in need of government handouts, including the contraception mandate in Obamacare.” Women vote predominantly Democratic because we think we’re weak? What sort of mind-mud is this? On the contrary, women feel empowered, voting (and we can do that now, Mike!) for the party that most closely aligns itself with the freedoms and rights we deserve. (Hint: doesn’t start with “R”.)

Moreover, women represent 53 percent of the voting population. The majority. And, we hugely resent Republicans moonlighting as armchair gynecologists. It’s why you keep losing elections, guys. And will continue to do so. Oh, that pesky 19th Amendment.

I could go on slicing and dicing, but there’s a side story to Huckabee’s rant that’s a real gem —  RNC Chairman Reince Priebus’ reaction: “I don’t know what he was talking about.”

Is that brilliant, or what? This sentence could save the Republican party from itself, whenever some misogynistic numbskull opens his mouth in front of a microphone:

Former Rep. Todd Akin: “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”

I don’t know what he was talking about.

Senator Saxby Chambliss, regarding military rape: “Gee whiz, the hormone level created by nature sets in place the possibility for these types of things to occur.”

I don’t know what he was talking about.

Former Rep. Joe Walsh on abortion: “When we talk about exceptions, we talk about rape, incest, health of a woman, life of a woman. Life of the woman is not an exception.”

I don’t know what he was talking about.

U.S. Senate candidate Richard Mourdock on pregnancy resulting from rape: “Life is a gift from God, and I think even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something God intended to happen.”

I don’t know what he was talking about.

And, the grandaddy of them all, from Texas gubernatorial candidate Clayton Williams regarding rape: “As long as it’s inevitable, you might as well lie back and enjoy it.”

I don’t know what he was talking about.

It’s the perfect “out.” It’s what you’d say after a schizophrenic told you about the lizard men from Planet Zontar.  It’s a polite way of saying, “Holy moly, that’s some kinda crazy there!” Republicans, this is your free pass when one of your brethren blathers some outrageous, backwards, dimwitted nonsense: I don’t know what he was talking about. At least women will cut you some slack for recognizing an idiot when you see one. Sadly, however, women do know exactly what they’re talking about: Sexism. And that’s why we vote predominantly Democratic. Not because we want Uncle Sugar to swoop in and save us from our libidos.

— Email Debra DeAngelo at debra@wintersexpress.com; read more of her work at www.wintersexpress.com and www.ipinionsyndicate.com

Total
0
Shares
12 comments
  1. Debra, the remarks you quoted from the other republicans in this piece are vile. Huckabee’s comments, although awkward in places, had a lot of truth I believe. Democrats, particularly Obama, have tried to buy elections by gifting demographics (women, minorities, gays) for a quid pro quo arrangement. I believe it was around a year ago, Harry Reid said he didn’t know why any Mexican would be a Republican. Here’s a man who said in his book (around ’09 or ’10) that Obama was a good candidate because we was light skinned and didn’t use the typical Negro dialect. Is this the language of a party who respects women and minorities or one that just wants to collect votes? Personally, I am in favor of government funded birth control and abortion. However, Huckabee is a bright, thoughtful man who raised a good question (albeit awkwardly): Do you want to be a member of a party in substance, or just a vote to be pocketed with a bribe? Obama’s beliefs on gay marriage, and more recently marijuana (which I also am in favor of legalizing) “evolve” right along with the majority. After the Obamacare debacle, Obama is mining for votes with income inequality. One has to wonder what concepts he would be willing to embrace in the hunt for votes.

    1. “Do you want to be a member of a party in substance, or just a vote to be pocketed with a bribe?” Recent events have shown that prominent Republicans on the national stage like Chris Christie and Gov. McDonnell have, given your choice, taken the bribe. The whole republican party is dedicated to getting as much unregulated and undisclosed money into politics as they can, essentially the legalization of bribery, because then the richest corporations and plutocrats decide the outcome. But in your upside down world, the president defending social insurance for all is a “bribe,” while republicans taking gobs of money from bankers so they can self-regulate again and lead us into the next economic meltdown is “substance.”

  2. Debra, the remarks you quoted from the other republicans in this piece are vile. Huckabee’s comments, although awkward in places, had a lot of truth I believe. Democrats, particularly Obama, have tried to buy elections by gifting demographics (women, minorities, gays) for a quid pro quo arrangement. I believe it was around a year ago, Harry Reid said he didn’t know why any Mexican would be a Republican. Here’s a man who said in his book (around ’09 or ’10) that Obama was a good candidate because we was light skinned and didn’t use the typical Negro dialect. Is this the language of a party who respects women and minorities or one that just wants to collect votes? Personally, I am in favor of government funded birth control and abortion. However, Huckabee is a bright, thoughtful man who raised a good question (albeit awkwardly): Do you want to be a member of a party in substance, or just a vote to be pocketed with a bribe? Obama’s beliefs on gay marriage, and more recently marijuana (which I also am in favor of legalizing) “evolve” right along with the majority. After the Obamacare debacle, Obama is mining for votes with income inequality. One has to wonder what concepts he would be willing to embrace in the hunt for votes.

    1. “Do you want to be a member of a party in substance, or just a vote to be pocketed with a bribe?” Recent events have shown that prominent Republicans on the national stage like Chris Christie and Gov. McDonnell have, given your choice, taken the bribe. The whole republican party is dedicated to getting as much unregulated and undisclosed money into politics as they can, essentially the legalization of bribery, because then the richest corporations and plutocrats decide the outcome. But in your upside down world, the president defending social insurance for all is a “bribe,” while republicans taking gobs of money from bankers so they can self-regulate again and lead us into the next economic meltdown is “substance.”

  3. Yes, the Democratic Party has to create and seek victims, in order to remain in power. Gone is the party of JFK. And Miss DeAngelo continues to carry water for their purposes.

  4. Yes, the Democratic Party has to create and seek victims, in order to remain in power. Gone is the party of JFK. And Miss DeAngelo continues to carry water for their purposes.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Previous Article

But wait, there's more! That face on TV may be familiar

Next Article

I still like Obama, I just stopped listening to him

Related Posts