Women's Suffrage and NOW (National organization for Women).

I was reading about the women's suffrage movement in jolly old England. What a horrible time to be a woman. The women who marched to get the vote for women were arrested and tortured for those beliefs. When they went on a hunger fast to protest the cruelty, they had a tube shoved down their throat and were force fed. Unfortunately, those doing it didn't know (or care) what they were doing and a number of these women died by asphyxiation because it was shoved into a lung, not their stomach. But it didn't matter if the woman were poor, there were just more of them to be found.

When the Equal Rights Amendment was proposed, I remember the arguments against it. Somehow, women were found to be inferior to men? That those with a penis were somehow better than those with wombs. I ran across this in a trade school where one of the instructors (an old Navy retiree) informed me that women did not have the ability to see a spatal (his words)relationships in the wiring for electronics. After hearing his spittle, spatal or whatever, I determined he was TRYING to say spatial. This was from an instructor I was supposed to take classes from.

Maybe this is why as students in high school, girls were NOT ALLOWED to take drafting, NOT ALLOWED to take woodworking, NOT ALLOWED to take automotive shops. We kept asking why, but were just told that girls JUST COULDN'T DO THAT, SO WHY TAKE THE CLASSES.

Now we have had a number of women running for high political office. Going back to Geraldine Ferraro up to the present. The political media seem to think in the same mindset that WOMEN JUST CAN'T DO THAT. I fear that their penises might not be good enough. Women do not need penises to be logical, and to do what must be done. The problem is, those same women who marched for the equal rights amendment do not believe that women who are not in their little group deserve their rights. Why is this so? They believe that those women who do not believe the same way they do are somehow inferior? somehow less than them?, somehow do not deserve their help?

I say SHAME, SHAME, SHAME. What does it matter? Why don't other women, regardless of their political affiliations, deserve the same outcry that those who have different views have?

NOW, The National Organization for Women, IS A FARCE. It is a lie that has been foisted on the women of America. Sure, they SAY that they are for ALL WOMEN, but their actions do not reflect that.

NOW is anti-abortion, because somehow they feel that babies are fine to flush down a toilet because they are inconvenient, but do not address the other issues that cause women to need to get abortions in the first place. Lack of self esteem, unwillingness to take responsibility for their actions, and the brutality of some men who look at women as objects. They do not look at the fact that if a women can get pregnant, she can become infected with AIDS, HIV, HERPES and more. It is as if a baby is more of a threat than these possibly mortal diseases.

We have not changed much. Sure, we are allowed to play any and all sports we chose, including the marathon races. Ironically, women do better in the super marathon type races because their bodies can endure more than most males. We can vote, we do not require a man to run a business and women who succeed are much better than the men who think they are inferior. They have to be.

BUT, as long as NOW and other "liberal" organizations (including the liberal press), do not look at a woman running for office as "good enough" to do the job, who create spurious lies about it and are not flooded with letters arguing with these points of views, then women will forever be considered inferior.

Let the NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF WOMEN stand up for ALL WOMEN, not just the few that happen to believe like they do, and do something for ALL OF US. Either that or give up any vestiges of truth.

News media feeding frenzy

The current news media are in a feeding frenzy of bias and attack. It is appalling the manner of their attack, on the baby, on the family, on the husband and has not put forth anything of the candidate. WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON?

All I hear is how good Mr. Obama is and how horrible it is that the family of Sarah Palin is because they are regular people. It is very surprising to me that they haven't mentioned the DUIs that Congress has had, Ted Kennedy for one. How many times the Senators have gotten freebies and waved off because the elitists felt that they were above the law. Give me a break, the press are so two-faced.

It is sad that the people who are there to inform us and give us information which we can use to make an informed decision. Why, oh why, can't they be true to that ideal instead of to personal interests. I wonder too, HAS THE PRESS BEEN PAID TO BE POSITIVE TO ONE SIDE AND TO TRY TO ATTACK THE OTHER????

They are sitting there lying to the American people. They try to pick negative information on one side and ignore the facts on the other side. Rather giving us a good picture of what each candidate is and what they have done and what they are, the media is giving us trivia, focusing not on the issues but on little things.

Tom Brokaw lost it

I was walking by the TV when I heard a very strident male voice. I turned to watch and saw it was Meet the Press. I looked and Mr. Brokaw looked very angry and belligerent. I started listening to his interview with the Governor of Minnesota. Every time Mr. Brokaw asked a question about Sarah Palin, the Governor had a strong answer for him that showed that she had more experience than Barack Obama. She had more experience in governing, more experience in national security, had been Commander in Chief of the Alaska National Guard, had negotiated with oil companies to provide a relief of gas prices to Alaskans and dealt with corruption in the Alaska government. All Mr. Obama had was that he had been a professional campaigner (my interpretation). I mean, after all, what is a community organizer. Did he make any difference and has it continued to grow after he left?

Mr. Brokaw had more and more of an expression which looked to me like he was angry that the Governor did not believe him and had a rebuttal for every question. It was almost like, How dare you think something other than what I say and how dare you question my belief in my candidate.

It was actually quite hysterical. It was a real evidence of Tom Brokaw's bias towards Mr. Obama because he actually defended Mr. Obama. I think he needs to retire for good if that is his idea of fairness in the news.