Indisputably? I do not think it means what you think it means.

Former (ersatz) president Obama recently claimed that women are indisputably better leaders than men.  There are so many problems with that but I will highlight three.

(1) He's looking at groups not individuals.  That's always a flawed approach. Whether it's about assessing people or how you treat people, it's a recipe for division, something Democrats excel at doing deliberately.

(2) He's using the Al Gore "the debate is over" tactic to silence opposing views. Al Gore used the approach to end discussion on climate change when he could not argue facts.  Obama is using it here as a glibly tossed out thought in an effort to pander to an audience. To what end, who can say.?

(3) He offers no specific evidence. In fact it's mere opinion but it's disguised as fact, it's meant to lead opinion, not facilitate discussion or invite commentary.  That's contrary to everything the president claimed to be about - open inclusive discussion. Yeah, not so much.

The former president, clearly pandering, is once again proving that he is all style, no substance.

Tim Pool goes into more depth below.  I don't think Obama's foolhardy pronouncement needs it but Tim Pool does a good job of dissecting it, nonetheless.

Fiorina on Obama vs. Women

This is a good clip, but not her best from the debate, just the best I could find this evening.

Expanding the conservative base

A couple of videos on how conservatism can spread it's message to a broader base, and start getting the discussion back on ground where we aren't pre-demonized for fictitious reasons made up by the left .

On going viral:

On the subject of women:

Thursday Hillary Bash - Setting her campaign back story up

It looks like Hillary Clinton has got the storyline set for her 2016 presidential campaign, and it's about her being the woman champion for all women.  "Women Who Break Barriers" is meant to imply her becoming the first female president but also symbolically link her to all other women who have broken or want to break glass ceilings for themselves.



“Hypothetically speaking, I really do hope that we have a woman president in my lifetime,” Clinton said coyly, making an implicit nod to the history she might make herself. “Our country,” she added, “has to take that leap of faith.”

Unlike during her 2008 presidential campaign, when she waited until her concession speech to fully embrace the historic nature of her candidacy, Clinton these days talks freely about women breaking barriers. She has woven a theme of women’s empowerment throughout almost all of her public remarks in the seven months since she stepped down as secretary of state.

Want more Hillary bashing? Click the pic to find related content.

As I said to a friend long ago, having the first African American president be a dismal failure does not make it any easier to ever get a second African American president any time soon after.  The same holds true for Hillary Clinton - philosophically she is not that far from president Obama.  So another four years of a floundering economy paired with forefront social policies that run against the grain of middle America, mean that it could be a long time after a theoretical Hillary Clinton presidency that a second female president ever gets a shot.

The point is that there is no reason not to have an African American, a female, a Hispanic or a gay president but that those selection criteria and potential empathy for a voting block are not qualifications for a good president.  Those attributes MUST come second to the real qualities of a good leader - knowledge, competence, vision, etc.

Just because Clinton is a woman, does not entitle her to the presidency in 2016.  Plenty of women are qualified to be president.  Hillary Clinton is not one of them.  We've already seen her policy approach fail because they are being implemented by the current president.

Women, Economic Hardship, Immigration and Population Growth

American birth rates, and a growing population are an important factor in the continued economic success of the world's greatest nation. The population of the United States has continued to grow unlike most other industrialized nations of the world which are typically experiencing birth rate declines. But America is not growing because of birth rates, it is growing because of immigration. Birth rates in America have become pretty anemic as well, and there are a few important reasons that need to be addressed.

FAT: Defending the problem, is the problem.

This morning I was looking around Facebook and I came across what was meant to be a humorous picture that spawned a string of comments in response that were certainly not humorous in nature.  In fact they were a fairly serious discussion.  What it struck me as was a specific example of what is wrong with America.

You can probably guess what conversation the picture (below) started.

Pelosi's War on Reality

Pelosi's war on reality and being prone to hyperbole continues unabated.

Dumbest Quote of the Year Makes Wikipedia

You know there's a lot of competition for the stupidest thing said in a given year, and 2009 and 2010 have been especially ripe with dumb comments.  But this has to be a contender for the 2010 competition and for now, it's the odds-on favorite.

The Hispanic Female Vote

Don't ever think Hispanic voters are a lost cause for conservatism - no voting block is a block, everyone is an individual and everyone is reachable. With conservative truths, this should be an easier demographic than it is.

Remember, there is hope.



Every supposedly solid liberal group is reachable with the truth - African Americans, Hispanics, women, unions, every one of them. Not by pandering but by talking, listening and educating them on what conservatism really is and what it means for them.

In defense of Sotomayor? Nah.

Don't panic - I haven't changed my mind on Sotomayor. She's absolutely wrong for the job. However, her comment about a "wise Latina" woman is, unfortunately defensible in one way.

Anyone in the legal profession has had to deal with hypotheticals. These are essentially 'what if' scenarios.

Here is a very simple example. If the actual case involved a contract between Ben and Alice, in which Alice agreed in writing to fix Ben's roof, and Ben agreed to pay Alice $100, Alice did not perform, and Ben had to pay $200 to another roofer, we might get hypos like the following:

• What if the agreement had been oral instead of in writing?
• What if the contract price had been $300?
• What if Alice had been a minor?
• What if the contract had not specified a price?
• What if Alice did the job, but the roof still leaked?
• And so on.

Thanks to Legal Theory Lexicon for the example.

So here's the hypothetical, and the defense, for Sotomayor. If it's a what if scenario, it's not binding. As a defence, it's pretty thin, and not really a game winner for her, thankfully. But here it is nonetheless.

She said, paraphrasing, that she would hope a wise Latina woman would come to a better conclusion than a white male.

That involves two hypotheticals;

(1) She would hope it was the case. Very hypothetical.

(2) She is a wise Latina woman. Equally hypothetical.

I know that was a long way to go for a bit of sarcasm, but still, it was fun.

I'd like to point out to any Sotomayor defenders that there's a big difference between being educated and being smart and being wise. All of those things are distinct traits.

Furthermore, there are lots of wise Latina women. She doesn't seem to be one of them.