Stale 'War on Women' Rhetoric Underscores Tone-Deaf DNC

BlogHer Original Post

It's bad enough when men regard women as single-issue voters, but it's insulting when women buy into that brainless nonsense.

Hence, the entire one-trick pony "war on women" of a Democratic National Convention agenda this week showcased a party bereft of fresh ideas for women, unless they happen to think of little more than their reproductive systems.

No question that women's issues post-Roe v. Wade must and will always include concerns about reproductive health.

But as events like this go, all the high-volume rhetoric and crying (felt like I was watching ABCFamily) mashed up rather oddly with the litany of celebrities trying to sound substantive about politics.

I care about as much as what Scarlett Johansson has to say about politics as I do about what Newt Gingrich might share about his morning beauty ritual.

Scarlett Johannssen at the DNC
Sept. 6, 2012 - Charlotte, North Carolina, U.S. - Actress SCARLETT JOHANSSON speaks at the 2012 Democratic National Convention in Times Warner Cable Arena. (Credit Image: © Harry E. Walker/MCT/ZUMAPRESS.com)

What struck me was how much the use of women's issues hearkened back to the "dark ages" strategies used by Karl Rove to get Bush some traction with Christian conservatives in 2004 with the anti-gay marriage position.

Yet, for all the theatrics, what's a real crying shame are today's jobs numbers, showing even more Americans quit looking for work.

According to Reuters:

"The economy has experienced three years of growth since the 2007-09 recession, but the expansion has been grudging and the jobless rate has held above 8 percent for 43 straight months, essentially all of Obama's term and the longest stretch since the Great Depression. Economists say jobs growth in the range of 125,000 a month would normally be needed just to hold the unemployment rate steady."

Regardless of the Democrats' valiant, though transparent, effort to sway voters away from the economy, an online Reuters/Ipsos poll on Thursday gave Romney a 1-point edge on Obama, 45 percent to 44 percent, with the same poll today showing numbers flipped 46 to 44.

A sitting president elected to historic popularity with a challenger in the hunt four years later shows a sour public opinion of his job performance.

And despite former President Bill Clinton's hissing "arithmetic" soundbite during his 49-minute DNC sales pitch on why his wife, er, Barack Obama should be president, the numbers just don't lie.

It's hardly all the president's fault -- historically, one-term presidents have governed during terrible economic times, dating back to John Quincy Adams.

And the entire Democratic Party displayed disorganization this week, expanding and shrinking its tent. Gay marriage is in, God and Jerusalem are back in (but only with the blessing of some during a disputed floor vote on the platform).

I certainly can appreciate what the party tried to do this week, and must admit that even Lee Atwater might have shed a few tears at the shrewd, methodical strategy playing out to trumpet Obama's true (and perhaps only) strength -- his wife. But he's not fit to be president, and nothing said this week made me think otherwise.

Let's lay out the real "war on women" during Obama's administration: highest poverty rates in 17 years and 683,000 lost jobs (nonfarm).

It's a dismal outlook that seems to only worsen every time the jobs reports hit the headlines. The rest of the issues that women care about will rise to the surface for us to once again consider this man at face value.

But no matter how November 6 shakes out, Mr. President, take hope in this: Even stray, impeached dogs like Bill Clinton go to Heaven.

Well, if you believe in God and such things.


- Follow BlogHer Contributing Editor @erica_holloway.

Comments

In order to comment on BlogHer.com, you'll need to be logged in. You'll be given the option to log in or create an account when you publish your comment. If you do not log in or create an account, your comment will not be displayed.