Can you imagine the outrage if a conservative author wrote an article titled "Why Some Men Don't Vote With Their Penises?"
On Thursday, MSNBC and Huffington Post contributor Keli Goff actually published a piece that she affectionately called "Why Some Women Don't Vote With Their Vaginas":
Just when we all thought Todd Akin was a shoo-in for the award for the dumbest thing said or done in the 2012 election cycle, Richard Mourdock comes out of nowhere to give Akin a run for his money just before Election Day. If only these two could be forced into the political-gaffe equivalent of a dance-off to determine who takes the crown for the biggest, dumbest, most offensive campaign blunder.
After citing Mourdock's recent comments on abortion, and predictably complaining about Republicans including Mitt Romney not disavowing them, Goff continued:
Apparently many women simply choose not to vote with their vaginas.
The stupidity on display got even worse:
There are two warring schools of thought regarding how you should live your life as a member of a minority or oppressed group. I say this as a member of two of them, being both black and a woman. (Yes, I know that statistically, women are not a minority in America, but given the power structure, I do believe we qualify as oppressed.)
"I do believe [women] qualify as oppressed."
She really wrote that. I'm not making it up.
In America where we have female Secretaries of State and CEOs as well as many women now making more money than their husbands, Goff not only believes but is also willing to publicly declare women are oppressed.
And therein lies the state of liberalism in 2012: everyone in America that is not a straight, white male is somehow being mistreated by society, and government needs to do something about it to level the playing field.
It's exactly this kind of thinking that will continue to divide this nation and prevent us from all just being Americans at some point in the future.
But Goff wasn't done:
Though there are some women whose politics are legitimately defined by their moral opposition to abortion, there are plenty of others who, like Thomas, have simply decided that they are not going to allow the body they were born into to define their politics. Most of them probably enjoy a measure of privilege that allows them the luxury of thinking that way. They may be white or wealthy or both, so as far as they are concerned, why vote on whether or not a politician supports or opposes limiting contraception access, because at the end of the day, they (or their husbands) make enough money that if push came to shove, they could pay out of pocket for contraception access without giving it too much thought?
Here's the problem with that thinking as it pertains to abortion: women are actually more pro-Life than pro-choice.
Gallup recently found 46 percent of women claiming to be pro-Life as opposed to 44 percent saying they were pro-choice.
Gallup also reported in May that the percentage of pro-choice Americans is now at a record low 41 percent compared to 50 percent claiming they're pro-Life.
As such, Goff's abortion views are not only out of the mainstream of the public at large, they are also not supported by a majority of Americans with vaginas.
But liberals don't care about other people's views, do they?
Instead, they manufactured a Republican war on women at the beginning of this year the net result of which was President Obama's 16 point advantage over Romney with the female population almost completely disappearing.
It seems the more women like Goff and Sandra Fluke complain about the plight of women in this country, the better it is for conservatives.
I guess we should encourage them to speak more.
