Jonah Goldberg from National Review received one of those fundraising emails which refer to you by your first name that make you feel all tingly inside because a big organization refers to you by your first name. This one was from Emily’s List, the pro-abortion organization which funds pro-abortion female political candidates.
They’re considered pretty mainstream by most in the media. But read this and be horrified by their worldview. It truly is frightening.
If the House Republicans had their way, women would have to ask permission to leave their homes, speak out of turn, or take an aspirin.
(Sadly, I don’t think that’s an exaggeration.)
Right now, the only thing that’s keeping the Republican Party out of your doctor’s office and out of your bedroom is the Democratic majority in the Senate.
Electing more pro-choice Democratic women in the Senate is the key to stopping the anti-choice, anti-woman agenda from reaching the president’s desk. 2014 is just three weeks away — contribute now to the EMILY’s List Senate Emergency Fund.
Communications Director, EMILY’s List
Help us fight back!
That’s crazy. Pure crazy. The scary thing is that Emily’s List gets millions and millions which they donate to candidates. That means they’re pretty darn good at fundraising. They know their stuff. So one would have to assume that this absolutely twisted worldview is shared by some big money folks.
That’s the thing I’ve noticed. A number of years ago I remember two buddies of mine and a girl we knew were having drinks. My two buddies were conservatives. She was a raging lunatic liberal. A PhD type. Her worldview sounded darn similar to that email from EMILY’s List. She said she believed that most women in America were terribly oppressed and forced into doing housework by jerky husbands with quick hands. Now, of course, she said that she knew that we weren’t like that but she believed the vast majority of the country was like that.
But that’s the thing. Her ideas of the evils of American “patriarchy” (her word) were set. Now, she had right in front of her three examples of married men who weren’t like that at all. But instead of perhaps adjusting her worldview she simply said we were the exception. I think we were supposed to be pleased with ourselves. And she could go on believing that American men were evil like her professors had told her.
The sad thing is that I suspect no matter what experiences she had in life that did not fit into her ideology would simply be written off as exceptions, never letting reality alter her worldview. Kinda’ sad.
It seems to me that’s the definition of an ideologue, one who can’t be swayed from their beliefs no matter how much reality gets in the way.