He didn't donate
Click the Pic
Donate today
Or sign up to donate monthly
Posted on 07/08/2011 11:58:34 AM PDT by Nachum
Excellent political ad.
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
Good ad, but anyone who voted for 0bama because “he spoke so beautifully” was extremely naive. Now that 0bama has made himself 0berFuhrer, the only way to take away his “blank check” is to rid ourselves of him and his followers in 2012.
Look, there are lots of female voters who, like the woman portrayed in this ad, voted for Obama for the very same reason. I never said the 19th Amendment was a swell idea, but give the group who put this ad together some credit.
The ad hits at a specific demographic: Single mothers. This group went heavily for Obama.
Over half of all women are now single, widowed or divorced. Only 26% of females think that government should be smaller and less intrusive. Women are 57% of Social Security recipients over 62 years of age.
In other words, women, and especially single mothers, value “financial security” over opportunity and freedom. Most women alive today have been told the idiotic premise that a “woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.” A large number of them were dumb enough to believe that nonsense. Well, the premise that fish don’t need bicycles is true only if Big Uncle Sammy is there to be to be hootchie mamma’s sugar daddy. Look at the voting patterns among women in the US in the last 20 years. Most single women who vote are voting for their Sugar Daddy. Out of wedlock birthrates keep going up. Go look at the vote split on married women vs. single women and try to tell me that I don’t know what I’m talking about.
The people behind that ad obviously know all of this, and they created what I think is a very effective ad that goes to the heart of the issue with that target demographic: Obama hasn’t delivered security, he’s delivered only more worries.
For those of us who married well, or are pale males: We’re always going to view such ads as complete pablum and syrupy twaddle. Just keep quiet.
Personally, at the rate that the female cohort is draining the US Treasury, I wonder if sharia law wouldn’t be a good thing to happen in the US.
Great ad.
It’s focused on some of the right groups of voters.
Personally, at the rate that the female cohort is draining the US Treasury, I wonder if sharia law wouldn’t be a good thing to happen in the US.
I stay away from personal attacks on character, but how the heck did you get there?
Under Sharia law, male relatives of single females are responsible for their support until they are married off, or if they are widowed. The government is not who bails out widows and orphans.
And, under Sharia law, since men can marry up to (generally) four wives, there’s another mode of support for women without government.
Ergo, it solves the single mothers voting for more welfare problem. The Sugar Daddy issue goes back to the private sector.
Since the feminists (the “like a fish needs a bicycle” crowd) seem to be so utterly ambivalent and nonplussed about the impact to women under sharia law, I reckon we oughta give them what they seem to want so the feminists can try it out.
Look on the bright side: Under sharia law, we would not have to listen to any more screechy feminist diatribes. And even if we did consent to being lectured by these harridans, we wouldn’t have to look at them, what with them being forced to wear black tents in public.
You are correct. The ad targets the naive. That is who must be turned.
Women traditionally need security more than opportunity and freedom. It's how they've protected the young long enough for there to be a 'human' race. Can't fault them on that part, Dave.
I can fault them for trying to pick my pocket in trying to obtain this security without giving me what I’m due in return.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.