"I've found it. The 2010 race about which I can get motivated the way I was motivated by Scott Brown v. Martha Coakley," writes Professor Jacobson. "The mainstream media and nutroots have made Sharron Angle target no. 1; that's all I needed. The Democrats have a strategy of crazy because their policies have been so disastrous and their rule so inept." Click here for Fox News report (above) and here to contribute. We sent along a little something this very morning.
"Michele Bachmann, another rising star in the Republican Party, is getting noticed precisely because she is an articulate, brave and joyful conservative," writes Bruce Walker in "The Year of the Conservative Woman" at American Thinker, driving home the point about this "Year of the Woman 2.0" that eludes our fellow opinionators of the legacy media caught in the amber of their postmodern feminism:
… but none of the dreary groups pretending to champion women is touting her for higher office, or even reelection.
The affable WaPo media reporter Howard Kurtz's attempt to make sense of it all is typical of the old media's failure to grasp the larger picture (although we credit him for seeking our old blogfriend Ed Morrissey's opinion):
When several Republican women won their primaries on Tuesday, I started thinking about whether the media would dub this another Year of the Woman. Conservative blogger Ed Morrissey said he doubted it, since in his view the mainstream press only likes to celebrate Democratic women, as in 1992.
"I don't agree with that, but I also couldn't shake the feeling that this year would not get such a label."
And why not? Kurtz mumbles something about Hillary and Palin as pioneers and then tosses the ball to colleague Anne Kornblut:
With victories by several prominent women in Tuesday's primary elections came the familiar declarations that a 'year of the woman' is underway. But in at least five races, something even more remarkable occurred: The candidates' gender never became much of an issue …
"That may be the most striking development," observes Kurtz, still not grasping the dynamics of what his lying eyes are telling him:
Once upon a time — 1984, actually — there was a huge discussion of how aggressive Vice President George H.W. Bush could afford to be in his debate against Geraldine Ferraro. Even in 2000, when Rick Lazio walked over to Hillary Clinton during a Senate debate, he was castigated for invading her space. Now, women punch back with the best of them — and that's a measure of equality.
In fact, they're so equal that they now have to fight off allegations of infidelity, if Nikki Haley's experience in the South Carolina governor's race is any indication.
We say bring 'em on! This newly energized conservative army of woman warriors, their hearts and minds not hobbled by postmodern feminism's identity-politics imperative, is unafraid to boldly go where too few women in this land of the free and home of the brave have gone before.
Crossposted at Riehl World View and Liberty Pundits.
And the Tea Party women do not feel the need to validate their serious intentions with f-ugly appearances and unkempt hair with no makeup. We feel perfectly free to be feminine and attractive, knowing full well that what is between our ears is quite worthwhile! We LIKE being female and have no desire to appear otherwise! I think that is what drives them nuts about female conservatives. Female and happy about it! Like men and happy about that too.
Posted by: Gayle Miller | June 15, 2010 at 10:57 AM