Follow by Email

Saturday, November 10, 2012

Maureen Dowd, "Romney Is President": Only Half the Picture

I am pro-choice. Always was, always will be. I found the comments of Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock to be abhorrent and loathsome.

On the other hand, I am also "pro-marriage," and this includes gay marriage. As noted earlier this year in a New York Times article entitled "For Women Under 30, Most Births Occur Outside Marriage" (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/18/us/for-women-under-30-most-births-occur-outside-marriage.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0) by Jason DeParle and Sabrina Tavernise, "more than half of births to American women under 30 occur outside marriage." As further observed by this article:

"The shift is affecting children’s lives. Researchers have consistently found that children born outside marriage face elevated risks of falling into poverty, failing in school or suffering emotional and behavioral problems."

These statistics concerning unwed births necessarily tie into unemployment, crime and America's national debt. Much akin to the trend in national debt, this trend involving unwed births is unsustainable.

In her latest New York Times op-ed entitled "Romney Is President" (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/11/opinion/sunday/dowd-romney-is-president.html?_r=0), Maureen Dowd states:

"In its delusional death spiral, the white male patriarchy was so hard core, so redolent of country clubs and Cadillacs, it made little effort not to alienate women. The election had the largest gender gap in the history of the Gallup poll, with Obama winning the vote of single women by 36 percentage points."

However, Dowd fails to observe that 53% of married women voted for Romney (see: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20231337).

So why the difference between single women and married women? Are single women so much smarter than married women? I don't think so, but please don't go asking my wife, who has had to suffer my tomfoolery for almost 30 years.

A delusional death spiral involving white male patriarchy? Well, this would not be my choice of words, and I think Dowd has gotten it only half right. As reported by USA Today in May of this year (http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-05-17/minority-births-census/55029100/1):

"Hispanics, blacks, Asians and other minorities in 2011 accounted for 50.4% of births, 49.7% of all children under 5 and slightly more than half of the 4 million kids under 1, the Census Bureau reports today."

Or in other words, an entirely different electorate is taking shape in the United States. The relative number of white voters will decline; however, I doubt that issues involving gender will heavily influence future elections.

Are Republicans so out of tune with this ongoing metamorphosis? I suggest that Maureen ask Susana Martinez, Bobby Jindal and Marco Rubio.

Like Dowd, am I pleased by the outcome of this election? Hardly. Two narcissists spent billions of campaign dollars without advancing a concrete plan how to remedy the American economy. Neither man addressed America's involvement in Afghanistan. Neither man was willing to oppose without qualification the sale of assault rifles.

America is in an uncontrolled economic tailspin, and this election represented a travesty and tragedy of unimagined proportions. Short-term pleasure continues to come at the expense of long-term benefits. I want to be surprised, but I don't see Obama, who lacks leadership and managerial qualities, avoiding an inevitable crash.

3 comments:

  1. Campaign finance reform would be a start to the resolution of one of those problems. But, of course, it would have to be passed by the same people who would be adversely affected by it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Why the gap between single mothers and married women? Single mothers are more likely to rely an government assistance, so they voted for Obama. While I'm on the subject of demographics, many are now saying that the Republicans ought to reach out to Hispanics by offering amnesty. Certainly, repulsive language like "self-deportation" won't win alot of votes, but who are these down-and-out, largely illiterate Hispanics going to vote for? They will vote for the defenders of the welfare state, not Republicans.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Oh, how ugly.
    Someone forgot (never knew) this "something" about widows and orphans.
    A single dedicated mother juggling the work and care (for a child, for a mother) deserves ... contempt, but some married utter prostitute manipulating/torturing/cheating everyone all the time is respectable because ....?
    Well, it isn't exactly the fault of this single mother who needs assistance that we've reached the "civilized" level where most people who work (single or not) can't afford housing, medical care, education etc. Why the word "slavery" comes to mind?
    Let's go back to widows and orphans. Why don't you read the Book, or at least any book.
    I doubt that Rush education is sufficient.
    Can I suggest that you actually familiarize yourself with the word "Social Democracy" (instead of welfare state) and check how the countries which have had it for some 70 years it are doing now and how the did in 1914-18, 1938-45 and between. I know I am asking too much, but well it's me - demanding.
    The problem with many Latinoes is that they are illegal immigrants, but this is a different story.

    ReplyDelete