Why the left despise Carly Fiorina

Apparently, to be a powerful and respected woman, you may hold only a set of carefully restricted views! From The New York Times:

Carly Fiorina Both Repels and Enthralls Liberal Feminists

By Amy Chozick | September 28, 2015

When the novelist Jennifer Weiner watched the second Republican presidential debate with her two daughters on Sept. 16, she felt a sense of pride at seeing the lone woman on stage, Carly Fiorina, hold her own against Donald J. Trump.

Carly Fiorina speaking on Thursday at Converse College in Spartanburg, S.C. She also visited an anti-abortion pregnancy center in the city. | Credit Travis Dove for The New York Times Click to enlarge.

Then Mrs. Fiorina denounced abortion and Planned Parenthood in a graphic monologue that thrilled many conservative Republican voters but left Ms. Weiner appalled.“It’s so weird — she looks like one of us, but she’s not,” said Ms. Weiner, who in addition to being a best-selling author is an influential feminist with a large social-media following. “You’re on the bus with her until she starts talking about Planned Parenthood.”

As Mrs. Fiorina’s presidential campaign gains traction — and as the focus on her statements about Planned Parenthood intensifies — liberal women across the web are expressing conflicted feelings about her candidacy. At times, there is gratification at watching a woman forcefully take on Mr. Trump; at other times, horror at Mrs. Fiorina’s conservative policy positions, which these women see as anathema to the feminist cause.

“Can you love a campaign but hate a candidate’s policies?” read the subtitle of the writer Robin Marty’s Sept. 18 essay on Cosmopolitan.com titled “Carly Fiorina Is the Candidate I Wanted Hillary Clinton to Be.”

Mrs. Fiorina has encouraged feminists to take her seriously.

There’s a lot more at the link, but it’s almost entirely on one subject: abortion. You can read it, but it’s pretty much tedious. The feminist left are utterly appalled that a female candidate might not find abortion to be some sort of secular sacrament — and there was a twitter hashtag #shoutyourabortion which encouraged women to talk about the positive aspects of slaughtering their unborn children — and might, just might, think that an unborn child is a living human being.

The left tried the same ploy in 2008 and 2012: opposition to abortion was equated with opposition to all forms of contraception, something which no Republican presidential candidate has advocated. The idea that Planned Parenthood, a private organization, shouldn’t be receiving $500 million in federal subsidies because of their abortion business is morphed into wicked Republicans want to deny women contraception.

In reality, Republicans, including Mrs Fiorina,1 have advocated making oral contraceptives an over-the-counter medication, rather than something available only by prescription.2

None of this is surprising, of course: we had already said that, now that she was a top tier candidate, the left — as well as her Republican opponents — would be coming after Mrs Fiorina with sharpened blades. What the left simply don’t understand, and really cannot comprehend, is that Mrs Fiorina isn’t running to become the first female President of the United States, she’s running to become President of the United States. She happens to be a woman, yes, but that isn’t really an important part of the equation for Republicans; we care that she is running on her accomplishments rather than on her genitals.

The Times story, if you go on beyond the point I quoted, becomes less a story about the differences between Mrs Fiorina and the feminist left than an editorial-masquerading-as-a-news story, one the author apparently hopes will undermine Mrs Fiorina’s candidacy.

You see, the left are horrified that Mrs Fiorina, like Sarah Palin before her, succeeded in life not by playing the woman card, but by getting in the arena with men and fighting for position as an equal. If a woman succeeds in the professional world, in competition with men, she must make obeisance to feminism and the left because not giving all of the credit to feminism means that, shockingly enough, such women might not agree with their political positions, either.

But conservatives? We value achievement, we value working for what you have, we value a real equality which says, “Go out and compete, show us what you can do,” rather than the false equality of professional feminism which tells women that they must have help from the left or they will always be behind. We believe in real equality; the left never have.

  1. The Washington Post used Mrs Fiorina’s photo to illustrate the article.
  2. Interestingly enough, some of the feminist groups oppose this:

    The Republican-proposed bill on Capitol Hill, to the dismay of women’s health advocacy groups, does not guarantee insurers would continue to cover the cost, as most plans are now required to do under the Affordable Care Act. NARAL Pro-Choice America called the proposal “nothing but political pandering to trick women and families into thinking we are covered while dismantling one of the most critical gains in the Affordable Care Act.”

    The goal, apparently, isn’t easier access to contraception, but getting the government to provide it.

It’s curtains for Carly!

She handled herself well!

Stage Backdrop Collapses Behind Carly Fiorina During Speech

By Brian Roth | Updated at 11:28 PM CDT on Sunday, Sep 27, 2015

A curtain backdrop appeared to collapse behind Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina as she spoke in a San Antonio campaign event.

Several women were seen rushing to shield Fiorina after the bunting and curtain frame crippled, sending frame piping and cloth falling to the ground.

After Fiorina returned to the front of the stage, she immediately asked if everyone was okay – then someone yelled “Trump!”

“Trump, Hillary, it could have been lots of people,” said Fiorina.

There were no reports of injuries.

There’s more at the link.

To me, this is just an amusing campaign trail story, a slight accident in which no one was hurt, but it did show that Mrs Fiorina can be calm and cool when the unexpected happens. Then again, we already knew that.

Out of very bad news, comes some good news for Israel

From The Jerusalem Post:

May it never end: The uncomfortable truth about the war in Syria

No one will say this publicly, but the continuation of the fighting in Syria as long as there is a recognized authority in Damascus, allows Israel to stay out of the swamp.

Why precisely now, after four years of war and over 200,000 killed, have tens of thousands of Sunni and Christian Syrians decided to leave what was once Syria?

The answer is that after the nuclear agreement reached between Iran and the world powers in July, the Shi’ite axis of Iran, Syrian President Bashar Assad and Hezbollah became the favored side for the United States which signaled to the Syrians that Assad is not going anywhere and that the war was not going to end.

This altered political dynamic, that spurred the masses of Syrians to leave their country, is not necessarily bad news for Israel.

Clearly the fact that Europe is prepared to absorb the wave of refugees has encouraged more people to leave the battlefields in search of a better future. The images of the refugees that reach European shores show that among them are also Assad loyalists from the minority Alawite militia. But the nuclear agreement with Iran and the diplomatic momentum that came in its wake point to the continuation of the war and the Russian military buildup in the country should be viewed in this light as well.

The 28 Russian jets positioned in the air base in Latakia will not substantially change the situation on the battlefield and neither will the 11 attack helicopters nor the nine tanks and the hundreds of elite Russian forces that came with them.

They will help Assad to preserve his regime in one fifth of what was once Syria and maybe they will help with another victory in Idlib. But even if the Russians increase their presence and even if Iran sends hundreds of additional fighters from the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, Assad will never return to rule over the Syria of the past.

The Russians and the Iranians will look east in order to block the ISIS threat from reaching Damascus. They will not reach the Golan Heights and the city of Daraa on the Jordanian border and so the main concern for Israel will be for the IAF to avoid Russian forces operating in the sky and on the ground. This is what was discussed between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow last week.

Even before the meeting between the Russian and Israeli leaders, the Russians did not hesitate to inform the Israelis about their military deployment in Syria. Israel requested that the meeting with the Russians be held at the highest levels with the countries two chiefs of staff, and even if the the relative strength of the parties can be described as those between ‘a bear and bee,’ the Russians were attentive and understood there was a joint interest to prevent misunderstandings.

There’s more at the link.

Has anyone, outside of Israel, of course, heard anything about the plight of the poor, pitiful Palestinians lately? The news from the Middle East has been dominated by the rise of Da’ish and its conquest of parts of Syria and Iraq. As far as the Israelis are concerned, this is good news, and the more that Israel’s enemies keep killing each other, the better off Israel is. Realistically, the better off the rest of the world is, or it would be if the tide of refugees could be stopped; right now, the Europeans don’t think that they are being helped in the slightest. And President Obama’s pledge that the United States would take some Syrian refugees, when we already have a population of 20+ million illegal immigrants we have been unable to assimilate, is utter madness.

Can the Russians help Bashar al-Assad hold onto power in Syria, or part of Syria? Maybe, and maybe not. But if they can help President Assad and his forces kill more of the Da’ish fighters, then Russian will be helping Israel, helping the United States, and helping all of Western civilization. It’s hardly a good situation to side with President Assad, one of the true scumbag dictators in the world, but in a choice between two very bad options, very bad is still less bad than worst.

Carly Fiorina and the Long Knives

When Carly Fiorina was a second-tier candidate — her 2% support earned her a place in the “junior varsity” debate for the first round — she wasn’t being continually bashed by her opponents and the professional media. Her performance in that debate gained her support, and she was in the varsity debate for the second round on CNN. Another strong performance moved her into second place in subsequent polls, and now the long knives have come out. Stephen Rattner of The New York Times calls her tenure at Hewlett-Packard “disastrous,” and the supporters of Planned Parenthood met her at an Iowa event to throw condoms at her. In other words, Mrs Fiorina’s performance as a candidate has the left worried, very worried.

Mrs Fiorina has said that the federal government should stop funding Planned Parenthood, which it currently does to the tune of $500 million a year. The question that The First Street Journal has asked is simple: since the wholly-misnamed Affordable Care Act requires everybody to have health insurance, including providing subsidies to those who cannot afford insurance on their own, and Obama Administration regulations require that all health insurance policies fully cover contraceptive care,1 with no required patient co-payments allowed, why should Planned Parenthood even need the subsidies? If everyone has insurance which covers contraceptive care,2 Planned Parenthood should have very few patients who don’t have insurance and whose care needs to be subsidized.

Carly Fiorina with Jimmy Fallon on “The Tonight Show.” Photo by Douglas Gorenstein / NBC (Click to enlarge.)

The truth is simple, and stark: most health insurance does not cover abortion, and that’s what Planned Parenthood needs government money to subsidize. Oh, they will claim that it isn’t, due to the Hyde Amendment’s requirement that any organization which provides abortion services among other things must keep all federal funds segregated from the abortion business, but money is fungible: the use of the federal subsidy to pay for other things leaves Planned Parenthood with more of its other resources to support the abortion business.

Planned Parenthood is a private organization, and ought to be able to survive on its own, without subsidies, if the public demand for its services is sufficient. I do not object to Planned Parenthood’s non-abortion services,3 and if they can make a successful business, without government assistance, I have no objections, nor do I believe that most Americans would object.

  1. A very few religious employers may avoid the contraceptive requirement.
  2. I am 62 years old and my wife is 55; ‘twould take an intervention by the Lord, as He did for Abraham and Sarah, for us to have another child, but President Obama insists that we need contraceptive coverage.
  3. The author is Catholic, but does not believe that the government should prohibit those people who wish to use non-abortion contraception from being able to do so; the author does believe that all abortions should be banned, except those necessary to save the life of the pregnant women from imminent death.

Rule 5 Blogging: Will they be fighting the Russians?

It’s the weekend and time, once again, for THE FIRST STREET JOURNAL’S version of Rule 5 Blogging. Robert Stacey Stacy McCain described Rule 5 as posting photos of pretty women somewhat déshabillé, but, on this site, our Rule 5 Blogging doesn’t put up pictures of Snejana Onopka Fox in her summer clothes, but women, in full military gear, serving their countries in the armed forces. The terribly sexist authors on this site celebrate strong women, women who can take care of themselves and take care of others, women who have been willing to put their lives on the line in some not-so-friendly places, women who truly do have the “We can do it!” attitude.

This week: women of the Ukrainian Army. Vladimir Putin has had Russian-backed separatists seize control of the eastern half of the Ukraine, and no one knows when the former KGB officer’s appetite will be sated. These women may find themselves facing Russian soldiers in the future.


Continue reading ‘Rule 5 Blogging: Will they be fighting the Russians?’ »

From Around the Blogroll

Yeah, I know, it’s only a form letter, a form-email to be precise, but someone in the campaign was thinking about etiquette and that people might appreciate a thank you note!

Hi Dana,

Just wanted to make sure I had a chance to thank you personally for your donation to my campaign.

In the last few weeks, our campaign has built an incredible amount of momentum–and it’s truly because of the support of Americans like you that we’ve been able to do so much in such a short period of time. I’m honored and humbled to have your support, and your faith in me to be President of the United States.

We don’t say it enough, but from the bottom of my heart, thank you again for your support. And thank you again for standing with my campaign.

All my best,


I made a $50 donation to Mrs Fiorina’s campaign a week ago. It would have been more, but I am just a poor boy (though my story’s seldom told), and perhaps I’ll be able to contribute more later.

And now, on to the blogroll!

That’s all for this week!

“I didn’t leave the Democratic party, the Democratic Party left me.” ― Ronald Reagan.

We have previously noted the difference between Kentucky Democrats and Democrats on the national level. Kentucky, a solidly red state in national elections, has plenty of elected Democrats at the state level; the Governor is a Democrat, and Democrats control the state House of Representatives, but they are, or at least have been, relatively moderate Democrats rather than the wild-eyed leftist Democrats in Washington, DC. But, perhaps that’s changing:

Clerk Kim Davis switching parties to become a Republican

Adam Beam and Claire Galofaro, The Associated Press | Posted: Friday, September 25, 2015, 2:54 PM

LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) – Kentucky clerk Kim Davis, a longtime Democrat, says she is switching to the Republican Party because she feels abandoned by Democrats in her fight against same-sex marriage.

Davis made the announcement while in Washington, D.C., to attend the Family Research Council’s Value Voters Summit, said Charla Bansley, a spokeswoman for Liberty Counsel, which represents Davis in her legal battles.

“I’ve always been a Democrat, but the party left me,” Davis said, according to Bansley.

And that is how Ronald Reagan, another former Democrat, described his switch to the GOP. There’s more at the link.

The elected Democrats in Kentucky aren’t all Nancy Pelosi on us, at least not yet, but they are moving that way.  Their problem is that the Democratic voters in Kentucky aren’t moving that way with them.

Mrs Davis is a low level elected official, and just one person, but she is going to take others with her; as Democrats who would have voted for another Democrat like Mrs Davis see what the party has done to her, more of them are going to make the natural move to the Republican Party.  It has already happened all over the South; the Bluegrass State is simply lagging behind on this.

Of course, it isn’t just the Democrats’ policies on homosexual “marriage” which are the problem.  Kentucky used to be a strong union state, in large part due to the strength of the United Mine Workers in eastern Kentucky.  But not only is the coal industry dying, but national Democratic policies are speeding that death along .  .  . and voters in eastern Kentucky, long a strongly Democratic area, are seeing the complicity of the Democratic Party in the loss of the best jobs in the area.

We welcome Mrs Davis to the Republican Party, but more, we welcome the conservative Kentucky Democrats she will bring along with her.


Latest polls: Carly Fiorina beats Hillary Clinton

Yeah, the election is 13½ months away, but this is still great news!

Quinnipiac Poll: Carly Fiorina Beats Hillary Clinton In Head-To-Head Matchup

Fiorina barely came out on top in the head-to-head matchup with 44 percent support, compared to Clinton’s 43 percent.

By Taylor Tyler | Sep 24, 2015 11:50 AM EDT

If the 2016 presidential election was held today, Republican contender Carly Fiorina would beat Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton, according to a new Quinnipiac poll.

Fiorina barely came out on top in the head-to-head matchup with 44 percent support, compared to Clinton’s 43 percent.

Retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson also beat Clinton in a matchup, 49 percent to 42 percent. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush did too, 44 percent to 42 percent. Clinton, however, managed to beat Republican front-runner Donald Trump, 45 percent to 43 percent.

Vice President Joe Biden, who hasn’t announced his candidacy yet, was the strongest of the Democratic candidates when matched up against Republicans, beating Fiorina 46 percent to 43 percent, Bush 46 percent to 41 percent and Trump 51 percent to 40 percent. Biden tied Carson with 45 percent each.

The poll found that most voters believe Fiorina won last week’s second Republican primary debate by a long shot, which a recent CNN/ORC poll also found. Twenty-eight percent of respondents told Quinnipiac that Fiorina outperformed Trump, who placed second with 11 percent. Florida Sen. Marco Rubio was ranked third in debate performance with 6 percent.

Trump still continues to lead the overall GOP field, though, with 25 percent support among Republicans and Republican leaners. Retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson follows with 17 percent, and Fiorina came in at 12 percent. Bush was in fourth with 10 percent, and Rubio took fifth with nine percent.

There’s more at the original.

A lot can happen between now and November of 2016, and there’s no guarantee that either Mrs Fiorina or Mrs Clinton will win their party’s respective nominations.

Of course, our medical records are completely safe!

Federal Mandates for Healthcare: Digital Record-Keeping Will Be Required of Public and Private Healthcare Providers

A key provision of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 is about to go into effect, and healthcare providers across the country are preparing to comply. As of January 1, 2014, all public and private healthcare providers and other eligible professionals (EP) must have adopted and demonstrated “meaningful use” of electronic medical records (EMR) in order to maintain their existing Medicaid and Medicare reimbursement levels.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act also includes financial incentives for healthcare providers who prove meaningful use of electronic health records (EHR). EHR is not only a more comprehensive patient history than EMR, the latter of which contains a patient’s medical history from just one practice, but also the end-goal of the federal mandate. “Meaningful use” of EHR, as defined by HealthIT.gov, consists of using digital medical and health records to achieve the following:

  • Improve quality, safety, efficiency, and reduce health disparities
  • Engage patients and family
  • Improve care coordination, and population and public health
  • Maintain privacy and security of patient health information

Penalties also exist for non-compliance. EP’s who haven’t implemented EMR/EHR systems and demonstrated their meaningful use by 2015 will experience a 1% reduction in Medicare reimbursements, and rates of reduction will likely rise annually thereafter.

We have previously noted the federal government’s requirement for computerized health records, in a common format, which can be easily transferred from one health care provider to another. Supposedly, this will improve health care. From The Wall Street Journal:

Government Personnel Cyber Breach Worse Than Previously Thought

Hackers stole fingerprint records of 5.6 million people, Office of Personnel Management says

By Damian Paletta | September 23, 2015 12:18 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON—The Office of Personnel Management on Wednesday said hackers stole much more sensitive information from its servers than originally believed, disclosing millions more fingerprint records were stolen than previously estimated.

The office said hackers were able to steal the fingerprints of 5.6 million people, up from the 1.1 million estimate it offered more than a month ago. More than 20 million people lost their records as part of the breach, and OPM’s new estimate means that roughly one-quarter of all those affected lost fingerprint data, in addition to information about their health, financial history and families.

The fingerprint records were collected as part of background checks conducted since at least 2000 for some of the most sensitive government posts, including law enforcement, military, foreign service and judicial positions.

Security analysts have said the loss of fingerprint records could be a nightmare for some U.S. officials, particularly intelligence and military officers who are used to operating covertly and try to avoid leaving any trace of their actions.

Let me fix something in that article: where it says that hackers stole much more sensitive information than originally believed, it really means that hackers stole much more sensitive information than the government was willing to admit.

Some hackers just do this kind of stuff for kicks, but others are deadly serious, looking for information they believe will help them, or whomever is paying them. The Journal article hints at whom would be interested in this stuff: foreign intelligence services could use the stolen information to track down spies. Well, as we were pointing out years ago, employers have a real interest in the medical records of applicants: if you have several applicants, all of whom look like good employees, knowing whether some of them have had psychiatric treatment or are on blood pressure medication or are diabetic might just tip the scales against them. It ought to be obvious: if information is recorded somewhere, someone can get to it, and someone will always have a use for it. We’ve seen, once again, that the government cannot keep a secret!