Obviously, they have no idea that God took care of the inequality problem when he turned those parallel lines into the form of a cross that Jesus died on. At the foot of that cross, we are all equals: all sinners equally in need of a Savior.

The cross is the great equalizer.

Credits:capitolcommentary.com

Copyright 2013 Susan Stamper Brown

When Air Force One touches down in Israel for meetings this week, President Barack Obama has his hands full. Iran is about a year away from developing a nuclear weapon and Obama must convince Israel he is trustworthy before he can suggest to anyone that taking a preemptive strike against Iran is a lousy idea.

Obama has a terrible track record when it comes to Israel. In fact, a recent survey done by algemeiner.com shows most Israelis don’t like him. Of those surveyed, just 10 percent held a favorable opinion of Obama, 17 percent held highly unfavorable regard, 19 percent, unfavorable, and 32 percent said they respect him, but don’t necessary like him.

But, who could blame them? Obama is the first American president in history to demonstrate indifference toward them with both words and deeds. Israelis didn’t just wake up one morning and decide they don’t like our president. Actions have consequences. Israelis listened when Obama made disparaging remarks about their prime minister to the French president. They were offended when, according to The White House Watch, Obama rudely walked out of a meeting and left Prime Minister Netanyahu “to his own devices” to eat alone. They’ve watched when Obama repeatedly fanned the flame of animosity between Israelis and Palestinians by swelling settlement issues. Most recently, they were taken aback by Obama’s choice of Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, who many label as anti-Semitic.

When it comes to settlement issues, one would like to feel empathy for the pitiful predicament the Palestinian people find themselves in nowadays, but it is vital to separate feelings from facts. After all, Israel is a miniscule speck on the map about the same size as Houston, Texas, hemmed in by those who refuse to acknowledge her statehood and habitually threaten her.

There is not, nor has there ever been, a country of Palestine. Technically speaking, both the West Bank and Gaza Strip lack the criteria recognized by the international community defining a state. No matter how vociferously they shout, or how sorry we feel for them, it is wrong to give the Palestinian people something that is not theirs to begin with.

Also, Israel is not the warmongering state some make her out to be. As I’ve written before, prior to the infamous 1967 Six Day War, Israel made every effort to avoid conflict by attempting negotiations with its hostile neighbors only to be met with threats, taunts and harassments.

In 1963, the Arab League organized the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), whose charter called for Israel’s destruction. The PLO’s guerillas attacked Israeli citizens 35 times in 1965, 41 in 1966 and 37 in the first quarter of 1967, infiltrating Israel from Jordan, the Gaza Strip and Lebanon.

Shedding light on the motivation for the attacks, Egyptian president, Gamal Abdel Nasser, explained, “The danger of Israel lies in the very existence of Israel,” promising Arabs would enter Palestine “with its soil saturated in blood.” From 3000 feet above Galilee atop the Golan Heights, Syria joined the attacks by shelling Israeli farms and villages forcing women and children to live in bomb shelters. With threats of “soil saturated in blood,” the UN’s refusal to intervene, and America’s decision to remain neutral, Israel was forced to go it alone. In the end, Israel brilliantly captured the Sinai, Gaza Strip, West Bank, Golan Heights; finally uniting Jerusalem.

Now, every action taken by Israel in self-defense is twisted to conform to, as one of my friends describes it, “the legitimacy of the emotional and hysterical Muslim view of the world, which bears no resemblance to historical or political reality.”

If Obama’s goal is peace in the Middle East, he must begin with his emphatic and unwavering support for our longtime friend and ally, Israel.

Credits: toddyenglish.wordpress.com

Copyright 2013 Susan Stamper Brown

“See, I will create new heavens and a new earth…” Isaiah 65:17

Relax.

Sometimes the best thing we can do is close our eyes, inhale the elevated CO2 levels in the air, and chill out. Although climate change alarmists want us to believe the contrary, fear will kill us before climate change will. Some things aren’t worth the hassle, especially if you already know how the story ends. One day the earth will be renewed. Until then, we should enjoy life and do our best to maintain the planet.

The biblical truth “To everything there is a season” is valid and remains constant. Whether it is scorching summers or frigid winters, the earth continues to rotate while seasons change. From plant life forcing its way through volcanic ash to oceanic microbes swallowing up spilled oil, the earth has the Creator-granted ability to heal itself from wounds sustained by acts of man or God.

Of course, any mention of biblical principles in relation to scientific argument is consistently mocked by those who crow the sky is falling every time a cow passes gas or air temperatures fluctuate.

Indeed, carbon dioxide levels are on the rise, according to recent data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), but there is no reason for panic. According to The Australian, the chief of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Rajendra Pachauri, recently confirmed despite elevated CO2 levels, there’s actually been a “17-year pause in global temperature rises.” On a lesser level, the University of Alabama’s Earth System Science Center in Huntsville also confirmed what those weary from snow shoveling already knew: the planet experienced a rapid cool down in February from the month prior. Whew. Good news. It’s okay to pull out your gas guzzling snow blowers.

Dr. Pachauri also said, “…science only thrives on the basis of questioning.” If that is the case, then why do climate change alarmists not ask more questions? If they truly desire answers leading to solutions, why are they afraid to include the “God factor” in their line of questioning? Seems every time there’s a drought, hurricane or snowstorm, alarmists suggest the planet is intentionally regurgitating on mankind for its ecological malfeasance. It seems laughable environmentalists and presumed scientific experts regularly talk about the planet having the ability to execute vengeance on global sinners, but scoff at the very mention of God playing a role in climate fluctuations.

Alarmists are quick to ridicule those embracing Biblical teaching suggesting an apocalyptic ending preceding a renewal of the planet, yet themselves promote a similar end, bereft the grace and hope for renewal. While they’d never admit it, they practice their own religion, coming across like Greek gods who can control the earth’s climate and create weather.

Man can do neither, and the more we try, the more we hurt ourselves and the planet. A wind energy group, for example, is seeking permission from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to kill bald eagles and protected birds and bats through “Incidental Death.” The USFWS claims a viable alternative to reducing those deaths is sporadic shut downs during certain migratory seasons, effectively reducing efficiency, and raising consumer energy costs. In a rare collision of liberal signature issues, fossil fuel wackos are willing to sacrifice bald eagles in the name of clean energy.

To understand the environmentalists’ theology you must check common sense at the door. On the surface, wind turbines seem like a great alternative to fossil fuel. But the dirty little secret is fossil fuels are used to fill in during down times. And there are a lot of down times — because the wind doesn’t always blow…if only we could learn how to harness the hot air rising from the mouths of those who think they have the ability to change the climate.

Credits: zazzle.com

Copyright 2013 Susan Stamper Brown

America’s founding fathers were beholden to the odd notion that the best prevention against a tyrannical leader or mob rule was the simple yet effective system of checks and balances. Presently, a nominal Republican majority in the House of Representatives is the only thing keeping American capitalism from a nosedive into collectivism, communism, Marxism, Leninism, or Maoism. (Feel free to choose your noun.)

I write “odd notion” because since taking office, Obama and Team Pelosi-Reid have effectively used the U.S. Constitution for White House toilet paper. They consistently write checks which can’t be cashed and operate on budgets which cannot be balanced. Not exactly what the founders had in mind. Need a more specific example? All one needs to do is remember the spending spree Democrats went on when they were in control during 2009-2010, leading to the Obamacare fight which Republicans and a majority of Americans went on to lose.

As a result, the electorate said, “yes” to checks and balances when it said, “no more” to Democrats-Gone-Wild, awarding Republicans the House majority during the 2010 midterm elections (and again in 2012). It’s been a miserable two years for debt-addicted Democrats. Addiction is the right word to be applied here. Addicts (insert Democrats) lose control of their sensibilities; never attaining satisfaction because they always need more.

To heck with the electorate’s wishes and checks and balances; many of these archetypal addicts have convinced themselves any way but their way is downright immoral. According to the Washington Post on March 2, President Obama told reporters he can’t “force Congress to do the right thing” regarding the sequester he originally initiated. Right thing? Seems to me Congress is doing the right thing when they say no to what they believe is the wrong thing for those they represent. Right… err…correct?

Not on your life — if the goal is to eliminate all things traditionally American. And if that’s the case, brace yourself for more Chicago-style gangsta’ politics to regain control of the House of Representatives in 2014. That’s why we will continue to hear incessant rants flowing from Obama’s mouth articulating a dishonest portrayal of the “checks” (Republicans) placed to keep him in balance.

We also see the creepy metamorphosis of Obama’s “Organizing for America” into “Organizing for Action” (OFA), which, according to The Weekly Standard, exploits “a loophole in campaign law and ethics regulations” by claiming it is an ostensibly nonpolitical “social welfare group.” Considering some of the emails they’ve sent and I’ve received, they’re about as nonpolitical as the 501c(3) organization Media Matters, Fox News claims is bias to Democrats and “maintains a close working relationship with the Obama White House.”

OFA is pimping out the POTUS at $500,000 a pop. Regardless of legality, OFA is raising “pay to play” to a whole new level. “You can buy four audiences per year with President Obama,” according to the Washington Examiner. And $500,000 is for what? A means to an end I guess.

Those beholden to common sense can glance beyond the peripheral to see what’s undoubtedly happening. Had public welfare, by way of job creation or relief from exorbitant food and gas prices, been a priority, the momentum would be moving in the other direction five years in. Instead, Obama is bent on destroying the one thing, the GOP, which is keeping him from his dream of radical change.

Credits: mom4freedom.com

©2013 Susan Stamper Brown

“There once was a place called America,” our children’s children will one day write, “a bright and shining city on a hill, divinely placed by God to serve as a beacon of hope to the entire world. A land filled with generous-hearted souls who showered the needy the world over with their abundant blessings.”

You see, America was founded by a handful of God-fearing patriots who didn’t always agree but believed certain things like life, liberty and the personal pursuit of happiness were worth dying for. And to ensure their ideas would survive the ages, they crafted one of the most revered documents ever put to paper, the United States Constitution.

 It wasn’t long before this exceptional nation became the envy of those who thirsted for freedom and the enemy of those who despised it. Some loathed America to the point of making threats while others declared war. But a certain few understood defeat was increasingly less likely and instead devised a plan to take down America from within, one small step at a time.

The leader of the former Soviet Union Communist Party, Nikita Khrushchev promised his beloved Communism would bury the capitalistic West without declaring war. The plan was outlined in a fascinating book called “The Naked Communist,” written in 1958 by a man named Cleon Skousen who accurately warned Americans of troubles to come unless things changed.

Skousen laid out the dangers Americans faced, point by point, almost as a Communist roadmap to America’s demise: Progressives captured the Democratic Party (goal number 15), civil rights actions were taken in courts  to “weaken basic American institutions”(16), the educational system was infiltrated (17), rioting like the Occupy movement was encouraged (19), the press was infiltrated (20), domination of the big screen and television waves (21), cultural standards of morality were broken down (25), homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity  were presented as “normal” (26), churches were infiltrated by those promoting social justice (27), prayer in schools was eliminated (28). Moreover, the Constitution and founding fathers were discredited (29 & 30) and American culture belittled by those promoting “cultural sensitivity training” seminars similar to one recently uncovered by a video  showing employees pounding on tables while chanting anti-American rants” led by a man representing the organization, Souder, Betances, and Associate, reaping more than than $3.3 million taxpayer funds, according to USASpending.gov.

Skousen may have been a prophet, seeing that most of his predictions came to pass. Too clever to be labeled Communists, they chose the name “Progressive” and in the name of change set out to dismantle the Constitution, piece by piece. Progress was slow but steady, that is until their savior, Barack Obama, arrived.

And no one was outraged because the Communist mission was complete. As former KGB agent, Yuri Besmenov so eloquently described, without war or bloodshed, America and her people were demoralized, no longer having the reasoning ability to distinguish right from wrong, or to comprehend the immensity of the treasure they’d buried just outside the gates of Hell.

Credits:4.bp.blogspot.com

Copyright 2013 Susan Stamper Brown

If there’s one thing I’ve learned, there’s no shortage of well-meaning people who want the world to be a better place. But, without the willingness to roll up your sleeves and be part of the solution, you run the risk of making the situation worse.

Obamacare is a good example. Its European-styled socialized healthcare system will fail the American people just like Britain’s National Healthcare System (NHS) has failed many of its citizens. When we allow the government in the name of compassion do for us what we should do for ourselves, individuals become numbers, treatments become quotas, and lack of funding sparks rationing.

I learned a similar, albeit much smaller lesson, recently while adopting a sweet little dog from a rescue organization, which I soon found, has more compassion than capability. As is typical with many online advertisements, the dog shown on their website was nothing like the sickly, tartar-mouthed, urine-drenched dog I picked up. As I write, my pup rests in my lap, just happy to have a home. Her first 24-hours included several baths, a vet visit, administering meds, and lots and lots of hugs in between. Although I’ve had to give up time and money, there is peace in my heart that only comes from personal sacrifice.

Arguably, liberals are far more well-known for their love of animals, but that same affection doesn’t extend to those of us walking on two legs. Most liberals actually believe the ill-equipped and incapable federal government is better suited to meet our needs. In Britain, however, some patients are in worse shape than my dog.

According to the San Francisco Examiner, a 2010 report found many “NHS patients were left unattended ‘for unacceptable amounts of time’ in urine-and feces-soaked beds.” The NHS system is in a death spiral. Costs are on the rise and funds that should be used for improving healthcare are reserved for negligence claims, which rose more than 30 percent from 2010 to 2011, according to the UK Telegraph. And there’s no reason to believe Obamacare will be any better.

It’s easy to say you care when you see a need, but caring is only half the answer. There must be individual action tied to a bleeding heart. The question is: Do you care enough to do something about it yourself?

Awhile back, Author Arthur Brooks wrote an unbiased book titled, “Who Really Cares,” based on sound research finding conservatives to be 30 percent more generous than liberals and a Google study a few years ago found conservatives were twice as charitable as liberals. Of course, there’s an exception to every rule, so if we searched long enough, we’d find a few tightwad conservatives and a charitable liberal or two.

To be fair, liberals do give liberally, especially with other people’s time and money. Otherwise, the closest many would come to a homeless or hungry person is if they accidentally hit one with their government-subsidized Chevy Volt while texting on their federally funded Obamaphone.

Statistics prove liberal programs like the war on poverty do much to line the pockets of bureaucratic administrators, but do little to help those most in need. Don’t believe me? Then take a walk around the White House after dark to watch the dumpster diving taking place near the First Family’s organic garden. A few years back, in D.C., my husband and I bought books of McDonald’s gift certificates and spent Christmas Eve walking in the vicinity of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue passing them out to homeless people. We figured we could get away with giving out greasy hamburger gift certificates to the Obama’s next-door neighbors while they were off eating healthy stuff on Hawaiian holiday.

As much as this is going to upset liberals, the only solution to poverty, homelessness and all other social ills affecting this country is charity motivated by courage and conviction, not penalty of law. We each have a responsibility to put feet to Jesus’ words about caring for the least among us.

Credits: www.kiefer-rocks.com

Copyright 2013 Susan Stamper Brown

The Obama administration seems to have gone Jack Bauer on us, which would be okay if we were just talking about non-American enemy combatants on some far-flung battlefield.

It seems the administration danced its way around case law and the Constitution in an attempt to justify the assassination of three American citizens it refuses to acknowledge it had any part of post execution. In September 2011, Anwar al-Awlaki, the mastermind behind the failed December 25, 2010 airplane BVD bombing, and his cohort, Samir Khan were killed. Two weeks later, in a separate drone attack, Denver native and 16-year-old son of al-Awlaki followed his father’s fate.

According to the Washington Post, “a recently leaked ‘white paper’ from the Justice Department…permits the government to kill its citizens in secret while refusing to acknowledge, even after the fact, that it had done so.”

No matter how evil someone is, it is unnerving that any president wouldn’t hesitate to blatantly disregard an American citizen’s constitutional right to a trial and then make the decision to become prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner of that same citizen – and not man-up afterward.

To be clear, the use of drones on the modern battlefield has proven effective, but great ideas in the wrong hands can sour quickly.

In the recently crafted and leaked white paper, the administration makes a weak argument to justify its extrajudicial power grab by suggesting “the use of lethal force” against an American citizen is equivalent to George W. Bush’s detention of foreign enemy combatants.

It seems like only yesterday a then-junior senator from Illinois repetitively repudiated Bush’s actions that included the capture, detention, and questioning of non-American enemy combatants, and a military-style christening of a few. Many say Bush’s actions led to information regarding Osama bin Laden’s whereabouts and eventual elimination.

What a difference a little (or a lot of) power makes. There’s a new sheriff in town and, suddenly, the North Star we Americans call the Constitution is no longer the effective navigational tool it once was. Now it’s okay to assassinate citizens and grant due process to non-citizens.

After Obama’s election, his administration became obsessed with lavishing constitutional rights on Guantanamo Bay terrorists and tried to move them to New York City where they’d be granted due process. Back in August 2012, Attorney General Holder told Bloomberg he still regrets the “missed opportunity.”

To complicate things, the white paper extends the battlefield to any foreign country. Page 7 suggests “clear evidence” — that a specific act will occur in the near future — is not required. Page 11 supports killing those simply in the scheming stage, leaving no room for a change of heart. They are guilty because they thought about it. To be fair, the paper does identify potential targets as high level leaders, and it also lists “capture” as an option, but contradicts itself considering what supposedly happened to the16-year old Denver resident. Guilty by association?

Throughout the 16-page document, the white paper intermittently leaves out the word “al-Qaida,” and uses  the term “terrorist groups” (or variants thereof), which would be of no concern were we dealing with a more transparent and less paranoid administration. Lest we forget, they put out the “Right-wing extremists” watch list in 2009 secretly informing police forces to look out for those who love God, celebrate freedom, adhere to wholesome values, and cherish the Constitution.

What one generation does in moderation the next does in excess; the same goes for presidents. Baby steps. As simplistic as it is, two wrongs will never make something right. We are now witnessing liberals using Bush’s so-called extra-judicial activities as case law to justify stepping deeper into the darkness in support of third world-like capital punishment without trial. So what might this president, or his successor, try next?

Photo credits: texastribune.org

©2013 Susan Stamper Brown

What was it about the Dodge’ commercial, “God Made a Farmer,” that stirred the souls of so many Americans during the Superbowl? Maybe it was the imagery of the dirt and grit of real America, not the white-washed concrete meccas many of us call home. Maybe for just a moment we were unplugged from our instant and superficial world and taken back to a time when we were captivated by God’s creation, not what our friends were doing on Facebook. Or maybe it was just the quintessential sound of American icon, the late Paul Harvey, whose voice wraps around you like a warm blanket on a cold day. His message was one you could expect for a happy ending, even at a time when happy endings weren’t en vogue.

Or maybe it was the unvarnished idea of the farmer, which is so often identified with America. It is the image of a tough life, one marked by hard work and honest living. A time when men were men and that was okay. A time when workdays didn’t end until the work was done.

When was the last time anyone gave a second thought as to from where their groceries came? Or, even cared? I haven’t in a long time, at least not until this commercial aired. When I need food, I drive to the nearest grocery store and buy some, and become irritated when the date on the milk isn’t as new as I’d like it to be. I’ve never had to provide milk for myself, and I’ll bet farmers feel a certain sense of pride when the shelves are full, and dates are fresh.

But why should we care? Because besides feeding us, American farms feed the world. According to the American Farm Bureau in 2010, one-third of the farms in the U.S. exported upwards of “$115 billion worth of American agricultural products.” All this from more than two million farms across the country. Not too shabby, until you consider in 1935 there were nearly seven million farms. And it’s getting worse.

Farming, like manufacturing, has begun a slow death in this country, sped along by a lazy younger workforce, many of which would rather stare at, as my niece so describes, “glowing rectangular objects” (smart phones), than produce something with soiled hands. According to the EPA, around 40 percent of farmers are 55 years old, or older. And according to the 2007 USDA Census of Agriculture, farmers under the age of 45 dropped 21 percent in five years.

The EPA report stated, “The graying of the farm population has led to concerns about the long-term health of family farms as an American institution,” therefore the direct attack of family farms in 2012 by the Progressive-leaning Obama administration should have come as no surprise to anyone. After massive outcry, the DOL dropped its oppressive imperative banning children from working on their parents’ farms.

In their quest to upend all that makes this country great, Progressives have hijacked the word “progressive” in hopes to paint buttercream icing over the cow dung they call ideology. And many of us have theoretically ingested it, without thought, and have no idea why our stomachs hurt and souls feel empty. It came as no surprise liberals attacked the Paul Harvey Superbowl commercial. The Atlantic called it “racist,” The LA Times, “retro,” and some bloggers deemed it “religious.”

All is not lost though because a real and present war still wages for the heart and soul of America. On one side, there are those who would have us wholeheartedly embrace hedonism, self-worship, and bowing down to the god of government. And on the other side, there are those who provide for the needs of the others, and still find time to quietly celebrate God, family, country, sacrifice, and the virtues of hard work and self-reliance.

Credits: 2.bp.blogspot.com

Copyright 2013 SusanStamperBrown.com

At least Romney had binders. Binders full of qualified women to fill cabinet positions, that is. Democrats mercilessly pounded Romney for the binders comment he made during the 2012 presidential campaign, but I’ll bet the Obama campaign now wishes Romney had passed the binders on to Obama since it seems he’s having a hard time picking women to fill his second term cabinet positions.

The recently released official White House photo of a predominately pale-faced and testosterone-filled cabinet (which I have no problem with) is enough to cause any misinformed voter into wondering what has become of the so-called party of women.

To be fair, women fill about half the White House staff positions, but the highest- level cabinet positions are currently extremely male and predominantly white. This seems a bit odd, considering the media narrative over the past 50 years has painted Republicans as the party of rich white men. But that’s not the case, if you look at the actual highest-level cabinet positions women were appointed to since Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR).

FDR appointed Frances Perkins as the first female cabinet member in 1933. Democrat presidential successors Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, and Lyndon B. Johnson, appointed zero.

Republican president Dwight D. Eisenhower appointed Oveta Culp Hobby as the first secretary of the US Department of Health, Education and Welfare and Republican president Richard M. Nixon, zero.

At that point in history, after four Democrat and two Republican presidents, two female cabinet members were appointed, one per party.

Republican president Gerald Ford appointed Carla Anderson Hills as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and then Democrat president Jimmy Carter appointed Shirley Ann Mount Hufstedler as Secretary of Education, Patricia Roberts Harris as Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary, and Juanita Morris Kreps as Commerce Secretary. The score: Democrats 4 and Republicans 2.

Republican Ronald Reagan appointed Margaret Heckler as HHS Secretary, Ann McLaughlin Korologos as Secretary of Labor, and Elizabeth Dole as Transportation Secretary. Reagan’s successor Republican president George H.W. Bush, appointed Elizabeth Dole as Labor Secretary, Lynn Morley Martin as his second Labor Secretary, and Barbara Hackman Franklin as Secretary of Commerce. Democrats 4 and Republicans: 8.

Democrat president Bill Clinton, who thoroughly enjoyed women in the White House, only appointed five women to his cabinet during both terms. Clinton appointed Hazel Reid O’Leary as Energy Secretary, Alexis Margaret Herman as Labor Secretary, Madeleine Albright as Secretary of State, Janet Reno as Attorney General, and Donna Shalala as HHS Secretary. Democrats: 9.

And then there was George W. Bush, God love him. Bush haters may want to take a deep breath before reading how many women he appointed to his cabinet. Gale Ann Norton was the first female Secretary of the Interior, Condoleezza Rice became the first female African American Secretary of State, Elaine Chao enjoyed two terms as Labor Secretary, Ann Veneman was appointed as US Secretary of Agriculture, Margaret Spellings as Education Secretary, Maria Cino served as acting Transportation Secretary until another female, Mary E. Peters, was nominated to that position. Christine Todd Whitman was appointed as EPA Administrator and, for a total of nine female appointees, Bush appointed Susan Carol Schwab as US Trade Representative in 2006.  Republicans: 17.

This takes us to President Obama, who, in his first term appointed to his cabinet six women including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Secretary of Commerce Rebecca Blank, Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. So far, Obama’s appointed zero new women for his second.

Since FDR, the Democrat Party has governed over 12 presidential terms with seven presidents, who combined, accounted for 15 female nominees as compared to the GOP’s nine terms, six presidents and 17 female nominees. It seems the “Party of Women” is actually the Republican Party, which doesn’t fit the mold cast by Democrats of a party filled with pregnant, barefoot soccer-moms who forgot to pay for their birth control.