I think that’s kinda the subject of The Neglected Voter by David Kuhn. The choice of Joe Biden as running mate was a pretty lousy choice. They made the sucker play – securing the hard-core, man-hating feminist base. They may end up with nothing more interesting than trying to play victim politics again, spinning the meaning of better polling among women.

The explanation, of course, is that it’s kinda like what happens when you hand a TV remote to some stereotypical guy: he changes channels frequently not because of an attention span problem, or because he’s fickle, flaky and can’t make up his mind, but simply because there’s nothing on in Oprah-land that he can stand watching for more than a second. (Yes, having cable helps here.)

Time will tell if Palin bashes back at her establishment feminist critics, or if she’ll just keep on smiling while sounding just like one of `em by repeating the standard unchallenged catchphrases from Feminist Studies 101 about “glass ceilings”, “old boy networks”, how “a woman has to work twice as hard as any man”, etc.

So far she hasn’t defended herself against the attacks in any substantive way. She either promotes Sen. McCain or attacks Sen. Obama, who doesn’t quite know how to defend himself against her, partly because doing so lowers him to debating a VP candidate, which thus takes him down a big step while simultaneously taking his VP out of the picture entirely. (Net: don’t expect any real discussion of VAWA until the dynamic shifts, if it ever does.)

As a game of political chess, the R’s have been masterful. They have the D’s totally boxed in at this point. After all, it was Obama himself who has made this race largely about personal charm, which the R’s are now capitalizing on big time — though I don’t think this is what the D’s are talking about when they bring up stolen elections.

I realise.

“You are a phenomenon. Everyone sympathetic reader of MND owes you a debt of gratitude for being the very first man to break through the lace curtain.”

I do.

“I wonder if readers hear can really appreciate what it is like to watch a typically feminist talking head become discombobulated when hearing you speak the unvarnished truth, as in this case you did by starting your spiel with “feminism is sexism.””

I appreciate.

“Do viewers appreciate that what they are seeing is these feminists in the MSM, both men and women, actually hearing the trashing of their sacred cows FOR THE VERY FIRST TIME! They are simply dumbfounded! “What is he saying??!!!” “What am I hearing??!!!” “Am I having a bad dream??!!!””

I appreciate.

I always tune in to see Marc or listen/watch the archived file. I vote for Marc on every FoxNews poll. I email Cavuto and O’Reilly in support of Marc. I defend Marc on websites where he is attacked. It may not be much but it helps a little and I certainly do appreciate the things you speak of and am very grateful to Marc for what he is doing.

I wonder how many of the readers of your works realize the degree of your trail-blazing?

You are, to date, the ONLY man who regularly appears on television and faces down feminism, directly, correctly, exactly!

Your breakthrough might be compared to to waht Fathers-4-Justice have accomplished in England.

You are a phenomenon. Everyone sympathetic reader of MND owes you a debt of gratitude for being the very first man to break through the lace curtain.

I caught you hust a few days ago on what I think was actually a money show on Fox News chennel.

I wonder if readers hear can really appreciate what it is like to watch a typically feminist talking head become discombobulated when hearing you speak the unvarnished truth, as in this case you did by starting your spiel with “feminism is sexism.”

Do viewers appreciate that what they are seeing is these feminists in the MSM, both men and women, actually hearing the trashing of their sacred cows FOR THE VERY FIRST TIME! They are simply dumbfounded! “What is he saying??!!!” “What am I hearing??!!!” “Am I having a bad dream??!!!”

This is waht those feminist are no doubt thinking when you are talking.

It is incredible to watch.

The question is: Are you going to prove to be a trailblazer, that is, that we will see more Marc Rudov’s on TV — or are you going to be somehow squashed.

When you are speaking on TV it is as threatening to the Feminazi as Sarah Palin — and that is intended as a big compliment!

Speaking of Palin, you neglect to mention her one characteristic that is the most unforgivable sin of all, from the perspective of the Feminazi: she is feminINE.

One last comment. I am of two very distinct minds regarding Palin. She is wonderful for all the reasons mentioned — HOWEVER — she should not be the VP pick.

In the case of a President McCain, the notion of the VP being “one heartbeat away from the presidency” takes on serious weight.

No, I’m sorry. I do not believe Sarah Palin has what it takes to be leader of the “free world.” Certainly position in the Cabinet, but not President of the U.S., which there is a very good chance she will become during the next 4 years once McCain is elected.

This is disappointing to me, as I am a great admirer of John McCain even though I disagree with him on some of the very biggest issues facing the nation (health care, war in Iraq, energy). McCain said he would rather lose an election than lose a war. By picking Palin, McCain has showed that winning the election is EVERYTHING.

This is doubly disappointing because it was unnecessary. There was no way that a majority of Americans would vote for Barack Obama to lead the nation. His history is wound too tightly with fundamentally anti-American politics. Americans are not so decadent yet that they would vote for an Emperor who has a strong history of anti-Americanism when the other choice is a 100% American patriot.

PLEASE keep up doing what you are doing, Marc.

Signed,
Mark Charalambous

Who, by the way, often steps into the role of primary caregiver and does a damn fine job of it. Todd Palin, rugged dude that he is, proves by his actions that fathers are perfectly capable of taking care of their infants and the rest of their children.

Because of that, putting Todd Palin in the national spotlight for the next several years is one of the greatest benefits for advocates of fatherhood that could be hoped for.

Add that to Sarah’s electrifying awesomeness, and you have the reasons why I am voting for McCain-Palin 2008.

I stand by my statement. Just because you have written letters means nothing about the majority of men or the majority of so-called MRAs. Also, you are a foreigner, and the response from Bush is probably justified.

Given my purview, what I do, and the contact I have with people around the world, I am in an excellent position to know what other men do. And, I can tell you that most men do nothing.

I am not being rude. I am being real. I am sick of seeing my rights disappear because men are too chicken to take their elected reps to task, and I won’t stop prodding them until they wake up to take action. Venting at MND doesn’t count for taking action.

Read comment #41 from Michael Robinson, the ONLY lobbyist for men in Sacramento — the guy men won’t support. He’ll verify everything I’ve claimed.

Men’s silence is women’s gold. Men must use their real names to flood their elected reps with calls and e-mails, and men must financially support legislative influencers like Michael Robinson.

I have sent three lengthy emails – including my name and address – to both Senator Biden and to President Bush. They were polite and to the point and contained data (American) and my opinion. They were measured and reasoned. They not only expressed dismay at what Amrica is doing to itself, but the flow-on effect to its allies and friends.

I recieved only an acknowledgment, of course, to only the first of both, and an addendum basically saying it was an American matter and foreign opinion is not taken into account.

Marc, you are not in any position to know what other MRAs do unless they squawk it about for your approval.

Sir, your rudeness to other good MRAs, men who generally admire the work you do, is disturbing. You dismiss them with all the grace of a feminist.

Having said that, Marc is also correct when he says that the only way fair and balanced policy will be championed is by having full-time professional lobbyists working the hallways, constantly tracking legislation, attending hearings, and so on. Ironically, men will not financially support this. Even more ironic is that CAFC’s most dedicated financial supporter for the last four years has been a woman. She has also donated the most in total dollars.

Our record of accomplishments speaks for its self, here in California, other states, and on the Hill. http://www.cafcusa.org/accomplishments.aspx

In Sacramento, there are at least eleven opposition groups and, of the eleven, six have nearly $16 million a year to operate on with highly trained professionals. Who says “money isn’t the mothers milk of politics”?

There is nothing free about freedom, and fighting for it includes raising funds to pay professionals who are needed. You cannot not run a political campaign and be successful without it. All legislation is, is a political campaign done one bill at a time, and it doesn’t get done for free.

A parade of 100,000 men would accomplish nothing. When you learn how legislation is actually created and passed — and how paid lobbyists influence the process — you’ll realize that parades have zero effect on that process. All those nameless, faceless men would be wasting their time and accomplishing nothing but attracting TV cameras.

If you have a flat tire on your car, you don’t march in a parade; you jack up the car and change the tire. When you have evil legislation, like VAWA, you jack up the law and change it. This requires skilled, influential people who can do that.

Again, I look at the data. Men are squawking anonymously and losing rights. They’re on the wrong track. A True MRA is an effective change agent. No lawmakers ever have or ever will take men seriously when they hide behind pseudonyms.

Anyway, back to the hostility…

Is Marc first and foremost a Republican, over-riding all other considerations, or first and foremost an equality feminist, over-riding any potential to support Palin the anti-feminist? Okay, admittedly she took a job which on the face of it is a feminist action, but I think that’s as far as it goes, and time will tell.

Palin may have 80% support in Alaska, but I guess Alaska’s population is made up of mercenary male workers, toiling in inhospitable conditions to rape and pillage animal, land, sea and mineral resources, to earn a large enough wage to keep a mercenary Her Indoors safely indoors – so Alaskans are going to vote for the blood-hungry mercenary. No surprise.

Palin herself only goes outdoors occasionally, to shoot moose. Put her and an army of hockey ‘moms’ on a front line though, where the enemy fire back, and she gains my respect. Otherwise, she’s just another psycho with a white feather.

I will delete all posts henceforth that serve no purpose other than to treat this comments section as a bulletin board. If you wish to communicate personally with other posters, do so offline.

As for me being “ineffective” in the Mens Right Movement, you’re wrong. I have a lot of effect in my daily life. I’ve gotten quite a few men and women (at work, at home, at church etc.) to see what’s really happening in America (and those other places). To paraphrase Harry, we need soldiers too. We have plenty of chiefs. And in my daily life, I assure you, I’m not anonymous. The fact is – YOU don’t know my name. And I can’t see any difference that should make to you. I don’t know amfortas’ name, but I know how important he is. We just do it free. On our own time.

“It’s not just the right of the person who speaks to be heard — it is the right of everyone in the audience to listen. And everytime you silence somebody, you make yourself a prisoner of your own action, because you deny yourself the right to hear something.”

Without a doubt, in the almost 8 years that I have edited this publication, I have acted to silence those who I considered to be out of line. And I am certain it will happen again. But it’s never a trivial act.

http://heliologue.com/2007/02/16/christopher-hitchens-on-free-speech/

You proved my point, as you always do. Instead of reacting to me with emotion, try to actually read what I write.

I really don’t care about anonymous opinions; I am responding to teach newcomers about the issues. Anonymous opinions aren’t solving any problems or making any headway. Keep arguing with me, and keep buttressing my point. That’s terrific.

By the way, Mr. Anonymous, all humble soldiers, in legitimate armies, have names, ranks, and serial numbers.

Demonstrably false – given that you are responding to so many people round here – such as Amfortas – whose names you do not know.

“If you want to effect change and be taken seriously, you cannot do so without revealing your proper name.”

Demonstrably false – given that there are millions of effective activists around the world who beaver away behind the scenes; mostly unrecognised and mostly unknown.

“You cannot legally and rationally overturn any system, in a democracy, without using your real name.”

Demonstrably false – e.g the suffragette riots, the Stonewall riots, the racial riots and, indeed, 9/11 – or are you going to argue that 9/11 was effective in, for example, changing security procedures at airports because we know the names of the terrorists involved?

You seem to think that only the generals count, and that the humble soldiers are an irelevance.