Image 01 Image 03

Gender Pablum at USA Today

Gender Pablum at USA Today

USA Today has a particularly trite, even by USA Today standards, article bemoaning the likely decrease in the number of women in Congress:

The prospects for female congressional candidates have been hurt by a combination of a tough political landscape for Democrats — women in Congress are disproportionately Democratic— and the nation’s economic troubles. Hard times historically have made voters more risk-averse and less willing to consider voting for female candidates.

Bottom line: Independent analysts predict that the number of women in Congress — currently 56 Democrats and 17 Republicans in the House, and 13 Democrats and four Republicans in the Senate — will decline for the first time in three decades.

The notion that women do worse in hard economic times is nonsense.  Republican women are doing well and running on primarily economic platforms.

I have an idea.  Elect Sharron Angle, Kelly Ayotte, Christine O’Donnell, and Linda McMahon to the Senate.  Problem solved.

Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Bookmark and Share


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


So apparently they've decided to write off every female Republican candidate as window dressing. Good to know. I always appreciate it when the MSM flaunts its misogyfeminist views, because it reminds me time and again just exactly WHY I can't stand them.

a little off topic, but i found evidence that a sexist, homophobic, lying anti-whitman comment was actually comment spam.

i bleg for help in trying to find out who is behind it.

"The notion that women do worse in hard economic times is nonsense."

Do you have a shred of evidence for this?

NS, here's evidence:

In comparing current (August 2010) unemployment statistics, men 20 and over have an unemployment rate of 10.2%, while women 20 and over have an unemployment rate of 7.7%


Greg, we're talking about women candidates for office, not employment.