Abortion legislation is futile territory given the House-Senate split right now -- nothing but base plays around bills that won't become law. But the universe of issues of importance to women is bigger than abortion, and given that the GOP holds the House, it has the power to set an affirmative agenda that could be beneficial to all women -- not just base voters -- on issues from rape to cyberstalking. A security-centric approach to reaching women voters would play to the GOP's strengths -- the anti-crime party -- and it would actually do something new and useful on a policy basis for women.
Andrea Bozek, NRCC Communications Director
Gail Gitcho, RGA Communications Director
Jill Bader, RSLC Communications Director
Sean Spicer, RNC Communications Director
Brad Dayspring, NRSC Communications Director
TO: Republicans Across the Country
RE: Democrats' War on Women
Democrats want voters to think they'll do anything to defend women. But when women in San Diego were allegedly harassed, marginalized and exploited by a Democrat mayor, most Democrats said nothing.
When a Democrat candidate for mayor in the nation's largest city was caught -- not for the first time -- acting like an internet predator and sending nude pictures to young women after repeatedly lying to his constituents, most Democrats said nothing.
Democrats' hypocrisy is appalling. And with their silence, they are sanctioning the actions of Bob Filner and Anthony Weiner and numerous others who have assaulted, harassed, and preyed on women.
That's not mentioning the Weiner campaign official, who went on a tirade against a female intern while she was talking to a reporter (thinking it was off the record), attempting to shame and humiliate the intern by verbally attacking her as a "slutbag" among a long list of other offensive, sexist, and demeaning terms. This is how Democrats really talk about women when they think no one will find out.
It's not just Weiner staffers. This week, a male senior official at the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee actually compared sexual harassment and assault to "cable soap operas" in an interview with Yahoo News.
Where's the outrage? Why aren't leading Democrats like President Obama, Vice President Biden, and former Secretary Clinton, standing up for these women?
Last year, when radio host Rush Limbaugh called liberal activist Sandra Fluke an offensive term, Nancy Pelosi demanded that Republicans speak out. But when an individual currently serving on an actual Democrat campaign used precisely the same term and many more to disparage an intern, Pelosi didn't say a word. Nor did she speak out when two former members of her caucus, members who voted for her as speaker, were discovered to be harassing and exposing themselves to women.
You'll also recall t hat last year, when a Republican candidate made a ridiculous and offensive remark, he was swiftly condemned by the party's presidential nominee, the RNC chairman, and congressional leaders. In contrast, when a Democrat official is accused of physically attacking women, Democrat leaders looked the other way.
Two full weeks passed before DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz could even be bothered to call for Mayor Filner's resignation. Not until seven women came forward alleging verbal or physical harassment did she come to the defense of women in San Diego. What took so long? Did she not think six harassed women was a concern?
When Nancy Pelosi was asked about her former colleague Mayor Filner, she didn't jump to the defense of the women involved. Instead, she was indignant that she was asked. "Don't identify him as my former colleague," she snapped. She's yet to call for her fellow Californian's resignation.
In New York, Senators Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand have ducked and dodged questions about Anthony Weiner and Eliot Spitzer and have not called on either to leave the race. Another New Yorker, Hillary Clinton, has stayed mum about all of it. For someone who has not-so-veiled aspirations to lead her party, she's failed to show any leadership in publicly denouncing Weiner's habits or his candidacy.
Speaking of Clintons, Democrats running in 2014 are counting on Bill Clinton to be a top surrogate and fundraiser. So while they're claiming to defend women, they're celebrating with a man who's record with women is notorious.
Does this sound like a party that cares about women? Or does this sound like a party who wants to cover up scandals at any cost, even if that means ignoring the very real harm done by members of their party?
Could it be that Democrats only pretend to care about women when it's politically advantageous?
With congressional Democrats back in their districts this month, it's time for voters to hold them accountable. Likewise, it's time to pressure the likes of Biden and Clinton into stating their positions. Where do they stand? Until now, it certainly hasn't been with women.
Let's be clear: Democrats made up and launched the contrived "war on women," and the media happily went along with it. Clearly they didn't think through their "war" strategy. It's now backfired and exposed them as the hypocrites that they are. And since you won't hear about that in the mainstream media, it's up to all of us to get the truth out.