The Rogue News

Comments (6)

All The Rogue News Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • A

    Autumn H-BOct 23, 2012 at 3:21 pm

    This is…offensive.

  • J

    JJJun 5, 2012 at 3:20 pm

    Ari Falkner: (Quite Possibly) My Worst Enemy

    Hello there Ari; how are you?
    You swell?
    You done being angry over the fact those dang liberal commies have a dang socialist moron in office?
    Not quite?
    I didn’t think so.

    Well I’m JJ, sophomore, and let me just plug in my Libero-Tunes so I can type at you for a little bit.

    So, where to start? First, what’s with Conservatives and loving to bash Liberals in their titles? I mean, sure, we get your point from the beginning, but yeesh. Setting the tone as angry from the beginning? If that’s the way you want to go, go for it. Liberals are not women’s worst enemy, I assure you. The “Liberal Agenda” works hard to fight for the equality women (and many other social groups) have deserved since the dawn of civilization.

    I like your comment on Liberals’ “Wars”. It’s true; we’ve named some Conservative policies the “War on This” or the “War on That,” but it’s just so we can explain how essential these institutions (Art, Education, etc.) are to American Society.

    Onward to the widget: The Life of Julia. It shows the fictional Julia, a symbol of thousands of American women facing similar problems, and is just showing how Obama’s policies help women of all ages. The coverage is indeed “extensive,” because, believe it or not, Barack H. Obama has made many a reform.

    The Life of Julia isn’t “ludicrous,” and yes, it “relies on the assumption that she [has a low income (no need to call everyone in Head Start ‘poor’) household]”. First off, obviously, not all of these experiences are happening to the same person, as “Julia” is fictional; it’s meant to show how women are affected differently. As she is fictional, isn’t it okay for Julia’s family to have a lower income than others, therefore going to Head Start? As I said, not every woman will be affected by every policy; it’s just to prove a point.

    I don’t know much about Ryan’s budget, so go ahead and take that point, but I’d like to point out that you bring up Obama’s cutting of Social Security. Yes, he is forced to cut this, but have you seen what else is planned on being cut, or already has been? Education, for instance. You talk about Head Start like it’s not necessary. Okay, so maybe the kids going into Head Start don’t, on average, do as stellar in kindergarten as those going to private preschools, but at least they can go to school! Would you rather have 200,000 children from low-income families not have any preschool at all because their parents can’t afford it? The first step to helping the “lower class” is education, and the experience Head Start can give can make or break a child’s future.

    Going to Social Security really quickly, you mention that Obama has some cuts for it. At least it isn’t completely cut? I mean, as a senior citizen(no matter race, creed, color, or status), I’m sure you’d love to not have to worry over every dollar spent. You talk about the over-glorification of Head Start, a worthwhile endeavor fro our children’s sake, btu just touch on Social Security, which we’re trying hard to keep around.

    In the article, you stated, ” It seemed that if there was a hardworking, self-sufficient women not dependent on the government for help managing her own life, the Democrats hated her with the same passion they accused the Republicans of conducting.”


    That is not at all what Democrats want as a whole. We greatly encourage women to be hard-working, which is why these reforms are taking place. Jaczko and his lot have nothing to do with this statement you made, Ari. And then you go on to say that Democrats think “[women] should not be allowed to economically pull themselves up by the britches, just as the historical martyrs did, to reach the economic status of men.” Where did that come from? Maybe we can talk about Lilly Ledbetter, who’s trying to fight for “equal pay for equal work.” This is the same right that a Conservative women, Phyllis Schlafly, worked to fight against back in the days of the Equal Rights Ammendment, just a few decades back. This is the same political leader who regularly fought and fights for the further subjugation of women by law.

    The Life of Julia is propaganda, absolutely, 100%. But, aren’t speeches propaganda? Posters? Advertisements? A slide show isn’t that far off from these.

    You talk about how our Ashland’s feminists need to reevaluate themselves. Okay well, maybe you need to take a good hard look into a mirror yourself.

    Our feminists aren’t fighting against women.

    You are.

    Let’s look at what you think The Life of Julia says, shall we? You talk about how men have survived thousands of years without government assistance, when this can’t be further from the truth. There are men on the welfare system too. Men on Social Security. Medicare, Medicaid, you name it. Women can get free birth control; men can get free condoms. This is an awfully one-sided argument that actually only takes into account women. And then you talk about how government replaces husbandry, where I once again have to call you out. Look at the statistics, and you’ll see that female breadwinners are gaining popularity across the United States. Men need help from the government too, so would they be replacing wives with government? Or rather, maybe the less-privileged people of the USA need help as a whole.

    Feminists are looking for equality, not rights above those men have.

    Ari, I think that, depending on how often you’d bring politics into conversation, you and I could be great friends. You write about science, you’re a technological wizard, and all around a smart person. I love logic, and I hope you can see where I’m trying to go with this comment.

    As the old saying goes, I don’t agree with your point, but I’ll defend to my death your right to have it.

    • A

      Ari FalknerJun 6, 2012 at 2:40 pm

      This is going to be fun to reply to. Just don’t take it personally, and this will go well.

    • J

      James RisnerJun 6, 2012 at 3:21 pm

      Dear JJ,

      I noticed that you are very confused right now and I will now try to help you. First, I’d like to address your first point. You state that you love how Republicans bash the “liberal agenda” which I concede to you. We the Republicans believe that liberals simply can’t be taught through conventional means. There is really only one way to teach a liberal what is right and what is wrong. That is to bash, beat and pummel the liberal ideology into the ground. Why? Because the fact that liberal ideology is so wrong, as is socialism and communism, that those who embrace it are beyond reason. To quote one of my favorite philosophers, Thomas Paine “To argue with one who has renounced reason is like trying to administer medicine to the dead.” I can’t help you understand, thus you must be beaten (verbally) in order to be able to understand what is right and what is wrong. The reason the life of Julia is a terrible idea is because it teaches women to revert back to their helplessness that has plagued them for so long. Welfare is negating Social Darwinism. Poor people are lazy. Take for example Andrew Carnegie. He worked for a telegraph company of lowly origins and worked his way up a railroad company in order to make smart investments for his steel empire. The poor could also be called the lazy. It is peace through power. Survival of the fittest. Liberals are not fit.

      Moving on to Mr. Jazco. Mr. Jazco is actually perfectly relevant to this discussion. Some patronizing son-of-a-gun appointed by the Socialist-in-Chief who is clearly anti-feminine represents the inherent weakness of the Democratic party and their hypocritical agenda. If the Democrats proclaim themselves the “tolerant” party appealing to blacks, mexicans and other “oppressed” minority groups when they themselves grew out of the roots of the KKK as Ari Falkner pointed out how can they lay claim to the most diverse party in the country? They can’t. If you are identifying with Democratic party then you are a racist. Simple as that.

      As Winston Churchill said “The best argument against democracy is a ten minute conversation with the average voter.” This holds true even today. If one does not have strict social conservative values to grow up with they become weak, shiftless sacks griping about how unfair life is. Andrew Carnegie didn’t do that, he kicked butt to get where he was. All liberals do is enable the parasites of society to continue to live when they should be purged unconditionally. I know where you’re going with that comment. You’re going crazy. This is the real world with real rules. It does not run on rainbows. If it did, I wouldn’t be typing this now. Ultimately it is peace through power, reward through hard work and survival of the fittest.

  • E

    Emma CobbJun 4, 2012 at 4:59 pm

    I couldn’t find the quote you gave in last paragraph, “Sure, men have survived without government assistance for thousands of years, but now that we’re starting to get women wanting to be independent, which is cute, we need to step in and protect them so nothing bad happens.” –could you give me your source for this? I would be interested to see the context in which it was said. Thanks!

    • A

      Ari FalknerJun 4, 2012 at 6:31 pm

      Sorry, that was a made up quote. I should add that in.

Activate Search
Liberalism: Women’s Worst Enemy