Feminists in Trouble Part II.

What's good??

After a long week at the salt mines, it's time to kick back, crack open some brew, and reflect on the week's events.

Recent developments continue to support my thesis that the era of Political Feminism, that great political ball-breaker, has no sustainable future.

Happy day!!

Without further ado, let's move to the evidence.

In the legal arena, MRAs have scored a major legal victory in New Jersey.

According to the Illustrious David Usher:

... In June, New Jersey trial court judge Francis B. Schultz did his judicial homework and found portions of the New Jersey domestic violence laws are unconstitutional. Attorney David Heleniak, who is also a board member of the True Equality Network, represented the husband in this ground-breaking decision.

In Crespo v. Crespo, Judge Schultz applied the Matthews-Eldridge balancing test to properly assess the standard of review required for these cases (trial court judges rarely do this on the notion that only high courts need weigh fundamental elements of due process). He found that since restraining orders impact constitutionally protected parental rights, the highest evidentiary standard of “clear and convincing evidence” applies when determining if restraining orders are issued.

In his decision, Schultz also rejected a common practice of state legislatures who often improperly dictate evidentiary standards and due-process provisions to the courts. It is long held that the standard of review and procedural matters are exclusively the venue of the courts.

The difference between applying the “preponderance of evidence” standard and the strict-scrutiny “clear and convincing” standard in domestic violence cases is important. The “preponderance of evidence” standard, and the lower standard of review presently applied, encourages and rewards false assertions by trial lawyers or clients whose cases have little or no merit whatsoever. Under this standard, evidence is unimportant or even unnecessary.

The “clear and convincing” evidentiary standard brings evidence to the forefront of the decision. If evidence of past or future serious violence exists, a restraining order will be issued.

The Supremacists-at-Bar were horrified about the decision. It means the collapse of their arrangement running trial courts as renegade Star Chambers...

Firstly, Dear Readers, we should all applaud True Equality Network, and all of the Men's Rights Activists in the political, lobbying, and legal arenas who have worked hard, put their boots on the ground, and staked their fortunes and their sacred honor in order to beat the feminists at their own game.

Also, I would like to thank Judge Schultz for finally applying the principles of Constitutional Law to these feminist statutes of injustice. Judges like these who uphold the Constitution deserve the highest praise. I called his offices at 1-201-795-6622 extension 6623 to express my gratitude, and I believe that you should do the same. We need to show the officials who despise the corruption that feminist policies bring to our government (who are numerous, I can assure you) that they have the popular support of the people when they dare to go against the feminist grain.

This case, while a limited victory, speaks volumes about what the Men's Rights Movement can do when we work together, obtain positions of influence and power, and put our money and our best efforts into striking back against feminist tyranny.

The main arguments of MRAs, that feminism is an ideology that is dangerous and subversive to our economy, our society, and our legal system, will find increasing acceptance in the mainstream.

NOW is the time to redouble our efforts, and assault feminism from every front; be it from blogs, books, podcasts, word of mouth, Youtube, the courts, magazines, the Marriage Strike, the Child Strike, the Dating Strike...

We must leverage our wins, however small, and take advantage of the increasing weakness of feminist organizations. Instead of slacking off because some progress is being made, now is the time to increase our activism!

In the first Feminists in Trouble post, I highlighted how increasing economic weakness would negatively impact Political Feminism. Let's expand on how our current Recession, soon to be Depression, will eliminate much of the Femme's political capital.




Banks in Trouble.



As most of us know, the American economy runs on the oil of cheap and easy money and credit.

Unfortunately, the producers of this vital resource, the banks, are busted beyond repair. They are leveraged to a combined total of One Quadrillion dollars in derivatives contracts, to say nothing of their balance sheet destruction as a result of a record amount of foreclosures.

Remember, loans are assets for banks, and loans are also how banks create money. Massive housing foreclosures = asset balance sheet destruction.

Anyway, getting back to derivatives contracts ...

A Quadrillion dollars is $1,000,000,000,000,000.

World GDP was estimated to be 65 Trillion dollars in 2007.

65 Trillion dollars is $65,000,000,000,000.

Doing the math gives us a ratio of 15. The amount of derivatives contracts outstanding is 15 times more than WORLD GDP.

And when one considers how flawed GDP is as a measure of wealth, one quickly comes to the conclusion that we are SCREWED.

Conclusion: Banks and financial institutions are heavily exposed to derivatives contracts, and they are suffering massive asset destruction due to the housing crisis. They are broke. They don't give a fuck about making sure that the pet projects of Political Feminism continue to be funded. Not to say that they were major sponsors of the feminist movement, but the powers behind these institutions, the Money Men [a][b], most certainly are and were. Expect the financial houses to have far less money to funnel into various unsavory causes, such as everyone's favorite hate movement.




U.S. States in Trouble.



Checking in with Mish the Mighty's blogspot, we find that State governments are in a world of hurt:

... 29 Troubled States

The list of states in trouble is 29 on the way to 50. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities is reporting 29 States Faced Total Budget Shortfall Of At Least $48 Billion In 2009.

Washington, California, and New York have all recently acted. Every other state will eventually follow to varying degrees.

The worst states as a percentage of budget gaps vs. general funds are in order: California (21.3%), Arizona (17.8%), Nevada (13.5%), Rhode Island (12.6%), Florida (11.0%), New York (9.1%), New Jersey (7.6-10.6%), and Alabama (9.2%).

Those eight states are already in deep trouble. Another 21 are in less trouble...

With that being said, State governments are doing all they can to avoid a crisis of biblical proportions. And, while many legislators are (outwardly) sympathetic to "Domestic Violence" and "Child Abuse" and "Violence againt Women" and all that jazz; and while it is a fact that States drive family breakup in order to receive fiat Federal dollars, most States are not in a position to expand new programs, and existing programs that don't make the critical list to be funded may well find themselves terminated due to lack of said funding.

As I've mentioned previously, the actual importance of failed family policies that create more problems than they solve [c][d][e] are minimal compared to issues such as serious felony violence, education, property taxes, and other vital government services.

No news article or report I have seen thus far lists feminist political objectives as even remotely critical during this crisis. Indeed, amongst my peers, many government officers understand that many feminist arguments, such as...

A) Only women are the victims of domestic violence

B) Divorce is a harmless and empowering lifestyle choice for women that has little to no impact on children and society

C) The courts are not sensitive to the "needs" of today's modern woman (be it child support, restraining orders, or divorce decrees)

... are absolutely ridiculous.

Many public servants understand the damage feminist jurisprudence has wrought upon this country. They also understand that if they don't cooperate and advocate these programs, or if they speak out and criticize these policies, they will soon be out of a job.

Because State and local governments are faced with the Perfect Storm, I expect many Agencies and Departments to eventually make deep cuts to feminist pork; with many using our economic downturn as an excuse to get rid of programs they find distasteful to begin with. Even those who support feminism in theory will find that they have no choice but to pursue policies and laws that:

A) Encourage the society at large to live together in relative harmony. (VAWA, and most feminist legislation does a wonderful job of destroying families, and estranging people from each other.)

B) Cut down on the crime and social costs that feminist legislation creates.

C) Leverage the wealth creating benefits that only the married family can provide.


The bottom line: States simply do not have the resources to act as Harem keepers on behalf of the Federal government; even if they ideologically wish to do so. Those States that continue to create and enforce destructive feminist/socialist/platonic policies will find themselves quickly exhausted; with California being a prime example of a failed socialist State.




Feds in trouble


Since it is clear that the States have no ability to preserve or protect feminist family values, the only likely source of pork barrel feminist spending is the Federal government. Indeed, as I have stated previously, the Federal government is Master of the Harem. It is Federal laws, Federal grants, and Federal fiat money and credit that, outside of private organizations and foundations, are the biggest enablers of the Political Feminist movement that has the country literally by the balls at the moment.

I am here to tell you, ladies and gentlemen, that Congress has much bigger problems. Even though the wasteful and utterly provocative I-VAWA is waiting for Congressional approval as we speak, the Federal government has much bigger fish to fry.

Firstly, it should be common knowledge by now that the government is insolvent.

B.R.O.K.E.

Bankrupt.

Flat Busted.

Done.

The U.S. Government has liabilities that it cannot possibly hope to pay, given our current spending trends. According to the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, Fedgov's liabilities total up to $52,000,000,000,000.

On top of these obligations, which include Social Security, Medicare, and other entitlement programs, the Feds are getting ready to write a check that it can’t hope to cash (without triggering a dollar devaluation and an eventual collapse).


Fanne and Freddie in trouble


According to Bloomberg:

“… Congress gave Washington-based Fannie and McLean, Virginia- based Freddie the ability this year to buy ``jumbo'' loans for the first time. The mortgages for more than $417,000 made up almost a third of the U.S. market last year, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association.

As their shares dropped as much as 76 percent the past month, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson proposed injecting capital into the companies and extending more credit should the need arise. This week U.S. lawmakers reached agreement on a modified version of the plan, which Paulson said is essential for safeguarding U.S. financial markets.

Bailout Package

The legislation passed yesterday by the House would authorize Paulson to bail out Fannie and Freddie while placing few restrictions on them. Lawmakers said they expected the Senate to approve the measure later this week, and the White House said President George W. Bush would sign it into law.

The government-sponsored companies, which buy home loans from banks and hold them or package them for sale to investors, accounted for more than 80 percent of the mortgage securities created in the first quarter, double the level of a year earlier, based on data compiled by Bloomberg. They own or guarantee almost half of the $12 trillion in U.S. home loans, and their purchases provide banks funds to offer more credit…

Let’s say that these government sponsored entities (GSEs) hold 5 Trillion dollars in U.S. mortgages. And, let’s assume that the GSEs will continue to suffer massive losses in the future (see here for an overview of unprecidented losses at the GSEs this quarter).

Assuming that losses at the GSEs will remain massive is a valid assumption, as this article at the Dr. Housing Bubble blogspot argues most effectively.

In addition, Istockanalyst.com informs us that the Congressional Budget Office has estimated the total number of loan defaults at the GSEs will be approximately 35%.

Going with these assumptions, then the Feds could potentially end up subsidizing these mortgage companies to the tune of ($5,000,000,000,000*.35) 1.75 Trillion dollars.

And what if the government decides to bail out the Big Three automakers? I don’t know if that would happen, but it seems like it could be a possibility.

Only time will tell.

So! It looks like the Feds have at least 53 Trillion dollars to come up with some kinda way… most likely by printing its way out of its obligations. This of course will lead to a hyperinflationary episode that will make Germany and Zimbabwe look like small peas run over by a Tractor going 100 miles an hour.

The Big Picture: The Federal government is the engine of Feminist Politics in the United States, and it runs on the oil of fiat money, cheap credit, and massive loans from foreign nations. Unfortunately for feminism, these sources of “energy” are drying up, little by little, on a daily basis. When the Federal government runs out of gas, we will see the Political Feminist movement take one hell of a haircut, and its considerable influence will decline.

Although feminist family values are currently a matter of Public Policy from which legislators, executives, and judicial officials are loathe to deviate from, I predict that we will see that emphasis change to a policy of family preservation and (with enough active participation and vigorous protest from the populace) erring on the side of Liberty, Responsibility, and Justice in order to make policy whenever the existing rules are unclear or vauge. The economic and political survival of the Republic depends on it.


More to come.