Meet Janis Lane: Tea Party Leader And Anti-Feminist

Janis Lane is the Tea Party leader in Mississippi and she appears to long for the days when women were happy chattel. Lane had made headlines in complaining that women are inherently poorly suited to not just serve as bosses but to vote.


Lane explained that “Probably the biggest turn we ever made was when the women got the right to vote. Our country might have been better off if it was still just men voting.” A former marketing director who now leads the party in Central Mississippi, Lane further observed that “There is nothing worse than a bunch of mean, hateful women. They are diabolical in how than can skewer a person . . . I do not see that in men. The whole time I worked, I’d much rather have a male boss than a female boss. Double-minded, you never can trust them.”

Once again, it is remarkable how some of our radicalized citizens share striking similarity with our enemies like the Taliban who would agree wholeheartedly with Lane on her view of women.

Source: Daily Mail

290 thoughts on “Meet Janis Lane: Tea Party Leader And Anti-Feminist

  1. With friends like this–who needs enemies?

    Scott Brown Supporter From Ad Calls Elizabeth Warren ‘D*****bag,’ Obama A ‘Muslim’ On Facebook
    Posted: 10/19/2012
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/19/scott-brown-elizabeth-warren-george-patriarca_n_1987112.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

    NEW YORK — Scott Brown recently got in hot water for falsely claiming that his Senate race opponent, Elizabeth Warren, was using paid actors in her commercials. But it turns out that Brown is perhaps the one who should have known more about the people appearing in his ads.

    In a television advertisement running as recently this week, Sen. Scott Brown’s (R-Mass.) reelection campaign featured a union construction worker whose publicly accessible Facebook page is riddled with insults against Brown’s Democratic challenger Elizabeth Warren and President Barack Obama.

    (Editor’s Note: This post contains strong language that some readers may find objectionable.)

    On one post made in August, well before Brown’s ad appeared, the worker, George Patriarca, calls Warren a “DOUCHEBAG.” On another he labels the president a “faggot,” and on a third he says, “there is a Muslim in the White House.”

  2. ThinkProgress ‏@thinkprogress

    “And if you come down with a case of Romnesia..here’s the good news: Obamacare covers pre-existing conditions”

  3. Blind-

    I’m sorry if I offended anyone who happened to read the blog post. I did not mean to insult anyone.

    My point is that the entire media took his quote out of context. The families understand that their parents are going to be ripped, and they need to deal with it. They cut off the quote before he explained how they signed on for this deal- and that this is how it works.

    While neither are perfect and both are caught in lies, the ones close to either candidate are in with their family 100%. This means Tagg truly believed his dad was not lying, and when he heard something he believes to not be the truth, and with an attack, it naturally angered him.

    I can sympathize with that type of situation. If my dad were the track coach and I believe him to be an honest time keeper- and another kid’s dad comes and calls him a liar because ‘my boy ran a mile in 6:45 last week!’ or something- while I might not have been privy to the other boys run, hearing my father called a liar is something that would make my face burn.

    I think it falls into the ‘protect the family’ feelings at a very primal level. I’m not saying Tagg was right, I’m saying the media failed again in being objective about the whole story, and edited the quote to further an image and an agenda.

    Also, I am relatively new and sporadic poster, probably considered troll by the regulars or one of their past crazies with another name. That’s OK, it’s only the internet. For future though-

    I follow the libertarian violence code- you don’t have the right to initiate violence against anyone for any reason. You may defend yourself though.

  4. Haha, I guess that is funny. The objectivity complaint linked to a outrageously biased blog. I see it as biased, but not ‘outrageously’.

    I believe the point is still salient though.

  5. Steg

    Thanks for the elaboration. You’ve helped me to understand your position and just that is important, I think.

    I’m pretty sporadic poster too, just a longer term sporadic poster. Thanks for the thoughtful reply.

  6. Steg,

    Tagg isn’t a child. He’s an adult in his early forties. One has to question whether he has failed to see the flip flops in his father’s position on a number of important issues–or chooses not to acknowledge how many times his father has changed his positions on issues for political expediency. One also has to question the wisdom of Tagg’s remarks with regard to President Obama.

  7. Thanks, Blind.

    Yes, gbk, it is basically as I stated. Hardcore libertarians will not initiate violence, although they will defend themselves. It is pretty much as I stated. Violence code seems like a bad phrase. More like code of conduct- and as it pertains to violence. Although Violence Code might be a fun band or album..

    Elaine- you are correct. It must be a question about the whole of his remarks, and not a cherry picked segment. (Like waiting until the end of that young reverend’s speech)

    As far as Tagg’s witness to the flipping, all I can do is shrug. Beats me.

  8. You realize therefore significantly on the subject of this subject, produced me in my opinion consider it from numerous varied angles. Its like men and women aren’t fascinated except it’s something to do with Lady gaga! Your personal stuffs nice. At all times maintain it up!

  9. Janis Lane, are you the person I spoke with about my public speaking training? I’m Tony Ruiz, preparing for a run at Congress from Arizona

  10. Mike Spindell, do you really believe that not being permitted to vote is being denied citizenship?
    Then children born to American citizens are not themselves citizens until they turn 18 AND register to vote? What are they? Where should they be deported to if they become undesirable aliens?
    Then people who are not registered to vote are not citizens? Where should they be deported to if they become undesirable aliens?
    Then Blacks who were not allowed to vote were not citizens? Even though they were counted in the census as citizens?
    Then convicts who are not allowed to vote are not citizens? Even though they are counted in the census as citizens?
    Voting and citizenship are not the same. Only citizens are (supposed to be) permitted to vote. But not voting, or not being allowed to vote, does not mean one is not an American citizen.

    • “Mike Spindell, do you really believe that not being permitted to vote is being denied citizenship?”

      Mac,

      Amazingly dumb misconstrual of my point. not being permitted to vote is a denial of one of the rights of citizenship, or do you believe differently?

  11. Yes, “gbk,” if you read his comment you saw it. Nonviolence except in defense of innocent persons. No initiation of violence. Moderation of violence if violence becomes necessary.
    Unfortunately the national Libertarian party does not extend this principle to anyone who has not been born yet. Some State and local LP affiliated parties do.

Comments are closed.