I also take issue about the so-called "sexist" comments about her cackle. Personal traits have always been fodder for pundits, so if Dubya's "smirk" is held against him, why is Hillary's cackle off bounds? Personally, I HATE her cackle not because it's an awful sound, but because she clearly fakes it to avoid answering some of the tough questions out there, eg. Bill's $800K speeches paid by Columbia and the conflict of interest with her position on the Columbian Free-Trade deal.

Posted at June 15, 2008 1:06 PM in response to Okay Can We Talk About It NOW?

How can we tell the difference between a gender-specific insult (bitch, dick, prick, etc.) and sexist intent? A "bitch" to me is simply a horrible female person, just as a "prick" to me is a horrible male person. And no, I don't want to do it all PC and give up my right to call a bitchy woman a "bitch" (and god knows there're lots of them around) and use a "horrible person" instead - it's absurd. Ironically, the objections to the use of the word strikes me as sexist - it is considered inappropriate because, well, we're supposed to be nice to women, and saying "bitch", that's not nice to women. Well, nasty women do exist - eg. Ann Coulter is a BITCH. There, it feels better.

Posted at June 15, 2008 1:00 PM in response to Okay Can We Talk About It NOW?

What irks me particularly about Ferraro is that her criticism of Obama isn't even about sexism, but about his benefitting from some form of affirmative action - "country got caught up in the concept". It was incredulous for me that feminists like Gloria Steinem did not speak up against this blatant racism from one of their own.

Following Dijamo's logic, since no feminists spoke against racism targeted at Obama, the next time another feminist is attacked, she should not expect anyone to come to her defense.

Is that even sound logic???

Posted at June 14, 2008 1:10 PM in response to Will White Feminists Speak up for Michelle Obama?

The dimension to the attacks on Michelle Obama includes racism, not just feminism. It might surprise a lot of people but a lot of white feminists are ALSO racists, take Ferraro and her comments that Obama got ahead because of his race, not because of his strength as a candidate. I came across a great article about this dichotomy but can't for the world of me remember who wrote it and where.

Posted at June 14, 2008 11:49 AM in response to Will White Feminists Speak up for Michelle Obama?

Great blog! MonicaL for 2012!

Can someone post the thread of Otto F's flirtation, please????

Posted at June 7, 2008 12:38 AM in response to I'm Not Bad, I'm Just Drawn That Way

I echo Samantha Powers..."Monster!"

Posted at May 29, 2008 1:47 PM in response to Seeing No Evil Can Come to No Good

But didn't Bush claim to have a direct line to God?

Posted at May 29, 2008 1:43 PM in response to Seeing No Evil Can Come to No Good

Yeah, but a screeching, tantrum-throwing, serial-lying, tearing, misspeaking, bi-polar type would, I see.

Posted at May 28, 2008 2:31 AM in response to What really happened in 1992 (Hint: Not what Billary claims)

Agreed! He can call it anything he likes, as long as he goes there and listen and actually DO SOMETHING about their concerns, as opposed to pandering for their vote and abandonning them after he gets it like the other candidate.

Posted at May 28, 2008 1:46 AM in response to Newsweek: Obama's Appalachia Problem Is Real

I won't deny that many Conservative leaders are outright fascists and bigots, as are many of their followers, but the question worth asking is HOW was the population "softened" up to lean their way?

How did Hitler persuade fair, decent Germans not unlike ourselves right after a very liberal period in Germany to adopt fascism?

One area of "softening" we have ignored - we dismissed TV (correctly) as a "vast wasteland" so we turned it off and ceded it to the Conservatives who are too happy to seize its prevalence among their constituents to shape their views and perceptions.

The advent of the internet might make this separation much worse between net users and TV watchers.

Criticism of popular TV culture and denounciation of Fox News is NOT going make its viewers turn it off, it's going to make its viewers RESENT the critics as elitist and condescending.

Another area of "softening" and insidious influence is Religion. Again, we have ceded this ground.

Don't confuse the Medium with the Message - both TV and Religion are prevalent in other countries like Canada, Europe and Cuba, but their influence on their respective societies are much different.

Posted at May 28, 2008 1:07 AM in response to Taking the Adversary Seriously: History and Condescension