I've figured it out!

Submitted by Cassiodorus on Sun, 01/24/2016 - 1:26pm

See, Hillary Clinton's presidential bid is all about a woman's right not only to be President, but to be untrustworthy as well.

If throughout all these years you've been voting for male politicians who couldn't be trusted, what right do you have to say "no" to a woman who demands the same courtesy as all of the men who've been getting a free pass?

And who the hell gave you the right to be an informed voter, anyway?

From a piece in The Guardian, Lena Dunham, the star of "Girls," argues:

“I am so frustrated with the dialogue around Hillary among my peers,” Dunham told me in an email. “It feels so gendered, even from women, so harshly sexist. We never throw claims of too establishment or too stiff or even too selfish at male politicians. It’s unfair in the deepest sense.”

We've been accepting of the Establishment all this time -- why should we stop now?

As the lyric says in Disney's "High School Musical": "stick with the stuff you know."

Tags:

Hillary Clinton

sexism

Establishment

Lena Dunham

Vote

Comments

Submitted by hecate on Sun, 01/24/2016 - 2:09pm

yesterday

Maureen Dowd observed:

Before Palin, if a woman flamed out in a spectacular fashion, it was considered an X through the X chromosome. If Billie Jean King lost to Bobby Riggs, women would be seen as second-class athletes. If Geraldine Ferraro seemed unfit for the White House, all women might be judged incapable.

But when Palin turned out to be utterly unqualified and unintelligible, spouting her own special Yoda-like language, it did not reflect poorly on women as a whole—only on her and John McCain. What the hell were you thinking, Senator?

Ordinarily, it's considered sexist to call a woman shrill. But Palin liberated us on that score. She really is shrill.

Ordinarily, you have to tread gingerly in critiquing a working woman on her mothering skills. But Palin’s brawling brood runs so wild around the state she once governed, in a way that is so contrary to her evangelistic, sanctimonious homilies on family values, that it seems only Christian to advise her to study the Obamas to see what exceptional parenting looks like.

There has been a lot of talk this campaign season about how women pols bring superior qualities to the table: collegiality and listening skills. But Sarahcuda shows that we are truly the equals of men, capable of narcissistic explosions, brazen hypocrisy and unapologetic greed. She had barely finished the endorsement Tuesday when she began using it to raise money for SarahPAC, so she can take her show on the road.

Palin has done us a favor by proving that a woman can stumble, babble incoherently on stage and spew snide garbage, and it isn’t a blot on the female copybook.

Clinton II is providing a similar service. She is demonstrating that a woman can be as Wrong as any man, and in every way.

Over at Media Matters, Mr. Shock Wig, in full scold mold, once put together a collection of Dowd's observations about The Mad Bomber. He intended it to reflect poorly on Dowd, but since pretty much everything contained therein is accurate, and also funny, it was a big boner on his part. I mean, how can you respond to assertions like "her smile is not connected to her face," she lives "in an ice palace" and seems "like a virus or alien that needs a host body to survive," that while she was "once so angry about tea and cookies, she is now so eerily glazed and good-natured that she could be the senator from Stepford," and "it's pretty pathetic, at this stage of her career, that she has to wage a major offensive, by helicopter and Web testimonials, to make herself appear warm-blooded"? They're just true.

Submitted by Shahryar on Sun, 01/24/2016 - 4:02pm

next time I see Lena I'll tell her she's wrong

I have no idea where she gets the idea that male politicians aren't criticized for all of those things.

(next time = first time)

Submitted by hecate on Sun, 01/24/2016 - 6:51pm

i

don't even know what is a Lena. Why is she in a news? Isn't she just another person with a twit machine? Is she, like, a Kardashian?

Submitted by Cassiodorus on Sun, 01/24/2016 - 7:57pm

Lena Dunham's creation

http://www.hbo.com/girls

—

The ruling classes need an extra party to make the rest of us feel as if we participate in democracy. That's what the Democrats are for. They make the US more durable than the Soviet Union was.

Submitted by hecate on Sun, 01/24/2016 - 8:24pm

i

see. The 486,897th television show about young white women living in New York City.

Can someone get a big saw and cut that island off and float it far out to sea already? They can all diddle each other out there while the rest of the Americans get about their business.

Submitted by shaharazade on Sun, 01/24/2016 - 9:57pm

She also made a indie

movie called Tiny Furniture that was so NYC hipster yuppified and neurotically self absorbed it irritated the shit out of me. The New Yorker loved it. Figures she's be a Hillbot.

Submitted by hecate on Sun, 01/24/2016 - 11:00pm

nyc

was a Dutch idea. Like stock, another Dutch brainshower, it was wrong from the start.

[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-RtayJQubY]

Submitted by Pluto's Republic on Mon, 01/25/2016 - 1:24pm

If I had to choose a flavor of feminism

…(which shockingly differentiate themselves when Hillary is the topic) I'd would fall in blogger Roqayah's camp.

Can a sociopath be a feminist? It's a real stretch. Female sociopaths and the women who support them have no place on the World Stage. There development was arrested at the "mean girl" stage back at Nightmare High School. Among enlightened women, they stick out light a sore thumb.

[Mainstream Feminist's] defense of Clinton hinge on emotion and a prospective future that has no basis in reality, especially when one examines her history as Secretary of State. Their arguments are bolstered by superficial social justice performances and liberal neologisms, wherein policy is simply an aside rather than the very heart of the matter.

In line with mainstream liberal feminist’s rejection of internationalism is their position on Hillary’s ‘send them back‘ immigration policy. During an interview with Christiane Amanpour, the former Secretary of State said that unaccompanied minors, many of whom are fleeing unimaginable violence, should be “sent back”. “We have to send a clear message, just because your child gets across the border, that doesn’t mean the child gets to stay,” she said in October of last year.

One of the most quoted statements made by Hillary Clinton is from the Beijing Conference on Women in 1995, where she remarks that “women’s rights are human rights”, and yet her support of even more muscular foreign policy emphasizes, among other things, a flagrant discrepancy. Humanitarian imperialism, or the use of human rights to sell war and occupation, is a fundamental portion of Clinton’s foreign policy. In March 2015 it was reported that Saudi Arabia would receive nearly $30 billion worth of advanced fighter jets— a sale that was allegedly necessitated and referred to as “a top priority” by Hillary Clinton, personally. To call these actions sanctimonious would be an understatement. Time and time again, Clinton has been at the forefront of the greater US drive for war and intervention, from Iraq to Afghanistan, and beyond. And so, if women’s rights are human rights then why further the military industrial complex, whose greatest victims both during and after periods of war are women?

They aren’t looking for women to dismantle an oppressive system but to join it, to become a part of the establishment class. This isn’t liberatory political consciousness, but the politics of superficial preservation for those at the top.

Submitted by WheninRome on Mon, 01/25/2016 - 11:33pm

On the town hall comment

On the town hall comment thread I posted: "She really isn’t likable. I can rant all night about policy disagreements with Obama, but on a human level, he is very likable. Not her."

I got this in response: "So sexist needing to “like" her."

Submitted by hecate on Tue, 01/26/2016 - 12:55am

the

Hairball isn't likable either, and he's a man. Some people just aren't. Male. And female.

Submitted by enhydra lutris on Tue, 01/26/2016 - 1:05pm

Wonderful, sums it up very well indeed.

—

That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --