Election Watch
You Looking at Me?
This is on Huffington Post, too. Some days it seems like journalists don’t have enough to do with their time so they create conflicts out of whole cloth as a form of entertainment. Fortunately for me, I make no claim to be objective. Let me know what you think. Better yet, go to HuffPo and put your comment there.
You know Hillary is no longer seen as the inevitable front runner in Iowa when Maureen Dowd (almost, at least till she gets to her punch line) writes something positive about her.
In response to the latest Drudge-Limbaugh-sexist bloggers’ echo chamber campaign to denigrate Hillary for—gasp!–looking like a 60-year-old woman, when men of that certain age or even—gasp again–older are seen as distinguished and wise, Dowd observed: “Women are still scrutinized more critically on their looks, which seem to fluctuate more on camera, depending on lighting, bloating and wardrobe.”
Read MoreWhy Oprah and Hillary are in This Election Together
Her exquisitely lacquered red nails clasp the lever confidently, six fashion-statement gold bangles punctuating her slender wrist. Though you can’t see the rest of her, if you read women’s fashion magazines, you might guess this is
the smart, sophisticated Marie Claire http://www.marieclaire.com woman.
There’s a good reason why the word “voting” is clearly painted under the lever, with an arrow pointing to it. This woman might well be one of the 35 million eligible women who didn’t vote in the 2004 presidential election. And single women http://www.wvwv.org , we are told by the article, are less likely to vote than their married counterparts.
Read MoreClinton, Couric, and Chris Matthews’ Sexist Spin
When it comes to Chris Matthews’s interpretation of Hillary Clinton’s words—any of her words—she’s damned if she yeas and damned if she nays.
After gloating that a new poll found Hillary losing in a matchup with any one of five Republican presidential candidates, Matthews later in the same program spun her November 26 interview with Katie Couric, in which–like any candidate with half a brain and a quarter of a spine–Clinton showed confidence in her ability to win the Democratic nomination.
Read MoreWhat Does the Election Mean?
WHAT A DIFFERENCE A VOTE MAKES—BUT WILL IT?
So now President Bush wants to cooperate. Now he wants to reach across the aisle. Now he wants to work together with the Democrats, finally to show he can be that “uniter not divider” of his 2000 campaign promises. That perhaps he isn’t even the sole decider of everything after all. What? Why would any Democrat in his or her right mind give this man the time of day?
Bush puffed and preened and bared his teeth before the election. But once he “got thumped”, as he put it, all that puffery deflated in a nanosecond just like you might see with any other bully. Rummy (who could do no wrong 24 hours previously) was shown the door the day after the elections, Congresswoman and probable next Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi–taunted throughout the election season as the very personification of liberal, liberal, liberal evil–was invited to lunch at the White House, and the president allowed as how he wants to work with the same Democrats he’s been wringing out and hanging up to dry for the last 6 years. And all too often, they have been complicit in their humiliation.
Read More