News > Culture > Which Worries You More: Uppity Coloreds, or Uppity Dames?

commentary
TUESDAY JULY 17 2007 4:00 PM

Which Worries You More: Uppity Coloreds, or Uppity Dames?

Submitted by Bitch_PhD

Edited by Bitch_PhD

Tags: bob novak, hillary clinton, barak obama, old white guys

In this photo, Bob Novak, the guy who outs women CIA agents in order to punish their husbands, is talking to his homie, Confederate Memorial Association President John Edward Hurley. Notice that Bob and John and those other dudes in the background are all old white guys. AKA, the only people that count.

No, seriously! Here's Bob talking to a bunch of other white guys about the negroes and the women folk over at "Meet the Press," an Important Media Outlet that Matters and that coincidentally is dominanted almost entirely by . . . white guys.

"Republicans are very pessimistic about 2008. When you talk to them off the record, they don't see how they can win this thing. And then they think for a minute, and only the Democratic Party, with everything in their favor, would say that, 'OK, this is the year either to have a woman or an African-American to break precedent, to do things the country has never done before.' And it gives the Republicans hope."

The answer to the titular question, though, is that Bob's more bugged by the uppity women than by the uppity Negroes--he and Hugh Hewitt agree that these people who "reject conventional forms of political action"--you know, like public platforms they're not invited to appear on--are scary.

the venom that comes out of the mouths of some of these women, particularly, Im not trying to be sexist, but theyre so vicious toward [Bush]. And I dont think that really contributes.

Ladies, it's *not nice* to be angry at men who, oh, think you should be broodmares for the republic. Stop arguing and *be productive*.

Bob also says that if Hillary wins, really that's just giving Bill a third term. Because, you know--just like in the Plame outing--women have no identities of their own. That's the kind of traditional value conservatives like Novak can really get behind.

Bob Novak's Republican Party: We Hope, Because We Believe Americans are Racist Woman-Hating Neanderthals.

There's a slogan for ya.

Bitch_PhD can't wait for the argument about how divisive this post is.

PAGE:

1 ...

7 | 8 | 9

Comments

ckdexterhaven

USA

December 2005

JUL 19, 2007 04:25 PM

Bitch_PHD said:
Why is that discrimination? If women want to see a woman as president for a change, then supporting Hillary makes perfect sense.

So, it would be admirable for me to vote for whatever guy runs against Barbara Boxer or Diane Feinstein simply because he was a guy, and I was sick of having a woman as senator? I should be proud of that?

d20

San Francisco, CA

September 2003

JUL 19, 2007 04:34 PM

Bitch_PhD said:
Yeah, it's just the beginning of the continuation of the anti-Hillary rhetoric we've been hearing since Clinton ran the first time. She's shrill, she's a lesbian, she's rigid, she's a bitch.

Of course, if she were more "feminine," then she'd be too girly to Lead the Nation. (rolling eyes.)

*ahem*...

Bitch_PhD said:
You're letting your frustration that they don't support your candidate lead you to being really dismissive of their concerns

when you get to the point that one post provides a rebuttal for a key point in the previous one, maybe it's time to bow out.

you have a lot of good ideas but i'm -- and i think we can safely say i'm not alone here -- getting really, really tired of your shtick. every little fucking thing does not play into your crusade, and not everything needs to be viewed in its context. give it a rest, or at the very least try to make your points in a less ridiculous fashion.

Saraphine

SUICIDEGIRL

Pennsylvania, USA

JUL 19, 2007 06:01 PM

Bitch_PhD said:

And what I'm saying is that Hillary and Obama are both from the same party, overlap on a lot of issues, and that women saying "I prefer O's personality but I want to vote for a woman" is not bigotry.

If you think Obama and Clinton are even remotely similar, you are wasting your time even talking to me.

Seriously --talk to the hand.

aldoushuxley

USA

November 2005

JUL 19, 2007 07:51 PM

Hillary has a pretty shoddy political record, you can find out a lot of the reasons why not to vote for her if you read her biography. Is she intelligent, hell yes but she is also ruthless and will do anything for her ambitions. She has already proven that she is a liar, claiming that she never supported the war, even when they had her on tape voicing support for it, come on she's not even president and she is already lying to the public. If you still think she is fit for the presidency be prepared for some one as bad or worse than bush in office. You have to really look and think about these people before you cast your vote, who cares if they have a penis or a vagina, thats not what usually does the thinking. Honestly I am a little stale on all the candidates for this election and I am really disappointed with both line ups, but I want two people to totally fail, Hillary and Ron Paul.

ASSH0LE

Las Vegas, NV

June 2003

JUL 22, 2007 09:21 AM

yourfashionwar said:
it's lol when people forget they're reading the suicidegirls newswire.

Where the hell do we get off expecting things to be written correctly? The nerve of some people.

It's the Intarweb! Functional literacy is out the window. I'm going to start typing "loose" when I mean "lose." It's all about "context."