Hateful, misogynist woman senator

[Rach3]

Just look at this hate speech being thrown about by an American senator:

During the Thursday hearing, Senator Boxer told Ms. Rice: “Who pays the price? I’m not going to pay a personal price. My kids are too old and my grandchild is too young. You’re not going to pay a particular price, as I understand it, with an immediate family. So who pays the price? The American military and their families. And I just want to bring us back to that fact.”

:grumpy: Unbelievable! I can't imagine how poor Ms. Rice feels.

“I thought it was O.K. to be single,” Ms. Rice said. “I thought it was O.K. to not have children, and I thought you could still make good decisions on behalf of the country if you were single and didn’t have children.”

Lucky for us, we have these paragons of integrity running our news media!

“I don’t know if she was intentionally tacky,” Mr. Snow said in an interview on Fox News. “It’s a great leap backward for feminism.”

“Here you have a rich white chick with a huge, big mouth, trying to lynch this, an African-American woman, right before Martin Luther King Day, hitting below the ovaries here,” Mr. Limbaugh said on his radio show.

"Passing Exchange becomes Political Flashpoint" (NYT)
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/13/w...&en=067441a2d1b4ab5e&ei=5094&partner=homepage

 

[Gokul43201]

“Here you have a rich white chick with a huge, big mouth, trying to lynch ...

Rush Bimbaugh is talking about Rush Bimbaugh? And gloating about it!

I've heard nuttier words spoken by Boxhole.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I think her point is entirely valid. And to ask how many lives will be lost is certainly within the bounds of consideration; or doesn't that matter? What is a crime is to sterilize this war. That's what got us where we are now - in a big mess completely of our own making.

Boy, Iraq was alleged to be a critical threat before we invaded, which it certainly wasn't, but thanks to the Republicans and those complaining the loudest about Boxer's comments today - those who supported Bush and his regime - Iraq is absolutely a critical situation now.

 

[verty]

I think her point is entirely valid.

I think this assumes that the military are something other than fodder, there to be directed at whim. I would call those false pretenses.

Or perhaps you mean it in an economic sense, like that it is an inefficient use of resources?

 

[Astronuc]

Boxer's comments could have been more thoughtful or better delivered.

As far as I know, none of the principals in the Bush administration have put themselves or families at risk in the service to the country - certainly not Bush, Cheney or Rumsfeld. However, they have 'played' with the lives of US service personnel and millions of Iraqis.

They have taken are relatively benign situation and produced a crisis which will place the US at risk for years to come. Even if the Iraqi government were stabilized, the US would still have to be present to either support it or keep an eye on it. The US military will remain an occupation force for some time, perhaps indefinitely - and the cost will be high - both economically and in terms of lives lost. The ongoing injustice of it will likely continue to fester.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Boxer's comments could have been more thoughtful or better delivered.

As far as I know, none of the principals in the Bush administration have put themselves or families at risk in the service to the country - certainly not Bush, Cheney or Rumsfeld. However, they have 'played' with the lives of US service personnel and millions of Iraqis.

Exactly - chicken hawks. And for the 3000+ dead US soldiers it needs to be said. It is the depth of truth that inspires the passionate objections.

Oh how I miss cigars.

 

[Manchot]

I don't see how it was misogynist in any way. Boxer's comments were completely gender-neutral, and could have just as easily been said to a male with no children.

 

[verty]

I don't see how it was misogynist in any way.

It was said to a woman, and to many that's enough.

 

[Rach3]

The OP was a rather unsubtle exercize in irony, Manchot and verty. I don't really think Mrs. Boxer's remarks are "hate speech" against Ms. Rice, nor misogynist, nor racist, nor would I characterize them as "lynching" as per the Limbaugh quote. Nor do I think FOX news even tried to present Sen. Boxer's speech in context, nor do I actually believe Rush Limbaugh and Tony Snow are "paragons of integrity".

/disclaimer

 

[Rach3]

Oh, and the topic I am presenting with this thread, is not a hateful, misgoynist woman Democrat, but a case-study in political media and its use of quote-mining.

 

[slugcountry]

I realize this is the internet and all but seriously not THAT much gets lost through text that the true intent of this thread was in any way obscure ...

 

[Manchot]

I can't believe I missed the sarcasm.

 

[verty]

I knew that Rach3, I assumed you chose to call it misogynist because of the overzealousness of many people towards calling things misogynist (or just labling things in general).

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

Perhaps it was taken out of context, but the quote from Ms. Boxer in the OP doesn't say or imply that Ms. Rice has no offspring because she is a woman. Ms. Boxer is being blamed for the particular way in which Ms. Rice chose to evade the question.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

The OP was a rather unsubtle exercize in irony, Manchot and verty. I don't really think Mrs. Boxer's remarks are "hate speech" against Ms. Rice, nor misogynist, nor racist, nor would I characterize them as "lynching" as per the Limbaugh quote. Nor do I think FOX news even tried to present Sen. Boxer's speech in context, nor do I actually believe Rush Limbaugh and Tony Snow are "paragons of integrity".

/disclaimer

I suggest that you try to me a little more sincere in your posts. Not everyone reads enough here to understand your sense of irony. And, frankly, threads started with the sole intent of being facetious should [and may be] be deleted.

 

[Rach3]

It's not facetious at all - the topic is quite clearly certain media and their undefensible use of quote-mining to effect political attacks. There's nothing insincere in my referring to White House Spokesman Tony Snow as a "paragaon of integrity" in his response - that's precisely and forcefully the converse of what I meant, and I'm frankly astonished there was any doubt to the matter.

 

[Rach3]

If the unpleasant object of discussion is still under doubt, let me expand on it.

"You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."

 

[loseyourname]

The thing is, you're not using language much different than the language Rush Limbaugh uses. It's not like there aren't Rush types on the internet. Those of us familiar with you know you're being sarcastic, but others might think you're just a Rush-lite blowhard that really thinks Boxer set back feminism a few decades.