The reason it’s offensive to put Obama on the cover of Ms. as a feminist is because he is not a feminist

Friday, January 16th, 2009 · 61 Comments »

There, I thought I’d put the whole thing right there in the title, for the twits who are having trouble following along.

I visited my friend Ann Bartow’s blog and discovered that the Obama Girls at Jezebel and Slate are crazy-mad because some of us are failing to adequately worship Dreamboat Barry. Some of us have taken issue with the Ms.cover, pointing out that it’s ridiculous to praise Obama as a feminist (much less a super-feminist) when he isn’t one. In fact, he’s actually a pretty obvious sexist with a long record of offenses. It’s not that he’s a man; it’s that he’s an asshole. It makes no more sense to put Obama on the cover of Ms. than it would to put George W. Bush there.

The problem is that for the fangirls, the word “feminist” is meaningless. They just love Dreamboat Barry. If being a “feminist” is a good thing, then by golly, Dreamboat Barry is it! He’s everything good! He’s the handsomest man in the world! And the smartest! And the bravest! He’s a magical prince from a faraway kingdom! He’s a beautiful pony with a long silky tail! He’s a sweet puppy that runs and barks! He’s an ice cream cone! He’s the sparkly stars in the sky!

Ach. I hope these twits wake up soon, ’cause I’m not going to be able to stand four years of this shit.

Filed under: Various and Sundry · Tags:

61 Responses to “The reason it’s offensive to put Obama on the cover of Ms. as a feminist is because he is not a feminist”

  1. Anna Belle says:

    Don’t you mean another four years? That’s what makes me so angry. I wanted Bush out of office this year! Doesn’t look like I’m gonna get that…looks like more of exactly the same.

  2. Ann Bartow says:

    Hi Violet. I don’t dislike Obama, quite the opposite (as you know, because it’s something we disagree about). And I don’t blame Obama AT ALL for the Ms. cover. Goddess knows he didn’t pose for it – it’s a work of fiction.

    Why is it that any suggestion that Obama isn’t consummate perfection personified makes certain Obamabots absolutely furious and frenzied and mean?

    Hero worship scares me and I think history is filled with examples of why it is a bad idea.

  3. myiq2xu says:

    Ann:

    Nobody is blaming Obama for being on the cover of Ms., they’re pissed at the morons who put him there.

  4. angienc says:

    You forgot that he is Christmas, Hanukkah & New Years all rolled into one.

  5. Cinie says:

    “Goddess knows he didn’t pose for it – it’s a work of fiction.”
    So’s Obama.
    Love this post.

  6. NoMo says:

    Agree with Ann on hero worship also. I also agree that it’s not that Obama is super bad or anything like that (although I’ve got money down that he’s having an affair – can’t wait to see what the dreamboat girls say then!), but there is no question he won this election because of our misogynist culture (not to mention the race baiting), and it is true that he is not a feminist. It makes no sense, unless you actually believe he won on his merits and actually ignored Hillary’s expert knowledge in the primary and then similarly ignored the fact that Palin has the exact same amount of experience as Barry, and ignored the difference in how the media treated Barry compared to both Hillary and Palin. That’s not to say that Hillary and Palin didn’t f-up, sure they did, but if you follow closely the run-up to their f-ups, you start to see how it all started to fall apart as they reacted to the Obama campaign, the misogyny, and the awful race baiting, which is really what did them in, and then compare it to the way Obama was treated…well, it was nothing short of complete fraud.

    Anyway, does anyone read anymore? Maybe that’s part of the problem with the Obamabots? I just don’t get it. Sorry, ‘nother long rant.

  7. sister of ye says:

    Well, I dislike Obama, at least as far as I know him from his public record. I’ve seen enough assholes in my life to guess that he’s probably worse in private.

    Sorry, Christmas, Hanukka and New Year’s isn’t enough for me. I need at least Chinese New Year and Arbor Day rollled in as well.

    And I agree Obama is a work of fiction – a bad one. I’ve read better Harlequin’s. And, unlike Obama, nobody takes those seriously.

  8. Ann Bartow says:

    I know, myiq2xu. But any negativity at anything even related to Obama in any way is incendiary to some increasingly frightening people. That’s not Obama’s fault either. But it is going to become Obama’s problem, if it keeps up.

  9. Ann Bartow says:

    NoMo,

    I hope there is a path forward. Obama and Congress can work together and get some good things done, I believe this with all my heart. And Hillary Clinton is willing to work for him and I think she’s going to do a very good job.

    My friends who supported Obama are entirely rational on the subject. They recognize that he has strengths and weaknesses and they are perfectly okay with criticism of Obama when it seems deserved – luckily for me!

  10. Another Kind of Feminist says:

    When a candidate spends the most money in history by selling commercial items with his face on it like he’s Britney Spears, goes on a European tour before he’s even president, plans rock concerts with free alcohol before his speeches like he’s Bon Jovi, and spends hundreds of thousands of dollars on Greek columns for his convention speech – it’s pretty obvious the guy thinks he’s Jesus. In a horrible economy, he chooses to have a star studded inauguration. Yes, his inauguration is historic but it would’ve been even more symbolic if he had cut costs with the money going towards services for the homeless people (who are being moved) in D.C. or to build homes in Katrina. It didn’t have to be much but just a symbolic gesture that he feels our pain would’ve been much more humbling. The man loves to be worshiped and it played a huge factor into how he beat Hillary Clinton. His fans are crazy and have assaulted people at caucuses to win. Obama knew about this and his surrogates encouraged it.

  11. RKMK says:

    I just read a fabulous comment at IBTP: “But men are always welcome to become feminists. The first step is to double your workload and cut your wages in half.”

    I think this is a fabulous idea, if Obama wants the mantle Ms has so boldly proclaimed on his behalf: he can take a paycut, and disperse it to all the women he systematically underpaid throughout his campaign.

    Oh, wait, the fact that he systematically underpaid the women on his staff is one of those bazillion signs that HE IS NOT A FEMINIST, WAY TO PAY ATTENTION, MS.

  12. Sis says:

    But how do your women friends justify the fact of his horrible sexist behaviour and comments Ann? Can you imagine, say, Clinton but really anyone, making the analagous racist remarks and Black men and women making irrational rationalizing justifications such as what you’ve just proferred, that leave everyone wondering if those Black persons have lost their minds, because Black people may suffer racism, but they do not excuse their institutionalized abuse.

    Only women do that.

  13. Sis says:

    But Ann yes it is Obama’s fault, because he played the Saviour, all emotion is what his speeches were about, like a minister. And he got the same response as one of those ministers who use those charismatic styles of sermons. He’s a rabble rouser, and he got what he styled his speeches for, but now he can’t control it. In fact, I think he refuses to control it, and people will be harmed by his egomania.

    In the day, I could write what he’s spoken. And *I* and any speech writer, any writer, knows what his speeches were written to do.

    He’s a Black Elmer Gantry, but this isn’t a movie. Yet.

  14. AM says:

    What first started me disliking Obama is the way he bears down hard on the last word of a sentence quite a lot. Made my body feel like something was hitting it. I realized it felt like a cold, controlling man laying down the law. It felt like an abusive husband. As a result I work very hard at not hearing him. Keeps me from feeling abused.

  15. Ann Bartow says:

    I don’t expect many folks here to agree with me, I just think we need a path forward. Obama will be the President, Congress is in Democratic hands, and progress for women can be made, as it has been in the past, even though it may be slow going and frustrating at times.

  16. Valhalla says:

    …I just think we need a path forward…

    If so, then why not offer a path forward, instead of a) hanging around here implying other commenters don’t; b) making excuses for him and pushing the ‘he’s not responsible for anything! stop being mean!’ obot riff; and 3) setting up typical OFB strawmen.

    You’re right. Obama is president and Congress is in ostensibly Democratic hands. So, what should he and they do to promote progress for women?

    Or don’t you think he is responsible for doing anything? Otherwise, this is just concern trolling.

  17. anne says:

    Obama is responsible for going into his meeting with Eleanor Smeale and announcing he is a feminist without having anything to back it up. The Ms editors are responsible for taking it at face value and not questioning him as good journalists would do.

    He’s also responsible for accepting so much support from George Soros, and from the organisations who Soro influenced into supporting Obama by giving them huge sums of money. The Feminist Majority Foundation who own Ms Magazine is included in that list.

    He’s not responsible for Ms producing a dreamy Obama Superman poster that ladies who love Obama can pin to their walls and kiss every night before they go to sleep, but you can tell that he’d really like the idea.

  18. qaz says:

    “I don’t expect many folks here to agree with me, I just think we need a path forward.”

    Isn’t that the same as ‘get over it’.

  19. Ann Bartow says:

    Yeah, I’m just concern trolling. Fine, I’m out.
    Anyone who is interested in trying to move forward on goals like these:
    http://change.gov/agenda/women_agenda/
    can learn about some of the specific ways those goals are being pursued other places.

  20. Lexia says:

    “He’s a Black Elmer Gantry”

    Or Zaphod: a guy with no actual power, whose real job is to distract attention from those who do have it.

  21. quixote says:

    any negativity at anything even related to Obama in any way is incendiary to some increasingly frightening people. That’s not Obama’s fault either.

    I disagree. He could say loud and clear that he’ll have nothing to do with that behavior or the people doing it. Instead he says nothing and profits from it. That does make it his fault.

  22. Keri says:

    Ann, it is Obama’s fault. He knew and knows what’s going on and did nothing to condemn it, much less stop it, in fact his words and actions (and inactions) approved and approve of it.

    Compare this to how Hillary stepped in and immediately condemned and fired any staffer who made offensive comments about Obama.

    Obama freaking rewards people who made made misogynist slurs, pantomimed sexual assault, etc… against Hillary!

    Obama is a misogynist Ann. The only way forward is not by giving in and turning your anger on other women, but by continuing to fight the creeps no matter what party label they have or office they hold. That’s what PUMA and New Agenda are doing.

    And Ann, Violet Socks, myself and a many people who call themselves both members of PUMA and New Agenda, voted Green Party- the only party fully committed to women’s equality as a central part of their platform.

  23. Keri says:

    help Violet, last post went into moderation

  24. emma says:

    But any negativity at anything even related to Obama in any way is incendiary to some increasingly frightening people. That’s not Obama’s fault either. But it is going to become Obama’s problem, if it keeps up.

    Except it is his fault. It’s very clear that Axelrod – the expert on astroturfing — organized and used that type of hate all through the primary. It was rife at Kos and DU and many other places. There is no doubt in my mind that the internet smears against Hillary and her supporters were promulgated by paid Obama operatives and that paid Obama trolls have been and are spending their time (and Obama’s money) to create the atmosphere of misogyny and hatred on the internet that we’ve all experienced.

    Ann, I like your commentary a lot. But as with your refusal to investigate the allegations of caucus fraud and the DNC shenanigans — which are documented on the internet and easy to find — you refuse to hear anything that attempts to place responsiblity at Obama’s door for his own campaign tactics. Thus, you are not reliable on this issue by virtue of your not wanting to know. You are, unfortunately, acting as nothing more than an apologist for Obama.

    That’s your right, that’s fine. But let’s not pretend that criticism of some amorphous “partisanship” — as you wrote about at the New Agenda — is the same thing as looking long and hard at Obama and the tactics he used to “win” the primaries and the nomination. It isn’t. But actual evidence of fraud and underhanded campaign tactics doesn’t fit in with your view of Obama, so you ignore it, instead blaming what happened, is happening, on unnamed “superpartisan” crazy Obamabots who, of course, have nothing to do with Obama or his tactics.

    Here’s just one example of the Obama campaign’s stoking and using the fury of the Obamabots to unfairly and wrongly smear Hillary Clinton: look up the RFK smear, where Axlerod sent a tape of Hillary to the press pool covering the campaign, saying that Hillary said on it that she was staying in the primary waiting for Obama to be assassinated. Then check out the firestorm on the internet and on the networks, all working hand-in-glove and culminating in Olbermann’s unhinged rant about Clinton and assassination. Axlerod created it, he stoked it, and he used the partisan Obamabots to make sure it got all the attention it got. Of course, Hillary said no such thing. But the Obama campaign created and pimped that smear and used the Obamabots – paid or unpaid – to do it. Look it up. Do the work.

    Obama is responsible for his worst supporters. That you won’t see it means only that you haven’t wanted to look.

  25. emma says:

    Yeah, I’m just concern trolling. Fine, I’m out.
    Anyone who is interested in trying to move forward on goals like these:
    http://change.gov/agenda/women_agenda/
    can learn about some of the specific ways those goals are being pursued other places.

    Sorry, but I think “go to his website” is the very definition of Obamabot trolling.

  26. Ali says:

    “I don’t expect many folks here to agree with me, I just think we need a path forward.”

    I agree with Ann. For us to do this we have to, at appropriate times, put aside our Obama anger and work together with other women who may like Obama to varying degrees. Why argue with Ann and try and convince her to dislike Obama as much as we do? She has already stated that he is not perfect and has demonstrated a willingness to call him out on some of his behavior.

    Honestly, if we can’t work with people like Ann we are going to be very ALONE here and therefore, I predict, not so productive.

  27. Violet says:

    Hey, people: Ann Bartow is a friend of mine. She is NOT a concern troll. She’s a staunch feminist and a person of great integrity.

    Her support for Obama is the reasonable kind. She has no illusions about him and certainly doesn’t worship him. You know, there are perfectly sane, reasonable people who do think Obama has great promise, whatever his faults (my own mother, for example).

    It bothers me very much that Ann can’t even show up here without people attacking her as if she’s personally responsible for Obama.

  28. Kat says:

    Oh Violet, thank you.

    It’s particularly odious to me that a creep like Obama was presented as a “super-feminist” on the MS cover — some kind of fantasy, hyper-evolved, next level of feminism that bitter, unlovely women carrying working class lunches in paper bags couldn’t recognize. Until, that is, Dreamboat Barry rips of his clothing and we are chastised, humbled, awed — now THAT’S what a feminist looks like, gals! We were so wrong, so wrong! Let us all squeal and faint!

    It’s double plus odious that all this has the faint stench of American Idol mixed with Marie Antoinette, as this ridiculously expensive inaugural lurches forward, tone deaf to the suffering of the world and economic collapse. The message: to think the inaugural circus is farce or objectionable is to oppose… wait for it, you know what I’m about to type… hope itself. Hope in the darkness of a torn world, for Obama is truly the light and the hope! Damn, are we allowed to have our own definitions of hope anymore? I still do, and he is no part of it. I agree that the man wants to be worshipped and I am long past the “historic candidacy/inauguration/Greek columns” thing — it’s pompous and empty to me at this point. It’s become a marketing ploy and god help you if you question it.

    I feel like everyone around me is doing this weird Naomi Wolf rapture session — including the Jezebel and Slate fangirl types — and it makes me feel isolated and freaked out, like I’m in the middle of a very bad Twilight Zone ep. I joke it off, but as others have said, hero worship is a red flag for me. And this kind of blind, fawning hero worship, the type that makes the fans to go nuts when you even suggest that Obama isn’t a bodhisattva, leaves a cold knot in my stomach.

  29. ea says:

    Dr. Socks:

    1. Your post made me laugh.
    2. I did not interpret responses to Ms. Bartow as attacks. Disagreements, yes.

  30. Kat says:

    Ann Bartow says:

    I know, myiq2xu. But any negativity at anything even related to Obama in any way is incendiary to some increasingly frightening people. That’s not Obama’s fault either. But it is going to become Obama’s problem, if it keeps up.

    I’m not trying to attack Ann or anyone personally here, but I do have to express strong disagreement with this statement above. Obama purposefully exploited his supporters’ behavior to gain power. That was his schtick. To me, what happened during the RFK smear on Hillary Clinton was particularly instructive. This is what he does. I don’t like him, I don’t think he’s a basically good guy who randomly attracted nasty, increasingly frightening fans, and I don’t think he’s automatically separate from certain things that happen In His Name.

    Here’s my feeling: we’ll have no way forward if we don’t challenge the magical pony fantasies. I think that “it’s not the great man’s fault!” is part of the fabric of that fantasy.

  31. Sis says:

    Anyone here has a right to express their opinion about MS. But not attack other posters.

    I welcome Ann Bartow’s opinion. She is most certainly not a concern troll.

    I always learn something from both Ann and Emma, wherever I read them.

  32. qaz says:

    The Obama campaign intentionally made Obama look innocent while behind the scenes engineering the the worst misogyny tactics I have seen in quite awhile.

  33. qaz says:

    …and the refrain ‘Obama didn’t do it, it was his supporters’ is getting really old. Obama supporters know exactly what he did.

  34. Lori says:

    The following sentence should be, “and Obama is not a feminist because he has never taken any principled action on behalf of feminist concerns.”

    His tolerance of misogyny deployed on his behalf far outstrips what I would even expect of Republicans. Obama’s “periodic” remark sounds like something Claytie Williams would have said to Ann Richards and would have been roundly condemned by almost everyone. And almost any other politician in America would have beat it out to a news crew ASAP to let them know that they did not agree with Randi Rhodes assessment of Clinton at a fundraiser on their behalf. So there are no principled feminist stands that he has taken and then there is his tolerance of misogyny. Both disqualify him as a feminist.

    The dreamboat Barry crowd is just hanging on to a narcissistic daisy chain. It’s fun to feel more enlightened than those tired, angry people who want or maybe need accomplishment. Barry is a transcendent figure which enlightened people admire and the proof of their enlightenment is that they admire Barry. And anyone who doesn’t admire Barry is probably a racist, but at the very least isn’t interested in getting anything done.

    Barry has split the left and the only people who benefit from that are the right. That simply hasn’t dawned on his dim bulb supporters.

    This entire affair has me remembering the tale of Ginny Foat.

  35. Sis says:

    I loved the Greek columns gaffe. One huge classic fuck-up in strategy that no-one, not even Axelrod, can talk away. The equivalent of walking out on stage with toilet paper trailing from your shoes.

  36. Another Kind of Feminist says:

    I think we need to cool it on Ann Bartow. The divide between those who supported Obama and those who supported Clinton and refused to jump on the Hope Train is like the Israelis and the Palestinians. We’re the same but we can never agree on a way to move forward because the crazy Obots (Hamas or the Israeli government, whichever side you’re on) are destroying any chance of a peace negotiation.

    I will never understand how a feminist could not see through Obama for being the empty suit misogynist that he is. I will never believe that he won the nomination and the election fair and square. And I will always believe that Hillary should be the one sworn in next week. I think other than his anti-war speech before joining the Senate, he has nothing on Hillary. His lack of judgment and character disgusts me and I regardless of whether my emotions are rational, I can never go to any part of his website and believe that this is what his handlers wrote and not what Obama stands for since he’s an opportunist who stands for nothing in my eyes.

    That said, I appreciate that Ann is willing to criticize Ms. for not taking our feelings into consideration. And I can appreciate an Obama supporter for understanding the reasons why we oppose him. So I hope all of us can welcome Ann as well as other former Obama supporters who have realize that they’ve been bamboozled. Not a lot of them are out there yet, and we need to welcome those who welcome dissent. It might even help our cause once Obama becomes an utter failure as a president.

  37. Another Kind of Feminist says:

    Sorry for some of it being incoherent. I meant to say that I could never go to Obama’s “Change” website and believe that he and not his advisers wrote any of it. Obama is good for reading other people’s ideas from a teleprompter. That’s probably the only thing that makes him slightly better than Bush who couldn’t even do that.

  38. Ali says:

    I just read the Ms. Magazine piece at the library – I’m not going to buy this one;) It’s funny that during the CNN interview the Ms. Magazine editor kept on saying – read the article! The article will explain!

    There was nothing substantive in the article. The article did say (I forget the exact words):

    1. Obama had the best platform on women’s issues as compared to any other presidential nominee in history

    2. let’s get optimistic and excited for all the hopey/ changiness!

    3. It did acknowledge Rick Warren and disappointment in this choice. However it only referred to Warren in regard to LGBT issues and not women’s issues – domestic violence, submissiveness, etc.

    4. There was no mention of Jon Favreau

    5. They were positive about the female cabinet selections yet did not get into numbers

    Well, thanks for the great article Ms Magazine! That really clarifies a lot!

  39. Lori says:

    another kind of feminist:

    That speech didn’t really happen. Despite the fact that the rally was covered by the media, not one of the them mentioned Obama speaking at the event, though other speakers were. In addition, there is no contemporaneous evidence of any kind that he was there. No photograghs, no local video – nothing.

    What there is is a phone videotape with a close up shot of Obama standing behind a podium speaking with a few signs behind him. it then cuts to the audience, where a distinctive and distinguished man in his 60s, with a shaved head and impeccable mustache, stands wearing a purple oxford cloth shirt and jeans. Cut to another speech he gives in the current day, and there is the same man wearing the exact same outfit and though he is in his sixties, he looks identical to the way he did 5 years before. I’m a filmmaker, and the entire presentation could be staged and shot for the cost of the podium and the signs and would take less than an hour.

    The speech is fiction just like Barrie’s feminism.

  40. emma says:

    First, I apologize if my posts to Ann were attacking. They were not meant to be. They were meant to put my point out there, to offer facts in opposition, to challenge, and to express my frustration.

    In particular, just as Ann is frustrated with unreasoning disparagement of Obama, I am frustrated with criticism of Obama’s actions being countered with “but go to his website!” Despite the spinning in the campaign, words are cheap and actions are what matter. I could read every word on Change. gov, and it won’t change Obama’s use and endorsement of Larry Summers, Rick Warren, Douglas Kmiec, Donnie McClurkin, Timothy Geithner, or Jon Favreau. I expect more critical thinking from feminists than I’m getting from “go to his website!”

    Second, I completely agree with this and I think it’s very well stated:

    I don’t think he’s a basically good guy who randomly attracted nasty, increasingly frightening fans, and I don’t think he’s automatically separate from certain things that happen In His Name.

  41. Violet says:

    That speech didn’t really happen.

    Lori, which speech is this? I’ve lost the thread.

  42. Violet says:

    In particular, just as Ann is frustrated with unreasoning disparagement of Obama, I am frustrated with criticism of Obama’s actions being countered with “but go to his website!” Despite the spinning in the campaign, words are cheap and actions are what matter. I could read every word on Change. gov, and it won’t change Obama’s use and endorsement of Larry Summers, Rick Warren, Douglas Kmiec, Donnie McClurkin, Timothy Geithner, or Jon Favreau. I expect more critical thinking from feminists than I’m getting from “go to his website!”

    Let’s get this straight: Ann didn’t say “go to his website” as a defense or refutation of anything. She referred to his website for the list of his stated goals, and said if people were interested there were blogs discussing how those goals might be pursued. Note that she said this as she was leaving, after being accused of being a “concern troll.” Ann is my friend and this was a friendly post about her blog. Right now Ann is being accused by the fangirls of being an Obama hater and even a racist because she objected to the Ms. cover. So for her to be accused of “concern trolling” in this very thread naturally ticked her off.

    Ann is not an apologist for Obama. You will find that she does not make excuses for him, and in fact is one of the few Obama supporters I know who criticizes him regularly for unfeminist behavior. She’s exactly the right kind of Obama supporter.

    It is ironic that people here are complaining that Ann is uncritical of him, when in fact she is being excoriated by the fangirls precisely because she ISN’T uncritical.

  43. Carmonn says:

    I agree that Obama is absolutely not innocent, not by a long shot, in all this, but the larger problem is how can we possibly move forward now? The one lesson Democrats will take from this is that pandering to misogyny will bring their Holy Grail male voters without puting women or feminists’ votes at risk. They have no incentive to do anything but continue to screw us over and then feign innocence and we have absolutely no leverage over them. And since his natural inclinations are not to do the right thing, good luck in transferring those lovely words from paper to reality. Obama’s blathering about Hope and Change didn’t stop him from running a campaign that pandered to the worst in his supporters.

    As an aside, I’m also loving the the fact that none of the people who were disgusted by $150k worth of returnable clothes seem to have much to say about a $150 million Roman bachanal.

  44. donna darko says:

    Ann is being accused by the fangirls of being an Obama hater and even a racist because she objected to the Ms. cover.

    Good god. What people don’t talk about enough is how neither Obama nor the progosphere has apologized for the historic levels of misogyny last year perpetuated by his internet campaign and progosphere bloggers/commenters.

    Did anyone see Glenn Greenwald’s definition of terrorism the other day?

    Glenn Greenwald: Tom Friedman offers a perfect definition of “terrorism”

    Premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience

    How was the Obama internet campaign’s and progosphere’s grotesque misogyny to force Clinton supporters to fall in line of 2008 not terrorism?

  45. donna darko says:

    What many commenters are saying is “get over it.”

    Do you ask battered women to “get over it” when abusers have not apologized or made amends?

  46. Lisa says:

    Violet, you are right- Ann is very reasoned about Obama, but what set this off in the first place for me was the OTHER professors she allows to post at her site.

    I do enjoy her writing, but I can’t stand to go to that site anymore after the whole Sarah Palin trashing fiasco.

    Whatever, it would be great to see her post an article occasionally at The New Agenda-I would like to be able to comment on her articles without having to read some of the other stuff that appears at her site.

    Friends matter- I hope we haven’t scared her away permanently from your site for your sake.

  47. donna darko says:

    Should you even ask battered women to “get over it” if their abusers apologize and make amends?

  48. Lori says:

    Violet,

    Obama’s historic anti-war speech never happened. No one from the media has been able to come up with a single mention of his appearance, or photograph or valid video to bolster the account. The only evidence of the speech lies in the doctored video the Obama campaign offered up as evidence. It really is disgraceful.

    I think he was the GOP candidate. Did you know the Republican 527s only spent $24m opposing him? Look at the number of Republican pundits fawning over him. I think anyone who voted for Obama voted GOP this time out.

  49. Sis says:

    Over at that Jzbl site, one of the posters has the rapt attention of any number of others, as she shares the latest about Palin.

    “Apparently…” she begins.

    And that’s all we need to know about who supported Obama, and how he got their support.

  50. emma says:

    Let’s get this straight: Ann didn’t say “go to his website” as a defense or refutation of anything.

    I disagree. That’s exactly what she did.

  51. Violet says:

    I disagree. That’s exactly what she did.

    Then you misunderstood her comment.

    Let’s end this tangent now.

  52. donna darko says:

    Do you ask Democrats to “get over” the stolen 2000 election?

  53. Lori says:

    Putting Obama on the front of Ms. magazine and portraying as a faminist is the same kind of bullshit as putting Strom Thurmond on the front of the NAACP magazine and calling him a civil rights advocate. Obama has no feminist accomplishments or stands to his name. The claim is simple narcissistic fatuousness totally removed from the historical record.

    Your friend is right – it was done to insult the women who supported Hillary (who, by the way, has a lifetime of feminist accomplishments to her name).

    Obama brings out the ugly.

  54. m Andrea says:

    What is the thing called, what is it’s name, that causes these vanilla girls to react with such venom whenever anyone disagree with their own opinion of the Messiah?

    What kind of personality trait is required, for one to insist that a value judgement otherwise known as an opinion be substituted for logic?

    What kind of assertion cannot stand closer scrutiny, and so utilizes defensive distraction techniques instead of oh I don’t know, refuting the actual criticism?

    Violet sez: Obama is a misogyist and here’s a list of reasons.
    Vanilla girls reply: Oh you’re just jellus.

    The charge is not that he’s human and will therefore make mistakes, the charge is that he acts as if females are not entitled to equality. Refute the actual criticism!!

  55. Elliot Lake says:

    Shorter Violet (with whom ITA):
    It’s not that he’s a man; it’s that he’s an asshole.

  56. Valhalla says:

    Ok, am I in moderation because I implied Ann might be a concern troll or because (as usual) I have incurable diarrhea of the keyboard? Pls help! (unless, the former, then I’ll slink away to other sites; if the latter, I’ll try to ration better).

  57. Violet says:

    Valhalla, I removed your comment. Ann B., whose criticism of the Ms. cover you said you’ve never seen and who you think is a concern troll, is the same Ann B. whose criticism of the Ms. cover is the subject of the post (and there’s even a handy dandy link to her blog).

    My patience on this issue is now into negative territory.

  58. Valhalla says:

    My apologies for missing the authorship, I just assumed the post was yours, Violet. Skipped right over the sig line. It was careless and wrong of me.

  59. sam says:

    I’ve just been informed the inaugural issue of Time Magazine with Obama on the cover has an interview with Hugh Hefner in which he claims to have stopped calling himself a feminist once feminism became “anti-sex.”

    Man-style synergy.

  60. polly styrene says:

    There is a discussion going on on ‘The F word’ in which people are saying that Obama IS a feminist and he only picked Warren for his inauguration speech, so that he could get Warren to moderate his views. I have been offered as ‘proof’ that Warren has in fact moderated his homophobic views. I presume the misogynist ones don’t matter.

    And they are saying this without a hint of satire. Despite me having directed them here….

  61. CoolAunt says:

    …people are saying that Obama IS a feminist and he only picked Warren for his inauguration speech, so that he could get Warren to moderate his views.

    Well, if you saw Jesus Christ in a bar, would you stupidly assume that he was there to get drunk? Or would you be wise enough to know that The Messiah went into the bar because there are a good number of souls there in need of saving? Likewise, Obama the Savior chose Warren because he was in need of The O’s saving.

    Yeah, I am being satirical. They need a good, long KoolAid detoxing at The F Word.