I think I now have it figured out.

McCain didnt want special treatment.

Libtards want nothing but special treatment, a different set of rules, all the way through life.

We can can this hypocrisy the Wm Jefferson theory of lib double standards.

I do salute John McCain for being a PoW, but, I also believe that this is irrelevant for a presidential candidate. Just because he was a prisoner doesn't mean that his chances to run the world should be increased. The man knows nothing about the economy.

As if Hillary or Obama know anything about anything.

Empty Suit vs. Empty Pant-Suit.

Cassy, you completely took Oprah's comment out of context. What did it have to to do with McCain tortured as a POW?

There's a campaign slogan just in time for Hillary in TX and OH -

"Vote for Hillary! At least she's not *ick* a veteran!"

True, McCain probably doesn't know much about the economy. He probably doesn't know alot about generating electricity either, or designing buildings or bridges. Fortunately the President is not tasked with any of those jobs. Any time Presidents have tried to micro manage the economy they have done much more harm than good.
Remember NAFTA ? There is an example of the Government getting OUT OF THE WAY of the economy vs. the liberal nanny state meddling with everything mindset.

I think McCain has done a few other things besides get the sh*t beat out of him for 5 years. A Naval career, a business career and, oh yeah that Congressional and Senate career thing he's been playing at for a couple of decades.

I think the point about Oprah's attitude is that she dislikes or hates McCain. She can't even have a reasonable discussion about the man ...

An all too typical liberal response to an offer of political debate. Believe me, my wife does the same thing everytime there is the slightest chance of a political discussion. No facts are allowed because she says that I'm just bulling her until she gives in. What she means is that she can't counter with facts so she feels helpless. Instead of re-evaluating her beliefs she just shuts down the debate. Needless to say not alot of political debates in our household. :)

Mainstream feminism has moved past hysterical man-hating, Cassy. The current wave is about autonomy and choice, and holds that a woman's choice to raise a family in a nuclear household is a worthy one so long as the choice is completely hers. Please adjust your stereotype accordingly, even though it will certainly be more difficult for you to rail against proponents of thoughtfulness and autonomy.

But for now, she can't be drawn into a discussion about politics, other than saying, "I'm feeling pretty hopeful about Tuesday," when Obama faces Hillary Clinton in key contests in Ohio and Texas.

Winfrey says she's not sure yet whether she'll have a role in the fall campaign. Asked about Clinton, Winfrey says, "I'm sticking to books today."

What about John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee? "Oh, please," she replies. "Bye-bye."

She doesn't hang up -- but the threat has been made.

So it's back to books -- and the future of Oprah's Book Club, which in 1999 earned her a gold medal and a standing ovation at the National Book Awards for her "magical quality to create best sellers."

Quote looks a bit different now, doesn't it? Was Oprah denigrating Hillary Clinton's time as a POW by refusing to talk about her as well?

I don't think Oprah's "Bye bye" represents a threat to hang up rather than discuss his candidacy. Rather I think it reflects the mindset amongst many on the left that (much like any election in Chicago) the winner of the Dem primary will effectively be the next president, and that the general election is a mere formality.

This is why the Dem's are going to be willing to go all the way to the convention, by the way, because they honestly don't believe they can possibly lose this time around. This is especially true of supporters of Obamessiah.

You know, I couldn't care less about what Oprah thinks. She doesn't direct my thinking.

I didn't intend to vote in the TX primary today. But after I read and heard Steinem's remarks on John McCain's time as a POW, I felt I had to act. You see, Steinem is a women's college grad, and so am I. (Both in the Northeast.) But today, the Kings Point wife in me won over the women's college grad. How dare she trash his service? He felt in the flesh the pure consequences of the ideology she herself supports by definition and implication.

I voted McCain.

Will Steinem and Hildebeast ever 'man up' and come out of the closet?

If they are so proud to be women, shouldnt they also be proud they prefer women?

Senator McCain, we honor you and your service.

Damn good thing you were never waterboarded or made to form a human pyramid naked.

"...and neither of them have done anything in their piddling little lives to compare to what McCain has done."

I don't watch or like her show, but she has had far more of a positive impact than McCain has. Every single person in Africa and the Middle East knows her name - and apparently, she is watched daily by the large numbers of Iraqis.

And yes, being a POW does not qualify nor disqualify anyone from service.

And yes, you took Oprah out of context to make a weak point.

Next up: "Cassy Mad at Stupid Retarded Air"

Hints from Heloise:

Save Time!

Read "Hat Tip" before reading the posting. If it says "Debbie Schlussel" just can just skip the whole thing.

Tomorrow we will begin our new four part series on Washing Your Hands Before Exiting a Restroom.

jp2 - "Every single person in Africa and the Middle East knows her name - and apparently, she is watched daily by the large numbers of Iraqis."

Good thing too jp2, because they will have all learned of the abuse at her 40 million dollar boondoggle in Johannesburg.

The DING BAT and the CRACK-POT two who should get along since their both as nutty as almond tree at harvest time

"Mainstream feminism has moved past hysterical man-hating, Cassy."

Bwaa haa haa haa haa.

Oh, man, Oh, the tears, oh my lungs which the laughter, which caused a coughing fit, just dumped up on my keyboard.

Oh man, oh sweet baby, oh turnips and pizza.

"I am so grateful that she [Clinton] hasn't been trained to kill anybody."

That's because she isn't a WOMYN'S Doctor, MORON!

Synova, what do you base your understanding of the contemporary women's movement on? Talk radio? Laughing at people who know more than you do sure beats reading books, don't it!

Mainstream feminism is relevant, thoughtful, and provocative; whereas with the hysterical man-hating variety, nobody pays attention except far-left academics with no political clout and wing nuts hunting for strawwomen.

By being a woman, Matthew.

And I would suggest that a *movement* that is unknown to the general public is not a *movement*.

My opinions are based on personal experience of being denigrated and insulted by people like you, who suggest that I don't read books. Or perhaps that I get my opinion from a man named Rush Limbaugh.

The truth, the ugly truth, of the modern women's *movement* is that anyone who is concerned enough to be part of the *movement* is essentially living a fantasy based on a colossal "straw woman" because if they were to declare and *appreciate* the victory won by their mothers and grandmothers they would no longer have something to hype into a *movement*.

I'm not interested in the women's movement. I'm interested in the world. I'm interested in politics. I'm interested in people. I'm interested in human systems. I'm interested in space and science and the future.

I'm not interested in the women's movement. I'm not interested in being put in that box. Of being grouped with that group of people who are not individuals *before* they are women and I'm not interested in being told that something called "women's issues" exist at all. I'm a person and *my* issues are quite exactly the same as the issues that belong to any man (with the possible exception of you). Human issues.

Don't think so small and don't you dare try to tell me that human issues aren't what should concern me most, that I'm supposed to spend my time and effort on some narrower subset, so poorly envisioned, of things with which it is proper for women to be concerned.

But by all means, accuse me of not reading and accuse me of getting my opinions given me by a man.

Trust me, dear boy. I've heard it before. Because if there is something that "feminists" are highly skilled at, it is insults based on gender and belittlement.

Never in my entire life have I heard from "chauvinists" what I've heard from "feminists."

I really am curious, Matthew, why you think that Cassie or I do not live in this world? The man-hating is real and pervasive. Commonplace.

Accepted.

I'd suggest that if you want to reclaim the term "feminist" that scolding Cassie isn't the most effective way to do so.

Probably getting rid of productions such as the Vagina Monologues or University sex workers expos would be a better plan. (Because sex work is just soooo liberating.)

That's nice. Anyway, we agree, as there's no way that you deny that women in this day and age are discriminated against by chauvinistic bosses or insecure partners. That the same or similar difficulties are experienced by my gender almost all of who are not intentionally responsible for gender stratification in western society doesn't make your gender any less the brunt of cultural and institutional prejudice. And admitting that doesn't commit you to the belief that women are weaker than men. Relative gains in the previous few generations show the opposite to be the case, actually.

"Synova, what do you base your understanding of the contemporary women's movement on? Talk radio? Laughing at people who know more than you do sure beats reading books, don't it!"

Oh, books, matthew! And where in the hell did you get this from reading the above post?! Do you feel oppressed by Cassy, Matthew? ;) "Mainstream feminism has moved past hysterical man-hating, Cassy." (Loud Guffaw) Every man's woman, which I definitely am, thinks Gloria Steinem is one of the biggest feminista thugs to appear in the 20th century. When a woman goes on a national talk show to diminish the crediblity of a presidential candidate, and does so with a false scenario just to get a laugh from the audience, you know to turn the station right away.

P.S. Matthew, you can actually learn a lot from both Cassy and Synova, as they are quite intelligent.

I think you should be the one who tells women that they're too stupid to make the choice whether to sell their bodies as prostitutes or pornographic actors. That shows great respect for women's judgment.

What's wrong with the Vagina Monologues? I can't stand Eve Ensler, or whatever her name is, but the production is good harmless fun.

...which speaks to something I mentioned earlier, LaMedusa, that the wingnutosphere pays way more attention to far-left feminists than people who might vote for Hillary Clinton.

I'm sure Cassy and Synova are very bright. However, as a 21st century heterosexual male, I'm threatened by women with good grammar. The women's movement has simply gone too far.

"I'm sure Cassy and Synova are very bright. However, as a 21st century heterosexual male, I'm threatened by women with good grammar. The women's movement has simply gone too far."

I hope you're kidding, there, matthew. But in case you aren't, good grammar has nothing to do with how compassionate and caring women can be. Your fears are imaginary unless you have a specific example, like some really smart girl you liked that made you feel less than what you are.

How has the women's movement gone too far? There are plenty of women that like to stay home and take care of their families without holding down a job as well. There are women that do both and more power to them. So, what do you mean?

Grammar! It is *my* servant to be used or ignored at will. Language is my slave to be abused as *I* wish. Ha!

That men are subject to the same inequities as women IS the point.

I've heard some silly-talk that "feminism" is pro-male, too. That it's pro-person.

I shall now make up a word, nay, a *sound* to express my feeling on this. (You'll have to imagine I made it just now!)

The word "feminism" to describe ALL GOOD THINGS is offensive because it is simply not possible to escape the foundations of the word itself any more than one can do so with the word "hysterical." Feminism as ALL GOOD THINGS simply must, by necessity, place one gender as good and the other gender as not-good, otherwise known as the SOURCE OF BADNESS.

So chose a new word.

Leave "feminist" for those mothers and grandmothers who fought the good fight.

And let us heap scorn on Steinem for her fatuous anti-military statements, as if women have not always had a bloody hand along side those of men, and let us sneer at the notion that we should kill our babies, and let us be honest that being used is being used, even when it's with permission and an exchange of cash.

Or perhaps you've never seen someone accept being treated as less than human for a coin or two.

I have.

Seems like only Matthew is voting negatively here. Bravo Synova and LaMedusa.

You are making a point that is hard to take by your opposition if given by a male, and even harder by a female, without the opposition throwing back extremely bigoted jibes that reveal their true misogynistic and misandrogenistic [there I go abusing the language too] prejudices.

Umm, I was joking, LaMedusa. I like smart girls. I wouldn't date someone that I couldn't argue or have serious conversations with.

I think my point was that "feminism" is a broad movement, and very much alive, active, and important to this day; that 3rd wave feminism (or whatever it's being called in sociology classrooms) respects women who choose to become wives and have families; and that the fringe cases that conservatives fixate themselves upon really aren't very important within the overall social zeitgeist, or even in academia. They're very loud, but they're like Ward Churchill: if Michelle Malkin doesn't hear them, do they really make sounds?

Also, who said you should kill your babies, Synova? What person has claimed that abortion is a good thing? Isn't it more about rights and autonomy than the positive value in killing a fetus/baby?

3rd wave feminism (or whatever it's being called in sociology classrooms) respects women who choose to become wives and have families; and that the fringe cases that conservatives fixate themselves upon really aren't very important within the overall social zeitgeist, or even in academia.

Feminism has finally accepted that some women choose traditional roles and respects those choices. If that's all modern feminism were about then you would have a valid point. However, modern feminism has some of the same anti-man underpinnings it had from day one. After all, every "movement" needs a common enemy.

Steinem's comment that "I am so grateful that she [Clinton] hasn't been trained to kill anybody." Is exactly the wrong message voter's want to hear about a future Commander in chief. Hillary doesn't make that statement about herself and even runs an ad that suggests she could make the hard choice of using military force if needed. Like Bill, Steinem is not helping Hillary.

Mac Lorry, which authors/movement figures are you referring to? What is the size of their audience? How much do they contribute to which campaigns? What percentage of journal articles/books within their respective disciplines do they publish? These are questions that you'd want to answer before talking about modern feminism. I don't know all of those answers, but when I look around me, I don't see Gloria Steinems--not a lot of them in universities I've worked/studied at, and basically none outside of them. Almost every woman I date claims to be a feminist, and none of them think that skyscrapers are phallic projections, for instance. Feminism has always been a threat to conservativism, and thus it's no surprise that the conception of feminism that conservatives carry around with them is a caricature, and a strawperson.

And for the love of Jeeeeeebus, it's not an "anti-man" movement; rather, it's a movement that recognizes fundamental discrepancies in gender equity, which is not any one man's fault. Men and women are part of the same system that reinforces gender norms, some of which prevent people (especially girls and women, but also boys and men) from flourishing to the fullest extent possible. If a feminist wants to tell me that it's my fault, I'd kindly tell her to piss off; but if someone were to assert that our society affords men no particular competitive advantage, and that women make 80% as much as men because they're 25% stupider/lazier (or men are 25% more intelligent/more hard-working--same difference), then they would be equally full of shit.

"Isn't it more about rights and autonomy than the positive value in killing a fetus/baby?"

No, it's not. If you haven't been paying attention. Killing a fetus or baby... the right and autonomy to KILL your fetus or baby is essentially and inescapably tied to the fact that babies NOT MEN are the source of female oppression.

The ultimate GOOD is to escape that oppression. It's ALL ABOUT reproduction and the biological unfairness of biology itself. The right to KILL your baby or fetus is the definition of freedom and autonomy.

Or you haven't been paying attention.

Or else show me the pro-life feminists. Show me the acceptance of pro-life sentiments. Show me someone who doesn't get kicked out of the "movement" if she suggests that women should be the masters of their own reproduction and responsible for the consequences of their *choices* when they make them.

Autonomy, to an honest person, does not in any way require the legal right to kill a baby or fetus.

Thus, it is not about autonomy.