Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock


Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict


Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links


Regional News


News Publications

Steinem on Clinton
Posted by: McQ on Tuesday, January 08, 2008

You had to wonder when the feminists would begin to try to make their case. Just as the Clinton campaign goes under for the second time seems appropriate. Gloria Steinem has her say today, concluding:
What worries me is that some women, perhaps especially younger ones, hope to deny or escape the sexual caste system; thus Iowa women over 50 and 60, who disproportionately supported Senator Clinton, proved once again that women are the one group that grows more radical with age.
Or, said another way, what's wrong with you women - yes I talked about not judging anyone by their physical characteristics but instead their character, however what I really meant is you should be voting for Hillary because she's a woman!
This country can no longer afford to choose our leaders from a talent pool limited by sex, race, money, powerful fathers and paper degrees. It’s time to take equal pride in breaking all the barriers. We have to be able to say: “I’m supporting her because she’ll be a great president and because she’s a woman.”
And I'm not supporting because she'd be a disaster as president regardless of her gender. In fact that same principle reason covers Edwards and Obama as well.
Return to Main Blog Page

Previous Comments to this Post 

So I take it that Steinem is a racist for not supporting Obama?
Written By: Jimmy the Dhimmi
Although with Edwards, the line "I’m not voted because she’s a woman" could be used without a whole lot arguement... :)
Written By: Scott Jacobs
URL: http://
I’m always amazed when Feminists (gender terrorists) complain about how bad women have it here in America. Perhaps American Feminists should go spend some time in the Middle East before they decide to demonize all American Men (see IMBRA). If they think America and American Men are against women, they really are beyond help. Seriously, American women are the most privileged group in the history of the world. They are the safest, the most pampered, and with the most options available to them of any group (including those horrible members of the "patriarchy") the world has ever seen. Despite this fact, their "voice" is now a shrill cacophony of loud complaints that is heard above all others. This cannot be refuted, though attempts will be made, with the usual pseudo Feminist "Facts", Lies, and talking points that have been debunked for ages now.
Written By: poboy
URL: http://
Among the reasons she gives for supporting Clinton over Obama - who she’s careful to claim she’s "not opposing" - are that Clinton has "no masculinity to prove" as well as "the courage to break the no-tears rule."

Good lord.

Gloria, if you really want to do something worthwhile, say, for all the women in America or something, I suggest you go have a nice lie-down and just STFU.

Incidentally, in the time it took me to click from Gloria’s op-ed to another NYT page and then back, the content of her article was altered. When I read it first, it included the claim that Ted Kennedy supported Clinton; a couple of minutes later that claim had been struck and a correction appended.

Like anybody really cares who Steinem or some Kennedy or another supports anyway.
Written By: Linda Morgan
URL: http://
And I’m not supporting because she’d be a disaster as president regardless of her gender. In fact that same principle reason covers Edwards and Obama as well.
And that’s important to this somewhat OT thread, as well; THe crying jag she got into the other day.

She wants to "turn this country around", etc. Is Obama not sufficiently liberal for her taste? In fact, as you point out, Bruce, you can’t fit water between them, policy-wsie. Indeed, the only difference I can see between her and Obama is he’s not HER.

So explain to me how we’re not to question her tears, the other day.

And isn’t it interersting? The standard claim is a sexual double-standard. Yet, we’re not supposed to worry about her tears... she’s just a woman, after all. Anyone remember Ed Muskie? What would the CW that Steinem et al would mouth, if a man... particularly a Republican, had done what Hillary did the other day?

Written By: Bithead
Would Iron Maggie have got all sniffly over how hard it is to run for Prime Minister?
I don’t think so.

Written By: looker
URL: http://
"Would Iron Maggie have got all sniffly over how hard it is to run for Prime Minister?"

I would love to hear her comments on this. I also can’t imagine Jeanne Kirkpatrick snivelling about how tough it was to be a public servant.
Written By: timactual
URL: http://

Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Vicious Capitalism


Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks