Wednesday, March 12, 2008


A couple of things today:

Geraldine Ferraro. Aw, bless. A member of the Loser Leftie Wing of the Democratic Party, long past her sell-by date, starts spouting nonsense about when she thinks Black people should be considered credible candidates for office. Still awaiting Hillary Clinton's Reject AND Denounce response to her campaign supporter's remarks... So far we've gotten a tepid "Well, I don't agree with that." Shall we hold our breath? I'm thinking not. My suspicion is that this is yet another attempt to paint Obama as The Black Candidate, all of which serves HRC's nefarious Divide and Conquer campaign strategy.

I've come to the decision, firmly, that I will not vote for Hillary if she is the nominee. I simply won't do it. Not now. Not after seeing how she does business. Abraham Lincoln once spoke rather eloquently about the need for appealing to "the better angels of our nature." In his case, he was discussing the need to maintain our Union in the face of Southern secession. In this case, HRC can't truly expect to keep the Democratic Party united even as she endeavors to fracture it into its parts, black/white/latino, female/male, rich/poor, whatever. I've always loved being a Dem because I felt like it was the party of E Pluribus Unum, that you didn't have to pretend to not be gay to join, that you could be of any color or religion, that you could live at any end of the political spectrum, from Eugene McCarthy to George Mitchell, and still be welcome. Now I feel like her campaign is taking that strength in diversity and turning it in on itself, pointing out the "otherness" of some party members, creating division. I'll walk away from the Democratic Party before I allow myself to be a member of an entity that flagrantly appeals to the baser angels of our nature.

In further nutball territory, here is the exchange, via Huffington Post, regarding Dr. Laura's thoughts on why Eliot Spitzer's infidelity was his wife's fault (not Vieira offering the bait):

VIEIRA: Do you think women play any role in this, Dr. Laura?

SCHLESSINGER: It's interesting. what you said about what men need -- men do need validation. When they come into the world they're born of a woman. Getting the validation from mommy is the beginning of needing it from a woman. When the wife does not focus in on the needs and the feelings sexually, personally, to make him feel like a man, to make him feel like a success, to make him feel like our hero, he's very susceptible to the charm of some other woman making him feel what he needs. These days, women don't spend a lot of time thinking about how they can give their men what they need.

VIEIRA: Are you saying women should feel guilty, like they somehow drove the man to cheat?

SCHLESSINGER: You know what, the cheating was his decision to repair what's damaged, and to feed himself where he's starving. But, yes, I hold women accountable for tossing out perfectly good men by not treating them with the love and kindness and respect and attention they need.

Is there any way to get Dr. Laura to resign? Or at least to discuss her self-hatred? How can anyone see a man cheating as his wife or girlfriend's FAULT!? For a conservative woman of her stature, you'd think she'd be all about pushing for Personal Responsibility. And for an orthodox Jew, she has it completely wrong. The ketubah (marriage contract), believe it or not, outlines the HUSBAND'S sexual responsibilities to his wife, not the other way around. For real. From Judaism 101:

In Jewish law, sex is not considered shameful, sinful or obscene. Sex is not thought of as a necessary evil for the sole purpose of procreation. Although sexual desire comes from the yetzer ra (the evil impulse), it is no more evil than hunger or thirst, which also come from the yetzer ra. Like hunger, thirst or other basic instincts, sexual desire must be controlled and channeled, satisfied at the proper time, place and manner. But when sexual desire is satisfied between a husband and wife at the proper time, out of mutual love and desire, sex is a mitzvah...Sex is the woman's right, not the man's. A man has a duty to give his wife sex regularly and to ensure that sex is pleasurable for her. He is also obligated to watch for signs that his wife wants sex, and to offer it to her without her asking for it.

So for a lady who uses biblical text to hate on gays, I find it interesting that she doesn't find it useful in cases where it doesn't further her argument that women are to blame when their partners cheat. I don't watch the Today show anyway, but this kook should be disinvited permanently from the show, for the benefit of all humankind.

In other completely unrelated news, happy birthday to my sister and my niece! Sister relationships, I've found, bear zero resemblance to anything you find on Lifetime Television for Women movies. In fact, I suspect that expecting to have one of those Hallmark Channel relationships is no doubt partially responsible for some of the poorer sister relationships out there. Let's review. You are two different human beings. You live in close quarters growing up. Teachers and others compare you with each other to your face for years on end. This is expected to be a wonderful situation how? Me and my sis have followed the standard pattern: best pals as kids, mortal enemies in high school, she goes to college and comes home somehow cooler; the change no doubt a combination of evolution on both our parts. Then we grow up have largely different lives and social circles which is just as it should be, IMHO. So my sister and I have different views on issues (I won't even tell you how we disagreed on OJ Simpson ;)...), we're in different places in life, and we don't necessarily approach situations in a similar manner. But would I throw myself under a bus to save her life? Would I move heaven and earth to keep her safe? Would I consider her kids to be my own kids? You better believe it. I think she and I would both agree, in Lyndon Johnson fashion, that we can say whatever we want to about each other, but god help you if you say anything bad about us. As in, I may be a sonofabitch, but I'm *her* sonofabitch. Or, as a few people have said:

I don't believe an accident of birth makes people sisters or brothers. It makes them siblings, gives them mutuality of parentage. Sisterhood and brotherhood is a condition people have to work at. ~Maya Angelou

A sister can be seen as someone who is both ourselves and very much not ourselves - a special kind of double.
-- Toni Morrison

If you don't understand how a woman could both love her sister dearly and want to wring her neck at the same time, then you were probably an only child.
-- Linda Sunshine


Vigilante said...


Vigilante said...

I'm quite taken with something I found on a Republican blog:

If, in 1984, my name was Gerard Ferraro instead of Geraldine Ferraro, I would never have been the nominee for VP.

Ken said...

Regading Dr. Laura...

I wouldn't rely on sensationalistic second-hand accounts. Did you actually see the video? The whole video? Did you watch and listen carefully? Dr. Laura was not excusing Spitzer, who is probably a malignant narcissist.

She was talking about "in general" - Dr. Laura says that ***IF*** you choose a GOOD man ***AND*** you treat him right, he will not stray. Nowhere does she excuse men for their decisions to commit adultery. However, she recognizes that if a wife isn't living by her marital vows (which are more than just "forsaking all others"), THEN a man is more likely not to live by his, either.

You don't have to like her or agree with her, but is it a good idea to spread false witness?

But if you want to believe that women have no power in their relationships, or no ability to a choose a decent man, then go ahead. It is easier to bash Dr. Laura than admit that some wives may not be treating their husbands right, or may have chosen a malignant narcissist for a husband.

I do think cheating is wrong and should not be excused. But if the refrigerator is empty, a lot of men are going to hit the drive-thru. That doesn't make it right, it just is more likely.

E said...

Ken! My man!

Are you being facetious here or serious?

If the fridge at home is empty, both parties either need to fill it or go find new fridges honestly, not sneak to the drive-thru...and spend $4000! :)