Smearing Republican Women

[EmptyTimCup]

Smearing Republican Women

Liberals in the media don't root for more women in government. They only root for more liberal women in government. Republican women are merely targets.


The primary elections on June 8 brought this memory rushing back. Republican women won gubernatorial primaries in South Carolina and New Mexico. The national media had plenty to say about Nikki Haley of South Carolina before the election, which is to say they had an endless regurgitation of unproven adultery charges to level against her.

One low point came from former Clinton bimbo-crusher George Stephanopoulos on ABC’s “Good Morning America,” asking Nikki Haley on the morning after her victory about how she’s somehow embarrassing her state by being accused without proof: “Do you expect more incoming during the runoff?” And: “Can you assure South Carolina voters that they're not going to be embarrassed if they elect you?”

Stephanopoulos, like many good Clintonistas, is incapable of embarrassment over his hypocrisy.

Stephanopoulos had invited on the perpetually annoying British import Tina Brown, who complained “it almost feels as if all these women winning are kind of a blow to feminism. Because, each one of them, really, most of them, are, you know, very much, you know, against so many of things that women have fought for such a long time.”

George Stephanopoulos invited no Republican guests on this occasion, so he attempted a mild rebuttal to Brown: “Well, you could argue they're different kinds of feminists. They've had a lot of success in different fields.” Brown snapped back: “Women, too, can be wingnuts, is the point.” It’s bizarre that Brown is so blind that she doesn’t think you could call Barbara Boxer or her beloved Hillary Clinton a “wingnut,” only the conservative or Republican women.

Several networks found “news” and some kind of national controversy in Fiorina mocking Sen. Boxer’s hairdo as “so yesterday” when she was wearing an open microphone off-camera. Stephanopoulos gave it a whole story when he moonlighted as evening anchorman on “World News.” NBC’s “Today” led off the show with this nothing-burger and mentioned it three times. Co-host Hoda Kotb touted it as a “big gaffe-a-rooney.”

Why not smear Republican Women ..... half the left threw Hillary under the bus to elect a Halfrican to the White house ....

 

[Bann]

...

Stephanopoulos had invited on the perpetually annoying British import Tina Brown, who complained “it almost feels as if all these women winning are kind of a blow to feminism. Because, each one of them, really, most of them, are, you know, very much, you know, against so many of things that women have fought for such a long time.”

George Stephanopoulos invited no Republican guests on this occasion, so he attempted a mild rebuttal to Brown: “Well, you could argue they're different kinds of feminists. They've had a lot of success in different fields.” Brown snapped back: “Women, too, can be wingnuts, is the point.” It’s bizarre that Brown is so blind that she doesn’t think you could call Barbara Boxer or her beloved Hillary Clinton a “wingnut,” only the conservative or Republican women.

Dr. Laura (love her or hate her - that's another tread) was a "Women's Libber" back in the early part of her adult life. On her radio program she used to refer to "N.O.W." as the "National Organization of WHAT Kind of Women". Tammy Bruce was often a guest on her show.

 

[migtig]

NOW does not at all represent me or any of the women I know. It's a shame, because this was truly meant as a good organization, but is now being used to push an agenda that is not for the protection nor the promotion of women, but to push a repressive agenda that actually hurts women more than it helps. I've thought several times about recreating this organization and bringing it back to its original purpose/intent, but have no idea how to do that. I've written NOW reps, especially during the last election with the attacks both on Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin, encouraging them to speak out against the sexist statements being made. I received a reply back that neither candidate had the endorsement of NOW. WTF is that about? Regardless of the organization's "endorsement" both candidates were women being attacked for their looks (Palin because she was hot and Clinton because she was not). Total . It angers and saddens me.

 

[Bann]

NOW does not at all represent me or any of the women I know. It's a shame, because this was truly meant as a good organization, but is now being used to push an agenda that is not for the protection nor the promotion of women, but to push a repressive agenda that actually hurts women more than it helps. I've thought several times about recreating this organization and bringing it back to its original purpose/intent, but have no idea how to do that. I've written NOW reps, especially during the last election with the attacks both on Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin, encouraging them to speak out against the sexist statements being made. I received a reply back that neither candidate had the endorsement of NOW. WTF is that about? Regardless of the organization's "endorsement" both candidates were women being attacked for their looks (Palin because she was hot and Clinton because she was not). Total . It angers and saddens me.