Liberal kills feminism
:eek2: Thats gonna leave a mark.. 
Ezra Levant
Mon, January 15, 2007
Liberal kills feminismPolitical correctness abandoned in foolish attack
By Ezra Levant
It's official: Feminism is dead. And it was a liberal who killed it.
The crime scene was Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., last week.
Dr. Condoleezza Rice, the U.S. Secretary of State and perhaps the most accomplished woman in world politics today, was patiently sitting through another session of anti-war Democrats playing for the cameras.
It was Barbara Boxer's turn, the leftist Senator from California.
Boxer and Rice were talking about Iraq. They disagree on things -- that's fine. There are reasonable arguments for America to defend Iraq, and there are reasonable arguments for America to pull out. But that's not how Boxer approached it.
Boxer was flustered by Rice -- a multilingual PhD, former head of Stanford University, concert pianist and Russian expert. Out of arguments, Boxer degenerated into sneers: "You're not going to pay a particular price, as I understand it, with an immediate family," she said. "So who pays the price? The American military and their families."
Of all the arguments the Democrats can muster to oppose Rice, of all the facts and figures and logic, the best they can do is point out Rice is a single woman with no kids in the military.
This, from the party that claims to be feminist?
Boxer herself has no family in the armed forces. Does that disqualify her from having an opinion on the subject? Of course not; like Canada, the U.S. military is overseen by civilians. That means most political decision-makers won't be soldiers. Frankly, it's an odd complaint from a peacenik Democrat.
It was a foolish attack that said more about Boxer than it did about Rice, who brushed it off with typical calm.
"At the time, I just found it a bit confusing, frankly," Rice said. "But in retrospect, gee, I thought single women had come further than that. That the only question is are you making good decisions because you have kids?"
Now imagine, for a moment, if the roles had been reversed. Imagine if it had been a Republican who had attacked a Democrat because she was a single woman -- a black single woman, to boot.
The charges of sexism would have come fast and furious -- and, probably, charges of racism, too.
The Republican leadership would have been pressured to remove Boxer from any position of authority. She would have been forced to resign, and every other Republican would have been pressured to denounce her.
Are you skeptical? Well, that's exactly what happened to Republican Sen. Trent Lott a few years back for a much milder comment than Boxer made. The media went into a firestorm until they had claimed Lott's scalp.
Not so for Boxer. As a liberal Democrat, she can say and do anything -- even racist and sexist things -- because she gets a free pass from fellow liberals in the media. The end -- embarrassing the Republicans -- justify the means. Rudeness to conservative women and minorities is particularly vicious, since they're regarded by liberals as sex- and race-traitors for leaving the leftist plantation.
Bill Clinton was a serial sexual harasser, but America's feminist organizations kept quiet about him for eight years. Now Barbara Boxer has made a single woman's lifestyle choice a national political punching bag.
They prove the obvious: Political correctness only applies to conservatives. Next time leftists talk about standing up for women, or blacks, remember Boxer's insult. http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Columnis...4/3382189.html
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself."
Tullius Cicero (106-43 BC)
Reply With Quote
