Left and Right and Silly

~~By Kenosha Marge

I admit freely, openly and honestly that for many years I voted a straight Democrat ticket. I admit freely, openly and honestly that for many years I was a nitwit for doing that. I didn’t research and I didn’t even care all that much about investigating whether the person who got my silly vote so easily was worthy. If it breathed and had a “D” after it’s name, it got my vote. Come on admit it, most of you did the same thing.

Now all those years and silly votes later I am appalled at my lack of integrity. How can someone, anyone treat their precious right to vote so cavalierly? How could I? I hang my head in shame.

Like many of the left I pooh-poohed the sight of voters in Iraq proudly showing their “purple” fingers. They displayed their “purple” fingers proudly and courageously. Because I was so partisan and loathed George Bush I missed something very important. Among all the death and destruction a good thing happened. Just because I hated the war and those that supported it was no reason to dismiss the joy those people felt because they were finally allowed to vote. Did they all vote intelligently? Do we? They dodged gunfire and the real fear of death to vote. Many Americans stay home if it rains. I am ashamed that my partisanship made me dismiss that pride and courage.

I was a person who had always prided myself on being a good citizen because I always voted. Now I see myself as no better than those that didn’t vote. They might have been lazy, but I was stupid. Sadly there are a lot of voters, left and right that do the same thing I always did. Sadly they haven’t seen the light. If it lives and breathes and spouts the correct talking points and has the “right” as in correct consonant after their name, they’ll vote for he/she/it. Isn’t it amazing how easily satisfied we have become about the people that are supposed to represent us?

The newly smarter me now looks at actions instead of words and deeds instead of the doer. And guess what? There are many times when I would not vote for the Democrat. The first time I came to that conclusion I was totally goshwoggled. How could I have been so blind? Kinda like many people feel once the honeymoon is over.

Having decided in my old age to take off the partisan blindfold I discovered a world of things I had not acknowledged as worthy. If all worthiness is in my party then your party is unworthy. Had I ever trimmed all the rhetoric and high-flying phrases down to that simplicity I might have noticed what a nitwit I was far sooner. I must admit that the words “ better late than never” don’t sound so good to me right now. As we used to say back in my day, it sounds like a cop-out.

I also should have noticed far sooner that are media is no longer made up of the same kind of people we had when I first started watching the news with my parents. It is no longer a “Chet and David” media world.

I always suspected that most politicians, even a Democrat or two, lied occasionally. It didn’t occur to me that people in the business of informing the people did the same thing. People who had their own little section of the Constitution wouldn’t be so crass. Would they? Are they? Damn.

The majority of the print media as well as those that infest our airwaves and television screens are people with little or no integrity. They “spin” the news to make it say what their corporate bosses want it to say and then collect giant paychecks for being liars. Prostitutes give more bang for the buck than presstitutes. They have a higher customer satisfaction rate too I suspect.

One of the sleaziest of these overpaid slugs, by the name of Olbermann, has one of the lower ranked and rated programs on cable news. Olbermann is consistently beaten and beaten badly night after bloviating night in the ratings. This would seem to say that his bosses–that would be GE–are willing to pay this cretin enormous amounts of money to lie, spin, twist, and distort the news for public consumption and to hell with ratings. I am happy to report that the cretinous Tweety Matthews has even lower ratings..

I admit to having watched Olbermann for a while. His shtick grew old very quickly. He did bash Bush when few others were willing to do that. He also made a nightly habit of beating up on some dimwitted or demented female personality. What was with that, I wondered. Time came to prove that is was because the man is a rampant misogynist. Probably has a small or inactive weenie too. That he uses Murrow’s tagline is repulsive.

Now that I have finally opened my eyes and looked around I find that there is very little differences in the two major parties. They both pander shamelessly to their base, they both promise the moon and deliver a pizza, and they are both corrupt. Their issues may at times seem polar opposite but in the end they are alike in that all they truly care about is getting rich, getting power, and getting re-elected.

Common sense, which I once thought I had should have made me see the error of my ways long before I did. The Democratic Party had to show such corruption that I could no longer ignore it before I admitted the truth to myself. None of us likes admitting that we are/were wrong.

As a resident of the great state of Wisconsin I should have been more aware. We after all have foisted men like Joe McCarthy on the public. We have also gifted them with the likes of William Proxmire. Seems almost schizophrenic doesn’t it?

We carry through on that tradition to this day. Our two “Democratic” Senators, Feingold and Kohl both have a “D” after their name. One really does represent all those old-fashioned democratic ideals that I have believed in and thought I was voting for all these years. The other? Not so much. I am proud to have voted for Russ Feingold and equally proud to have voted against Herb Kohl. Both these actions are now done with both eyes wide open and without a partisan blindfold in sight. I even find myself agreeing with my Republican Congresscritter Paul Ryan now and again. Imagine that. A short time ago I couldn’t have.


Links of interest:





Of Robots and Women and Our Current Life in the Village of Stepford (Antidote on the Way?)(A Double Post by kenosha Marge and InsightAnalytical-GRL)

Women, You’re About To Be Replaced By…a ROBOT!

~~By InsightAnalytical-GRL

A few days ago I happened to spot something as I roamed around the web that really made my skin crawl!  In the current climate of subtle and not-so-subtle sexism and misogyny coming at as from every direction, this had to be “the crowning touch.” When I saw this, my mind rewound to a post written by kenosha Marge that first appeared at Partizane back on November 12. (For those of you who missed it there, KM’s opus follows  immediately after this eye-opener.)

Let’s see… the item I found was written, it seems, by exactly the sort of woman KM describes in her piece.  With complete seriousness and “professionalism” and not a hint of wondering about what the hell it’s all about, she does a thorough and admiring article on a certain invention.  Maybe she wants to keep HER job, but she can’t muster up a single reference point to what women have been put up with for eons???  Did she ever see original version of  The Stepford Wives (1975), a movie I can’t bear to watch anymore??? (Ironically, the 2004 remake was supposed to be “more comedic” according to the linked article…maybe another indicator of how we’ve been more delusional about our “progress” than we should have been!)

Well, I guess it’s on with the show from The Sun (UK), home of the half-naked “Page 3” women:


Inventor builds She-3PO robot

SHE is the perfect wife, with the body of a Page 3 pin-up and housekeeping skills that put TV’s Kim and Aggie to shame.

Her name is Aiko, she can even read a map, and will never, ever, nag.

Sounds too good to be true, doesn’t she fellas? And she is.

Aiko is actually a robot, a fantasy brought to life by inventor Le Trung.

Devoted Aiko — “in her 20s” — has a stunning 32-23-33 figure, pretty face and shiny hair.

She is always happy to clean the house for “husband” Le, help with his accounts or get him a drink.

Computer ace Le, 33, from Ontario, Canada, has spent two years and £14,000 building his dream girl.

He had planned to make an android to care for the elderly.

But his project — inspired by sci-fi robots like Star Wars’s C3PO — strayed off-course.

Le said: “Aiko is what happens when science meets beauty.”

Robo-wife Aiko starts the day by reading Le the main newspaper headlines.

The couple often go for a drive in the countryside, where Aiko proves a whizz at directions.

And they always sit down for dinner together in the evening, although Aiko doesn’t have much of an appetite.

Le says his relationship with Aiko hasn’t strayed into the bedroom, but a few “tweaks” could turn her into a sexual partner.

Le said: “Her software could be redesigned to simulate her having an orgasm.”

Aiko can already react to being tickled or touched. She also recognises faces and speaks 13,000 sentences.

Now Le is seeking a sponsor to help him overcome the robot-maker’s biggest challenge — making Aiko walk like a human.

Once Aiko has been perfected, Le hopes to sell clones for use as home-helps.

He said: “Aiko doesn’t need holidays, food or rest, and will work almost 24 hours a day. She is the perfect woman.”

Aiko sparks mixed reactions in public.

Le said: “Women usually try to talk to her. But men always want to touch her, and if they do it the wrong way she slaps them.”

Well, at least she slaps them if they “touch her the wrong way”!! What a “perfect woman”!

Here’s a “full frontal” cheesecake photo of this latest wonder (and there’s a video up at the The Sun, too):


I don’t know what’s sicker–the fact that this guy has built the perfect stereotype which women can’t seem to shake OR the fact that the female reporter seems to accept “nagging” as a feminine attribute and humors the fellas as she mentions that the robot woman is  “too good to be true.” Oh, but Aiko does get credit for being able to read a map, although we’re not quite how she’ll do in bed…

One more thought–can you imagine if this thing is mass-marketed?? What will THAT do to the status of women?  Hey, NOW and all you other “feminist leaders” who decided to get suckered by Obama…what’s your move when this hits town???

If you are feeling as disgusted as I am, you can email the “reporter”  or whatever she is at c.iggulden@the-sun.co.uk.


Women Will Never Be Equal

~~By kenosha Marge

I watched as 56% of the female voters in the country voted for a misogynist. I watched outraged. I watched in sadness. I watched in shame. And I knew, I finally, completely, totally knew that women would never be equal. They won’t let themselves be. They don’t want to be. They are afraid to be. They will always choose a second-rate man over a first-rate woman.

We will never be equal not because of the men that hate us, demean us and insist that we remain second-class citizens. Those pathetic little fellas need someone to look down on but there are not enough of them. There are too many good, decent secure men around who don’t need to keep a woman down to make themselves feel all manly.

The pathetic little men need to have someone to whom they can feel superior and then push around; pound on, talk smut about and then take to bed. The sex part is a bonus they get with no other subjected critter. Except for those that do it to sheep and even the sheep have the self-respect to bleat about it.

But the pathetic little men need help. And they get it from women, from women that do not support other women. For whatever sick, sad little reason, women do not support women. And so women will never be equals.

When media launches one of its sexist attacks on some woman, any woman, other women quickly pile on. When night after night on the rabidly sexist Countdown on MSNBC, the rabidly sexist cretin Keith Olbermann demeaned the pathetic public meltdown of Britney Spears, where were the female voices telling him to stop? I don’t even like her and yet I was appalled and after a few programs I stopped watching him and never went back. Seeing someone bash Bush wasn’t worth watching a man publicly attacking a woman without outcry, with no outrage. Those programs should have told everyone all they needed to know about Keith Olbermann. Instead his ratings climbed. Sexism sells. It also tells me everything I need to know about people that still watch him.

When Hillary Clinton was smeared and subjected to outrageous sexism in the media, and particularly on MSNBC, where was the outrage? When her run was done and Sarah Palin was smeared and subjected to outrageous sexism, where was the outrage? And where were the women protesting such treatment?

How about Rachel Maddow, the newest member of MSNBC’s Obama team? Sticking up for the females? You gotta be kidding. She’s just one of the boyz now and thus must prove her chops by beating up on women worse than they do.

All the old hags of the Women’s Movement piled on the Palin. How dare a “conservative” woman think she had the right to run for VP when a liberal woman hadn’t been chosen? Bet ya didn’t know that only “liberal” women are worthy of support. However Hillary Clinton just wasn’t the right woman. Yeah, right.

Now we gleeful girls, or at least 56% of us are dancing around the Maypole in joy that an African-American, well actually a Kenyan-American man, is the president elect. That’s historic, don’t ya know!

Black men were given the right to vote 50 years before women. The Fifteenth Amendment to the Constitution was ratified on February 3, 1870. It prohibits preventing a citizen from voting based on the citizen’s race, color or previous condition of servitude. Thus black men were given the right to vote. But women, of any color were not.

15th Amendment

Fifty years later, the 19th Amendment to the constitution was ratified on August 18, 1920. And women were finally allowed to vote.

19th Amendment

Guess us girls will just have to hang on another 50 years or so to get our turn at the Presidency. Hell, even at the Vice-Presidency. Cause it’s all about the boys, don’t ya know. At least 56% of the women in this country seem to think so.

So long as 56% of the women in this country stand in a man’s corner when a woman is fighting, a woman will never, and can never win. It’s a hell of a price to pay for a pat on the head or a pat on the ass.

Women will never be equal. 56% of them won’t allow that to happen. And so the rest of us must suffer for their puny and pathetic little hang-ups. If I didn’t loathe them so much I would almost feel sorry for them.


Editor’s Note: Heidi Li has formed a new organization; see Introducing 51 Percent – an organizational antidote to hatred of women.

This will be a non-profit educational organization designed to teach people what misogyny is, why it is different from sexism, how it relates to hateful conduct. On the affirmative side 51 Percent will promote the aspiration of having women occupy 51 percent of all areas in civil society (not just politics, but the workplace (and not just high level or white collar jobs but all jobs), the arts, every media institution, etc.) I believe that 51 percent representation – proportional to the presence of women in the general population – is  the most expedient antidote to the prevalence of misogynist conduct and its current social acceptability.

Please check out what she is doing…

Oh No, Poor Joe (Joe the Plumber Meets the Ghost of Joe McCarthy)

~~Posted by kenosha Marage

I don’t know if any of you ever saw the movie Dave with Kevin Kline and Sigourney Weaver but there is a scene where a teacher at a day care center is doing a teaching/game with some kids. The game uses the phrase “Oh No, Poor Joe” and then goes on with a choice for the kids about whatever poor Joe’s problem happens to be.

I was reminded of that scene in the movie by the battering of Poor Joe the Plumber. Oh No, Poor Joe had the audacity to ask a question of a presidential candidate and now the candidates campaign, the media and the left shrilloshere are relentlessly attempting to destroy him. Oh No, Poor Joe, has now had his personal life turned upside down and inside out and his personal information posted on toxic waste dumps like the Daily K.

Why would any decent citizen, Democrat, Republican, Green, Independent or whatever excoriate another citizen for the crime of asking a question of someone who is asking us to vote for him for highest office in our country? Seems to me that we should all be asking both candidate lots of questions. Seems to me Obama should be explaining why citizens aren’t allowed to ask questions without being attacked by his surrogates.

Isn’t the left supposed to be all about fighting for and supporting the little guys and gals? If not, and it seems not, then I’ve been voting for the wrong party for a very long time. However that would mean that I thought this Democratic Party was the same Democratic Party I used to support. This Democratic Party has had an Extreme Makeover and the makeover has distorted every thing for which it ever stood.

The trials and tribulations of Poor Joe the Plumber is a microcosm of what is happening in this country courtesy of Obama, the beyond-biased-in-his-favor media and the disgusting cesspool that many left-leaning Blogs have become.

Are we resurrecting the ghost of McCarthyism? Oh No, not Joe (Joseph McCarthy) coming to our politics once again. Do we never learn that stifling someone’s free speech stifles all free speech?

How long did it take the media back in the 1950’s to remember their job was to inform the public of the truth? How long did the congress allow one drunken, lunatic of a Senator to hold the country hostage to his relentless witch-hunts? How many lives had to be destroyed before one courageous Journalist spoke out? That a lunatic like Keith Olbermann dares to use Edward R. Murrow’s tag line is criminal. Thugs like Olbermann attack people as “racist” the way McCarthy attacked them as “communist”.

Is it now standard operating procedure that a politician is allowed to use the tactics of personal destruction against a citizen that dares ask him a question? Perhaps questions are only permitted if the questioner nods their head in agreement with his answer. How un-American is that attitude? How un-democratic is that attitude? How does that connect to the ballyhoo we Americans make about believing in freedom of speech?

I see nothing wrong in supporting the candidate of your choice. I supported mine, her own party sandbagged her and I have moved on. But I never hung on her every word or thought she was the 8th Wonder of the World. I would not have thought of attacking someone for the crime of asking her a question and then not agreeing with the answer. Disagreeing with others is what many of us spend most of our lives doing. It’s the American Way. It’s the human way.

Anyone that worships any politician is living in a fantasyland. Politicians lie for a living. They have to lie. If they stood up and told the public the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth they wouldn’t be elected to the city council in a one-horse town. Even in towns smaller than Wasilla, AL.

So pardon Poor Joe and Josephine the average American for thinking they have a right to question someone running for president. Pardon Poor Joe and Josephine for not getting in line, climbing on the bandwagon or marching in lockstep. Pardon them for believing that they have the right and the freedom to both disagree and be disagreeable. No matter who the candidate may be. Never forget these candidates are asking to work for us, and are supposed to represent us. Wouldn’t it be nice if things actually worked that way?

If you think Poor Joe the Plumber should not have the right to ask his questions, disagree with the answer and then be left in peace then you are not a liberal, a progressive or a Democrat. You don’t believe in the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution or the freedoms they assert.

You are of that pack of Americans called Obamacrats and we’ve all ready seen how little regard you have for freedom, honesty and fairness. Members of a cult seldom do.

We’ve seen the right behave like this in the past and we were appalled. That kind of repulsive behavior had us looking for the tar and feathers. Too bad we don’t feel the same way now. It is not encouraging to find that the liberals are every bit as big on hypocrisy as the conservatives. One wonders where to go.

“Oh waiter, can I have a table for a party of one?” However, I do expect company later. Lot’s of company.

SHILLING and CHURNING–the State of the Media and the “Mass Production of Ignorance” (A Double Post by kenosha Marge and InsightAnalytical-GRL)

The two pieces in this post are intertwined. First, there is “American Media Shills for Obama” by kenosha Marge.  Then, check out “Flat Earth News–The State of ‘Churnalism'” by InsightAnalytical-GRL, an introduction to the acclaimed journalist Nick Davies and his courageous expose’ about the “news” business.

American Media Shills for Obama

~~By kenosha Marge

Has the time finally come when ordinary citizens stop listening to the drivel coming from the mouths of multi-millionaire pundits? Have we really gotten mad as hell and aren’t going to take it any more?

Going back as far as William Randolph Hearst it is easy to see that media moguls were always about money and power, not journalism. It was in fact Hurst’s engaging in a bitter circulation war with Joseph Pulitzer‘s New York World which led to the creation of “yellow journalism“–sensationalized stories of dubious veracity.

There was a time between Hearst and the Current Millionaire Media Morons that infest our newspapers and airwaves today when some actual journalism occurred.

Having been raised with the Huntley-Brinkley Report and Walter Cronkite what passes for journalism these days is wretched. Certainly Edward R. Murrow, must be spinning in his grave knowing that a hack like Keith Olbermann, is using his signature line, “Good Night and Good Luck”.

It is interesting that Murrow gave a speech before the Radio and Television News Directors Association in Chicago in which he blasted TV’s emphasis on entertainment and commercialism at the expense of public service. That was on October 15, 1958. I suspect he would be appalled to see how far down that road the media has traveled.

Today’s media gives us such stalwarts as Charlie Gibson of ABC who sneered his way through an interrogation disguised as an interview. Gibson tried to embarrass and demean Governor Sarah Palin. Instead he embarrassed himself and the occupation he represents so poorly. We really aren’t interested in whether you like Governor Palin or not Charlie, we just expect you, as a professional to conduct an interview that allows us to make our own decisions based on what WE perceive to be the truth. Your opinion Charlie is irrelevant.

This election cycle, like many before has shown us a media increasingly less interested in reporting the news than in making it. We expected that the Clinton-hating media would attack her relentlessly without regard for truth, fairness or integrity. We didn’t expect their blatant misogyny and their slobbering preference for Obama. There wasn’t even a pretense of fair coverage.

Now John McCain is being treated in the same way. Must be a surprise for him since he is used to being the media darling. He is learning that media, like jackdaws, are attracted to the newest shiniest object to enter their sphere.

Oprah Winfrey had the honesty to admit being an Obama acolyte. She is just a talk show hostess so her opinion is just that, her opinion. She might better occupy her time recommending Diets or Authors but then she’s missed a few times on those issues too.

Chris Matthews is a silly, sexist, twit. Had Matthews forthrightly admitted to being in the tank for Obama you might at least have respected his honesty. His pretense of being neutral was absurd. The tingle up his leg is probably a sign of poor circulation and not enough blood getting to his brain.

The list of Obama fans in the press is nearly endless. Eugene Robinson, E.J. Dionne, and Chris Cillizza are press agents for the Washington Post. Like many papers its circulation is dropping and will likely continue to drop as readers find themselves faced with fewer journalists and a proliferation of cheerleaders.  Were it not for Dana Priest and Thomas E. Ricks the Post wouldn’t be worth reading.

Frank Rich, and Bob Herbert love them some Obama for the New York Times. The Times should no longer be allowed to proclaim itself a newspaper of record. Professional and unbiased? Were it not for Paul Krugman the current Times would only be useful for the bottom of my parrot cage.

Only on the right is Obama not fawned over like the second coming. Even there he isn’t pummeled with the fervor to which a democrat is typically subjected. If Corporate Left and Corporate Right likes someone, that someone might not be the best choice for all us little peons out here that don’t have media contracts worth millions.

Our media has decided that they want Obama to be president. In pursuit of their wish that such a thing come to pass they are willing to slime anyone, tell any lie, spin a few words into something unrecognizable as from the truth and show us their true, corporate colors. There may be a few, a very few, honest, decent, hardworking journalists around. But real Journalists don’t work on cable “news” programs and they seldom show up on the pages of the top newspapers in the country. Like common sense, integrity and honesty are becoming less common all the time.

MSNBC has become the Obama network. I believe the “M” stands for misogynistic. CNN has become the loving Obama all the time network. CNN was once a respected news channel. Now there is more blather than news and more opinion than fact. Jumped the shark a while back. FOX, to everyone’s surprise has been the most unbiased of the 3 cable “news” network. Whoever would have believed that would come to pass?

Few people respect or believe media. Seven out of 10 voters (69%) are convinced that reporters try to help the candidate they want to win, and this year by a nearly five-to-one margin voters believe they are trying to help Obama. What does that say about how voters view the integrity of the media?

As if the misbehavior of the media were not enough they sneer down their exfoliated noses at the rabble for being “low information” voters. They do not do their job to inform us, then insult and demean us for NOT being informed.

Who, what, when, why and where as journalistic ideology? Gone with the snows of yesteryear…


“Flat Earth News” The State of ‘Churnalism'”

~~by InsightAnalytical-GRL

While listening to the BBC World Service months ago, I heard an interview with author Nick Davies, an acclaimed investigative reporter from Britain (see bio below). Davies, who had written a book entitled “Flat Earth News” (published in February 2008) lambasted the present state of journalism. In the book, Davies “exposes falsehood, distortion and propaganda in the global media.” Check out his website of the same name.

The part of the interview that has stayed with me these many months was his discussion of what Davies calls “churnalism.” If you scan the reaction by the journalists who have commented on the book, you’ll see the frustration of many of them who have experienced the process of taking press releases that have been rehashed and passed off as real news gathering and those who have been forced to rely on “automated news-sifting services” because they are no longer given the time to investigate stories or check their facts. In other words, as one comments, most news “isn’t original anymore.”

A video of a more recent interview with Davies on “churnalism” is available here at the BBC site and is well-worth watching!

Here’s a synopsis of the book from Davies’ site:

“Finally I was forced to admit that I work in a corrupted profession.” When award-winning journalist Nick Davies decided to break Fleet Street’s unwritten rule by investigating his own colleagues, he found that the business of truth had been slowly subverted by the mass production of ignorance.

Working with a network of off-the-record sources, Davies uncovered the story of the prestigious Sunday newspaper which allowed the CIA and MI6 to plant fiction in its columns; the daily newsroom where senior reporters casually refer to ‘nig nogs’ and where executives routinely reject stories about black people; the respected quality paper which was so desperate for scoops that it hired a conman to set up a front company to entrap senior political figures. He found papers supporting law and order while paying cash bribes to bent detectives and hiring private investigators to steal information.

Davies names names and exposes the national news stories which turn out to be pseudo events manufactured by the PR industry and the global news stories which prove to be fiction generated by a new machinery of international propaganda.

He shows the impact of this on a world where media consumers believe a mass of stories which, in truth, are as false as the idea that the Earth is flat – from the millennium bug to the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, tainting government policy, perverting popular belief.

He presents a new model for understanding news. With the help of researchers from Cardiff University, who ran a ground-breaking analysis of the contents and sources for our daily news, Davies found most reporters most of the time are not allowed to dig up stories or check their facts – a profession corrupted at the core.

Read All About It. The news will never look the same again.

An extract from the book is here.

Needless to say, this book has raised the hackles of many in the established media.  A paperback edition will be published in early 2009.

Check out Nick Davies’ site for updated posts on recent media distortions and for many links about the book and reactions to it, as well as media-monitoring sites, including:




Nick Davies’ Resume

“Nick Davies has been named Journalist of the Year, Reporter of the Year and Feature Writer of the Year for his investigations into crime, drugs, poverty and other social issues. Hundreds of journalists have attended his masterclass on the techniques of investigative reporting. He has been a journalist since 1976 and is currently a freelance, working regularly as special correspondent for The Guardian. He also makes TV documentaries; he was formerly an on-screen reporter for World In Action. His four books include White Lies (about a racist miscarriage of justice in Texas) and Dark Heart (about poverty in Britain). He was the first winner of the Martha Gellhorn award for investigative reporting for his work on failing schools and recently won the award for European Journalism for his work on drugs policy.”

Nancy Pelosi Talks about Hillary during an Interview about Her New Book “Know Your Power: A Message to America’s Daughters” (Ironic Title, Isn’t It?) (UPDATE 1X)

I spotted it in USA Weekend Magazine over breakfast…a little squib in the “Who’s News” column about Pelosi’s new book.

According to Lorrie Lynch, the columnist who puts together this page,

Pelosi told her she wrote the book because “other people were writing my story; I thought I should.” She wants our daughters to know that “power is within them.” They should “have faith in themselves, set their path and be ready for opportunity.”

I nearly spit up my tea as I read this claptrap.

Lynch usually seems to be oblivious to what’s going on, preferring to focus on the celebrity aspect of her interviews.  The rest of the current column is full of answers to questions from readers which are extremely important. For example, the question right under the Pelosi squib asks whether George Clooney is half-Greek or half-Italian…

I’ve caught Lynch in the past showing her biases toward political figures, so I was on the lookout for a lot of fawning, especially since she met Pelosi years ago–24 years ago–at the Democratic Convention in San Francisco.

By the way, the convention she’s referring to is the 1984 convention where Geraldine Ferraro was nominated for Vice President to run with Walter Mondale.  Twenty-four years ago…gee, haven’t we come a long way, baby?

Lynch did a full interview with Pelosi, so I went over to her blog to see what was there.

Lynch got off to a slow start with a very insightful question about whether being the chair of the host committee during that convention was as hard as being head of the national party now.  OK…

Pelosi was given the chance to shower women readers with loads of advice:

LL: You say in the book that women should know their power but keep the faith. Talk about what you mean by keeping the faith.

NP: I wanted to convey to women they can do anything if they know the power and keep the faith. The power is within them. The faith is within them, too. So, it’s about themselves. They should  be themselves, have confidence in that… set their path, set themselves on a track, or not, but be ready for whatever opportunities come along.  When you and I sat down 24 years ago when I was chair of the host committee if you had said to me in three years you’ll be in Congress I would’ve said that’s totally impossible.  But, when your transitions are revealed to you it’s important to recognize them and to give your faith and confidence in yourself if it’s what you want to do.

Hear that, PUMA women? Nancy tells us to “keep the faith.”

Nancy also spoke of her fondness for Washington, D.C. and San Francisco…you won’t believe this prattle:

Washington…inspires me to honor the entrepreunerial spirit of our founders. And my city of San Francisco is  a city built on optimism and entrepreunerial spirit and all the rest. I take the optimism and the fresh new ideas of California to Washington every week, respectful of the traditions that are there but connected with the spirit of our founders to make change for the future, to take risks, be bold and make the future better for our children.

Somehow I’ve missed all that boldness and risk taking she’s been doing lately on behalf of us…and she sure likes the word “entrepreunerial,” doesn’t she?

But Lynch managed to ask a few pointed questions about Pelosi’s thoughts on Hillary Clinton. These “thoughts” are mealy-mouthed, weasely and scripted, of course:

LL: In your book you talk about cracking the marble ceiling in the Capitol. In the primary campaign we heard a lot about breaking the ultimate glass ceiling. Do you feel any disappointment  — or that it’s a setback for women — that Sen. Clinton did NOT become the nominee?

NP: Sen. Clinton made a tremendous and courageous effort to win the White House. She made it clear a woman can be president, serve as commander in chief, has the knowledge, the courage and the stamina to be president of the United States. What Sen. Clinton did can never be considered a setback because she advanced the cause enormously, she almost won. You can’t call that a setback because no woman had come that far, gained that much support  blazing the trail for herself, for the future, for other women. It was progress, it was ground breaking and it is because of Sen. Clinton that those strides were made.

LL: The question now is, if not Hillary, than who? Who will be the first woman president? You may be in the most unique place to know who else is out there with the talent and possibility. Is there anyone you think eight years from now could be  another great woman candidate?

NP: I wouldn’t rule out Sen. Clinton eight years from now but that’s up to her. But in addition to that, there are many U.S. senators and women governors and  women in the House of Representatives who could be on the path to the White House. But remember one thing: Eight years ago, no one had even heard of Barack Obama. So, we don’t know who it could be, but what we want to do is make sure there is enough encouragement of women to get involved in the process, to receive the kind of support to follow their aspirations. This  is not for the faint of heart.

LL: People from all backgrounds and walks of life supported Sen. Clinton and were excited about the possibility of a woman president.

NP: I think that’s true. There’s no question there was a great deal of exuberance for having a woman president. I can tell you from my own experience becoming Whip, (majority) leader and then Speaker of the House, the enthusiasm that I have seen for a woman standing in the path to power.
I think the public is way ahead of the politicians in terms of women doing whatever job they set out to do. Of course, older women want to see it, younger women are inspired by it, but what touched me when I reached power was the letters, communications, I would get from fathers of daughters that would say, ‘I’m so happy to see that you have reached the heights that you have for what it means for my daughter.’ It’s not just confined to women wanting women to be successful… It’s people looking to a new generation.

Well, Pelosi didn’t answer the question about whether she was “disappointed” about Hillary “losing” the nomination. And when Lynch asked her who would be the first woman President, if not Hillary, Pelosi moved right into the “next generation” talk.  I’d like to know, however, who exactly these “many” women senators, representatives and governors are that are poised to catapult into the forefront?  Who else has the experience, tenacity, and smarts of Clinton?

It’s pretty clear that Pelosi would be happy to see Hillary Clinton out of the way after this year.  She’s dead and buried as far as the Democratic leadership is concerned, PUMAS.  But we already knew that, didn’t we? She can gloss her words all she likes, but she isn’t fooling us!

The replies to this interview are interesting.  None seem to have mentioned Hillary so far, but they sure are critical of Pelosi!   Apparently, not all readers of Lorrie Lynch are ready to just “fall in line.”

And here’s little tidbit about Lynch and Keith Olbermann.  Back in April, Lynch made Olbermann’s “Worst Person in the World” list.  Why?

I only merited the third place WORSE for my item in Sunday’s print column on CNBCs’ reporter Erin Burnett. Keith was upset that I told readers how Burnett would not talk to us without her PR handler being in on the interview. In his rant (which you can view here) Keith chastizes me for not understanding that no public figure from “the president to Ashton Kutcher” is interviewed without his press handler sitting in.

Sorry Keith, I beg to differ. I’m proud to say we expect public figures to be able to answer questions without  their PR people in the room or on the phone. It makes for much better interviews. And my column is full of such conversations every week. In fact, in November of 2005, Keith himself was featured in the column (scroll down a bit for the item), having given a lovely interview that was completely handler-free.

How rich is this?? A gossip columnists displays some “journalistic integrity” and that guy who thinks he’s Edward R. Murrow disses her for not wanting handlers with interviewees?

Unreal…as is Nancy Pelosi.  Just unreal…

UPDATE Thursday, August 7, 2008

Hate to report anything from Drudge, but he quotes the Nielsen Bookscan as reporting that Pelosi’s book has sold 2,737 copies during its first week and this after the USA Weekend push.

By contrast, the anti-Obama title, OBAMA NATION, has sold 21,466, according to a Drudge “insider.”

Looks like the people are speaking!!