“Feminism! Politico Made New York Times Executive Editor Jill Abramson Cry,” says Rush Limbaugh on his show today:
The Politico ran a story on her not long ago that was critical of her, and she cried. Jill Abramson admitted that a story critical of her in The Politico made her cry. This is a woman that came from the bowels of the modern feminist movement. This is a woman who came from the feminist movement which preached toughness, no emotion, no relationships — and if you have one, you don’t talk about it, and it’s not the center of your life.
You take on the men in their bailiwick. You take on the men in their careers. You become them, and you take over, and you do not cry. Well, she cried. Jill Abramson was reduced to tears because of a story run about her in The Politico.
* * * * * *
The Jill Abramson story in The Politico was published all the way back in April, and for some reason it has just surfaced. She told Lloyd Grove at The Daily Beast, “I cried. I should say that their story just bounced right off of me, but I’m just being honest. I did cry. But by the next morning, I wasn’t completely preoccupied by it anymore. I had my cry, and that was that.”
How many people have the New York Times destroyed?
How many politicians, how many just people in all walks of life have journalists at the New York Times targeted to destroy, to damage, to harm? And here’s the woman that runs the operation admitting that she cried over something written about her in the media. They’re making fun of her out there, because feminists aren’t supposed to cry. You know, Patsy Schroeder broke down and cried when she decided that she couldn’t win the presidency.
* * * * * *
[At her press conference, Schroeder] just started bawling, broke down and started crying. And then, to add insult to jury, she then sought comfort from a man. I looked and said, “Who’s that?” because she really buried her head on this guy’s shoulder, and she just really let loose. She said, “I decided I can’t win.” (crying) Really, folks. It’s like a baby crying. And then she turned to this guy and her head’s buried in her shoulder. I said, “Who is that?”
I found out it was somebody I didn’t know existed: Her husband. Guy’s name was Jim. I don’t know what his last name was. It might have been Schroeder. I don’t know if she took his name. But she started wailing. “I said, “Man, she is letting the sisters down double, double whammy. A, crying, and then on the shoulder of a man – and maybe a triple whammy,” because that was her husband, who, heretofore — outside of their friends and neighbors in the district — nobody knew existed.
“Anyway, you find it interesting that a woman editor at New York Times crying is a news story?”, Rush concludes. “But it was big. Why is that news? You have to ask yourself: Why is it news?”
Also, note this very pre-feminist moment in Abramson’s Bizarro World profile in Tina Brown’s Daily Beast:
Some 30 feet away by the 15th-floor elevator bank, a middle-aged man in shirtsleeves and loosened tie is pacing feverishly, a cellphone glued to his ear. “There’s David Barstow,” Abramson says, pointing out the multiple Pulitzer winner who shared this year’s investigative prize for a series on Walmart’s serial bribing of public officials in Mexico. “I worship David Barstow.”
Surely, Barstow, 50, has been a valuable asset since he joined the Times in 1999, but he’s an ink-stained wretch; it’s unlikely his salary matches that of celebrity-statistician Nate Silver, the author of the controversial yet eerily prophetic FiveThirtyEight blog—and certainly it’s nowhere near what Silver will be pulling down when he leaves the paper to join ESPN after his contract runs out next month. “A ton of money,” guesses Keller, who hired the 35-year-old Silver.
“It’s not your fault,” Sulzberger comforted Abramson after the Politico story. “It’s just your turn.”
Abramson, who says she worked hard to keep him, recalls a meeting with Silver’s lawyer-agent: “The first thing he said to me was, ‘I’m in a pretty good position because I represent the prettiest girl at the party.’ And I looked at him and I made sort of a face, like, ‘Yeah, really?’ And then I said to him, ‘The New York Times is always the prettiest girl at the party.’ ”
“The prettiest girl at the party?” How bourgeois! Since when do politically correct feminist leftists voluntary confess — after voluntarily confessing to crying — that they’ve used such outdated doubleplusungood oldspeak language?
Speaking of which, before going further, here’s your official WARNING: DNC-APPROVED VULGARITIES TO FOLLOW, underneath the “More” tab:
Ann Althouse has some thoughts on Tina Brown’s recent Drudge-linked “End the Damn Dickmanship!” anti-Weiner rant in relation to yesterday’s addition to the Anthony-Huma-Bill-and-Hillary four-ring circus, when TPM reported that Weiner’s communications director Barbara Morgan described former intern Olivia Nuzzi as “a fame hungry ‘bitch’ who ‘sucked’ at her job. Morgan also called Nuzzi a ‘slutbag,’ ‘twat,’ and ‘cunt’ while threatening to sue her.” As Althouse writes in response:
I guess I’m supposed to denounce Morgan for calling Nuzzi a “slutbag,” a “twat,” and a “cunt.” Those female-specific insults. But didn’t Tina Brown call Weiner a “dick”? And, if so, shouldn’t we give equality to women and get our share of gender-based insults? But Tina Brown didn’t call Anthony Weiner a “dick.” She referred to his “dickmanship.” He’s not a dick but a Person of Dickmanship. The equivalent would be to refer to a woman’s twattishness. But that kind of distancing in the insults is for the official print version. How does Tina Brown speak off the record? Seriously, why do you think Barbara Morgan thought she could talk like that? Such a string of epithets can’t come out of nowhere. There must be a culture.
And yet, if that were the culture, wouldn’t there be thousands of ambitious interns like Nuzzi, whose climbing hit a ceiling, dishing out a million “Fuck you, you little cunt” quotes?
Good question. Perhaps Nancy Pelosi could elaborate on that topic, no?
Related: “Slutbag. A bag of slut. When will Obama call?”