Battered Women “Just Asking for It”
Press releases don’t get a whole lot more shrill than this:
In a sharply critical statement, the New York state chapter of NOW took aim at Kennedy Monday for what it called an “ultimate betrayal,” and suggested the Massachusetts Democrat “can’t or won’t” handle the idea of Clinton becoming President of the United States.
“Sen. Kennedy’s endorsement of Hillary Clinton’s opponent in the Democratic presidential primary campaign has really hit women hard,” said the statement. “Women have forgiven Kennedy, stuck up for him, stood by him, hushed the fact that he was late in his support of Title IX, the ERA, the Family Leave and Medical Act to name a few.”
“And now the greatest betrayal! We are repaid with his abandonment!” the statement continues. “He’s picked the new guy over us. He’s joined the list of progressive white men who can’t or won’t handle the prospect of a woman president who is Hillary Clinton.”
There are two ways to reply to NOW-New York’s statement.
First, there’s the obvious: Dude, he’s a Kennedy, what did you expect?
Second, there’s the equally obvious: Kennedy knew he’d get away with it, after watching NOW stay on its knees for Bill Clinton all these years.
The correct reply? Both.
Steve,
If you think that’s bad, you should see what this group wrote a few weeks ago:
http://www.nownys.org/pr_2008/pr_011108.html
TO: Stephen Green, et al.
RE: Mere…
…herstrionic, if you ask me.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Female, n., the unfair sex. -- Ambrose Beirce, The Devil's Dictionary]
P.S. That goes for your observation about them as well, Doug Mataconis.
Far be it from me to defend the Chappaquiddick Kid, but has NOW released similar unhinged rants against other Democrats who support Obama? And if supporting Obama is a betrayal of women, isn’t supporting Clinton a betrayal of African Americans? Hence, on the view of loyalty espoused by leftists–loyalty not to ideals but to classes and ethnicities–it is impossible to avoid betraying somebody. This illustrates the inherently irrational nature of their worldview. It also illustrates the futility of NOW’s strategy of ignoring even the most grotesque mistreatment of women by Democrat politicians.
TO: Nathan
RE: Well…
“Far be it from me to defend the Chappaquiddick Kid, but has NOW released similar unhinged rants against other Democrats who support Obama?” — Nathan
…not as far as I’ve noticed, but what is that old truism…..
“Heav’n has no rage, like love to hatred turn’d, Nor Hell a fury, like a woman scorn’d. – William Congreve”
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[If you don't think women are explosive, drop one!]
Third obvious reply:
“NOW’s still in business?”
So far as I can tell, Kennedy has always been only reluctantly supportive of the Clintons. That’s because the Clinton machine has regularly worked to overshadow the Kennedy machine. The two machines in the Democrat party are at odds with each other for control of the party, with only a tenuous cease fire once a nominee is chosen.
This support for Obama against Clinton is consistent and was predictable.