The New Line of Bull
I was watching MSNBC for a little while this evening and I saw an interview with Heidi Harris and Amy Goodman. My Spidey sense started tingling when Harris said that women vote Democratic because they vote with their heart, not their head. If I said that, my wife would stab me in the neck.
To his credit, Matthews pressed her asking, if women aren’t voting with their head on abortion. She said, I don’t think that Roe v. Wade will be overturned no matter who they put on the court. To top it off, she said that most of the women complaining about abortion are too old to have children.
The good part is about 5:15 into the video. Is this the new whisper campaign? “McCain really isn’t anti-abortion, he’s just saying that to get the crazy-ass zealot vote. Your right to an abortion is safe with John McCain.”
I jumped out of my chair when I watched that tonight. Was that woman – and I use that term loosely – for real?
I predict this interview is going to be a youtube hit, and… a great Obama ad.
Any woman still voting for McCain after watching this garbage should be ashamed. Go ahead ladies, watch the clip. THIS is what you’re supporting.
What am I missing? I didn’t see the interview, but what’s so offensive about that? I’ve heard Chris Matthews say the same thing about Democrats ( ‘dems fall in love; repubs fall in line’). It’s kind of true, isn’t it?
click on the first link.
And another thing… Can you tell I’m hot?
Heidi Harris just confirmed my earlier post. The McCain campaign talks out of both sides of its mouth. Sadly, they are so stoooopid!
All Heidi accomplished tonight was alienating everyone. Hillary supporters and Independents are appalled. And the little “wink, wink” – “McCain really isn’t anti-abortion, he’s just saying that to get the crazy-ass zealot vote. Your right to an abortion is safe with John McCain.” – just drove the far right Far away from McCain.
Good work, Heidi.
For the record, the whole crazy-ass zealot part is my interpretation.
I realize that… but you nailed the meaning, so I stole (cut and pasteed) your words.
Then I’ll take it for the compliment that it was intended as.
I just watched it and I still don’t see what you guys are all worked up about. Apart from the fact that what she said wasn’t completely off-base, she’s a radio talk show host, not a campaign staffer. She even said McCain wasn’t her first pick.
I think you guys are just looking for reasons to complain about him. I will say, however, that the face Chris made when she made the ‘too old to get pregnant’ comment was priceless.
So you agree that abortion right are safe with McCain? That’s what I’m worked up about.
I’m completely insulted, but maybe that’s because I’m “emotional”. I’m too silly to comprehend the issues. Geez, Dom, I agreed with you when you complained about sexism and Hillary. Have your rules for sexism suddenly changed?
And if I shouldn’t give a damn about abortion since I’m not having more children, then maybe I should just say… screw the environment. I’ll be dead by the time it gets really bad.
I actually do think abortion rights are safe regardless of the makeup of the court. Worst-case scenario, it gets kicked back to the states and Delaware is fine.
P – Yes, her use of the word ’emotional’ was a bit cringeworthy, but I don’t think she was implying that women are silly. I think she was implying that we are sometimes more inclined to make decisions based on emotion rather than logic. Frankly, I don’t think that’s completely untrue. Most of the women I know have had a history of following their hearts before their heads. Why do you think so many end up and stay in bad relationships? C’mon, that’s not sexism, that’s realism.
So… given your logic… The reason Hillary ended up in her “bad” marriage was because she didn’t use her head???
Damn it, Dom! How can spew such crap – ” I think she was implying that we are sometimes more inclined to make decisions based on emotion rather than logic. Frankly, I don’t think that’s completely untrue.” – and then cry sexism over Hillary?
Congratulations, you just made the argument against a female President.
Umm…yes. That’s exactly why I think she stayed in that marriage. Why else would she? She would have gotten further career-wise by leaving him after Monica. That’s not sexism. That’s a woman making a decision with her heart before her head. That’s part of what makes us different than men, more nurturing than men.
Are you saying you don’t do that? Please. Let me introduce you to my 23-year old daughter (heart over head decision at 19); she has yet to make a decision with her head. I wish you could have seen my in the cute red Mercury Cougar I traded in my reliable, 1-year old Honda Civic for (heart over head decision at 30). Or maybe I could introduce you to my second dog, Rocco (heart over head decision at 40). I would have a third dog (attempted heart over head decision last year) if my husband didn’t stop me at the Humane Association (I sobbed like a child the whole way home). Sure, most of the decisions I’ve made have been head over heart, but for the most part there’s a lot of heart that goes into every decision I make.
That’s not an argument against a female president; that’s an argument FOR a female president. A female president would probably be much more inclined to incorporate her heart in decision-making. That alone would make for a better president.
Nice spin, but I’m not buying yit. You dug this hole. Men AND women make heart over head decisions. Singling out one sex, labeling them emotional, is exactly what you’ve been writing about all these months. But maybe I’m wrong, I better go ask a man if my point is “logical”.
Frank Rich’s column in Sunday’s NYT made the point that the repub pandering to Hillary voters is in itself sexist in that it presumes that these women won’t respond to rationality. You know, “Don’t confuse them with facts and issues, just tell them that everything will be OK — they can’t handle much more.”
Rich is right, of course, and the HRC voters (the few that really are buying this crapola) are doing more to further sexist imagery than any damn thing that Chris Matthews says.
It’s not spin. It’s true. Answer the question – do you do it? Do you do it more than your husband does?
Men and women are different; you don’t need me to tell you that. This is one of the things that makes us different. Women, in general, are more emotional than men. If she was saying that they were incapable of making a good decision because of their emotions, I would say she was being sexist. I don’t think that’s what she was saying. I don’t remember the exact quote and I don’t feel like watching it again, but I think he asked her why so many women vote Democrat. I may have misunderstood her, but I thought she was inferring that many of us make the decision because of the abortion issue, which is an emotionally-charged issue (I would have referred to it as emotional blackmail, frankly). She could definitely have phrased it better – she did sound a bit demeaning, but there’s really no need to overdramatize it. It’s not like she said or even implied that women aren’t capable of making logical decisions.
I don’t remember you being this outraged when sexist remarks were being hurled at Hillary or when Obama called that reporter ‘sweetie’.
Actually, Dom, I posted serious responses to your sexism vs racism question over at DWA. When it comes to the “sweetie” comment I have no leg to stand on… I call everyone sweetie. It’s my thing.
That said I fully and loudly admitted Chris Matthews was a jerk. So was Russert during the debate.
My husband and I both make emotional decisions. I fell in love with a sofa. He bought a grill with enough buttons to make NASA proud. He also was the one who brought home the dog. And when it comes to the kids, he’s mush.
You don’t remember my outrage? Funny, when all I can remember is your’s. And, yes, she did imply women weren’t capable of making logical decisions. She’s a Republican strategist who when asked why women voted Democratic said that women were emotional. Implication: If women were logical they’d vote Republican.
She is a Repub Strategist however she from Vegas nuf said
“Congratulations, you just made the argument against a female President.”
*
yup
ding*ding*ding*
The stupid, it burns.
‘Implication: If women were logical they’d vote Republican.’
Or, if women weren’t so easily manipulated by emotional issues like abortion, we might be more inclined to look at Republican candidates more often.
I can see why her comment can be interpreted as insulting and sexist. She definitely could have phrased it better. I just happen to think that there’s some truth to the statement.
I also think there’s a difference between a woman calling another woman ‘sweetie’ or ’emotional’ than a man doing the same. One has an understanding of the gender; one is dismissive of it. It’s kind of the same thing as a black person using the ‘n-word’ – completely different context than a white person using it.