Archive for the 'Delusion' Category

Because of course there are no female bankers

I’d love to do a thorough fisking of this article on “Dating a Banker Anonymous,” and what it says about how society views women, how the New York Times views women, how the New York Times really needs to hire writers who didn’t all go to Dalton and Nightingale, and how these women view themselves (hint: as accessories for rich, powerful men), but I rather feel the need to take a shower.

Caroline Kennedy out

UPDATE: Or maybe not.

UPDATE II: Nope, she’s confirmed she’s out. Carry on.

And another political story that doesn’t really wash: Caroline Kennedy is reportedly withdrawing her bid to be named to Hillary Clinton’s recently-vacated Senate seat. Check out the reason given:

The New York Times reported that Kennedy’s decision to withdraw was prompted by concerns about the health of her uncle, Sen. Edwad Kennedy, who was hospitalized after a seizure during an inaugural lunch for Obama on Tuesday.

Hasn’t he been released, though? And since Caroline, from what I’ve read, didn’t actually go to the hospital, how is his hospitalization/health a reason for her to withdraw her bid? You’d think that it would be a reason for her to stick it out, since it’s, like, a law that we have to have a Kennedy in the Senate.

But just like the Dick Cheney “moving boxes” story, this sounds a little fishy. Especially when you consider that earlier in the day, just after Clinton was confirmed as SoS and resigned her Senate seat, I’d read in the Times that Gov. Paterson had pretty much made up his mind on Monday afternoon:

Mr. Paterson, speaking to reporters here shortly after President Obama was sworn in, said he had all but decided on his choice Monday afternoon but planned to mull it over for a few more days.

“I have a good idea now which direction I want to go,” Mr. Paterson said.

Then, explaining why he would wait to reveal his choice, he added: “I thought that with something this serious — that when I came to a point of view — that I wouldn’t react to it immediately. So since I’m going to be here for another couple of days, I thought I would see if it feels the same way when I come back on Wednesday as it did, I guess toward the end of yesterday afternoon, when I think I started to come to a point of view.”

An unnamed “friend” of Paterson’s speculated that he would be swayed by Teddy’s seizure, which seems a really stupid thing to be saying to the press about your friend, lest you make your friend look as idiotic as Blago, if less venal.

But that story appeared in the NY/Region section. The story about Caroline Kennedy’s withdrawal ran in the Politics section, by different reporters. Who put in some interesting stuff about the expectations that Caroline and her backers have, not to mention the spinning they’re doing to the reporters:

Ms. Kennedy believed that the job was hers if she would accept it, the person said, but aides to Mr. Paterson would not comment on whether that was true….

Ms. Kennedy’s decision comes nearly two months after she, along with several members of Congress and leading political officials, began auditioning to replace Mrs. Clinton in the coveted position. She attracted relentless attention and was viewed by many as the most likely choice for Mr. Paterson, given her national stature and ties to the incoming Obama administration….

Ms. Kennedy had gained the support of some powerful backers in the state, including several labor officials and a top aide to Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, Kevin Sheekey.

But her pursuit of the seat also set off resistance, with some local Democratic officials suggesting it smacked of entitlement, and polls showing voters preferring Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo for the position….

Some have speculated that with the state facing a $15 billion budget deficit, Mr. Paterson was risking a lot to not select Ms. Kennedy, given her connections to the Obama administration and top Senate Democrats such as Majority Leader Harry Reid. Mr. Paterson appeared to like Ms. Kennedy and saw in her a potential star, but was frustrated and angry by what he saw as efforts by her supporters, especially within Mayor Bloomberg’s administration, to create a sense of inevitability about her candidacy….

A friend of the governor’s [he’s got some chatty friends, doesn’t he?] said on Wednesday afternoon that “I would be totally shocked” if Mr. Paterson did not pick Ms. Kennedy.

If he doesn’t go with her, how angry is the Democratic leadership going to be with him?” the friend said….

Wow. This clearly shows that the Kennedy machine was spinning, hard, right up until she dropped out, trying to create that inevitability. I mean, she believed the job would be hers if she wanted it! She had powerful backers! “Some people” believed she was the leading candidate! She’s best buds with Obama! The Senate Dems would be really, really angry if he didn’t pick her! Obama will have his revenge on New York if Paterson picks someone from New York who backed his rival, the junior senator from New York! O woe! The New York Democrats will never, ever be able to raise enough money for an incumbent Democrat to hang onto the Senate seat in the bluest of blue states against the terrifying New York Republican Machine, led by… um… who, again?

It’s all such bullshit. Clearly, Paterson made up his mind Monday that he wasn’t going to pick her, sat on it for a bit, let her know and gave her the opportunity to bow out gracefully. She took the “spend time with my family now that my uncle is ill” route and withdrew rather than be passed over publicly when Paterson made his announcement this weekend. Which doesn’t mean that her spinners aren’t out there spinning this as her walking away from the opportunity that was hers for the asking rather than Paterson giving her the boot.

But now the press gets to move onto its next-favorite candidate, Andrew Cuomo, conveniently forgetting that he isn’t the only one under consideration.

If you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime. Except, well, when nobody can figure out whether you should do the time to begin with.

Jill’s on fire today, asking pro-lifers some very pointed questions. In fact, the same questions that were asked in this video [now located here, because YouTube took down the one I’d embedded], which inspired the Anna Quindlen column Jill’s responding to:

I know there are at least a few regular readers who self-identify as “pro-life.” So here’s a question for you: How much time should she do?
One goal of the anti-choice movement is to outlaw abortion. But, as Anna Quindlen points out, anti-choice activists are almost never able to identify what the legal consequences should be for women who terminate their pregnancies. So, pro-lifers, tell me: What should the penalty be? How much time in jail should a woman face for abortion? . . .

Continue reading ‘If you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime. Except, well, when nobody can figure out whether you should do the time to begin with.’

Empowerful

Oh, crap. I can’t seem to get the video player to embed here. So go see Jennifer and Bean for the video.

I don’t know which one I love more, the guy who says that feminists are hairy, ugly lesbians, or the woman who correctly identifies feminist achievements like getting the vote, but who decides that pole dancing is more feminist than that.