Silky’s wife: Hillary may not be as “good” an advocate for women as Silky
posted at 11:37 am on July 17, 2007 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
Entirely true assuming you define “good” the way Elizabeth Edwards and the campaign’s most notorious hires do. Silky’s staked himself as the true nutroots champion, willing to pander to the hard left on every point of leftist dogma, so in that sense it’s hard to be “better” than he is on gender short of signing on to the SCUM manifesto. On the other end, Hillary’s keen to explode stereotypes about how a woman president would act in office which is one of the reasons why she hasn’t apologized — yet — for her Iraq vote. Remember?
Mrs. Clinton’s image as a strong leader, in turn, is critical to her hopes of becoming the nation’s first female president. According to one adviser, her internal polling indicates that a high proportion of Democrats see her as strong and tough, both assets particularly valuable to a female candidate who is seeking to become commander in chief. Apologizing might hurt that image, this adviser said.
So yeah, if you’re in the market for gender demagoguery, the Edwards campaign’s your best bet. Meanwhile, though, in pimping this on the Report, Drudge misquoted Edwards’s wife not once but twice. Presently the headline reads, “Gender Bender: Wife Edwards Says Hillary ‘Behaving Like a Man’”. The one before it read, “Elizabeth Edwards Shock: Hillary ‘May Not Be Good Advocate for Women’”. The actual quotes:
Look, I’m sympathetic, because when I worked as a lawyer, I was the only woman in these rooms, too, and you want to reassure them you’re as good as a man. And sometimes you feel you have to behave as a man and not talk about women’s issues. I’m sympathetic — she wants to be commander in chief. But she’s just not as vocal a women’s advocate as I want to see. John is. And then she says, or maybe her supporters say, “Support me because I’m a woman,” and I want to say to her, “Well, then support me because I’m a woman.” The question is not so much how she campaigns — that’s theater. The question is, what does her campaign tell you about how she’ll govern? And I’m not convinced she’d be as good an advocate for women. She needs a rationale greater for her campaign than I’ve heard.
The “behave”/”behaving” one is at least arguably fair, although Drudge is being cute with the “Gender Bender” thing by hinting that she impugned Hillary’s physical femininity when what she really seems to be saying is that if you’re not as vocal about the Patriarchy as Elizabeth Edwards would like you to be then you’re de facto part of it. The “good”/”as good” misquote is clearly unfair, though.
Ah well. We all know who the real “woman’s candidate” is. Exit question: Will the nutroots’ high dudgeon over insinuations about John Edwards’s gender lead them to rally to Hillary’s side here? Or will they end up squarely in the tank as usual for this shameless pandering moron and his wife?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Silky more of a woman than the Hildebeast? Seems pretty clear from my POV, from the lack of cankles on up.But then again, have we ever actually seen Silky’s legs?
bbz123 on July 17, 2007 at 11:42 AM
Enough with all this innuendo!
The fact that John Edwards is pretty means nothing.
JiangxiDad on July 17, 2007 at 11:46 AM
…although if he added a little lighter highlight to his hair, I could really go for him.
JiangxiDad on July 17, 2007 at 11:47 AM
Rudy in drag resembled more of a woman than the Hildebeast.
amerpundit on July 17, 2007 at 11:48 AM
Let’s have all of them debate in drag and just decide already.
(Or has that already been planned at the upcoming gaydebate.)
JiangxiDad on July 17, 2007 at 11:50 AM
Why can’t we get the best attributes of each candidate??
Rudy’s eyes, silky’s hair, Mitt’s chin… ahhhh
JiangxiDad on July 17, 2007 at 11:51 AM
Hey, any candidate that promises to end all bad things should merit serious consideration. (link is to a parody)
Slublog on July 17, 2007 at 11:53 AM
My answer; squarely in the tank as usual for the shameless pandering moron and his wife.
Griz on July 17, 2007 at 11:55 AM
Didja have to bring suppositories into this???
/
RushBaby on July 17, 2007 at 11:56 AM
What is truly sad is that these two Edwards are still living under the delusion that he actually has a chance in this race.
bbz123 on July 17, 2007 at 11:57 AM
Why is Edwards even in the race? He should have been laughed out by now. What a sad testiment to the USA that schmucks like this are contenders. Imagine the trash candidates we will have as contenders once the government grants amnesty to 12 million law breaking cheaters.
If you don’t think Americans can’t be really stupid, look at this Ellison bafoon. Don’t worry, he has plenty of company with dirtbag colleagues.
saiga on July 17, 2007 at 12:00 PM
In the old days, the only nuts we had to worry about were Huey Long types on the left, and Joe McCarthy types on the right.
Neither one of those types would even come close to the nuts we have in our government today.
saiga on July 17, 2007 at 12:03 PM
Shameless pandering has a pretty good track record in the American electorate.
eeyore on July 17, 2007 at 12:05 PM
It’s difficult to believe that this wormy little dolt is even considering a run for president. When somebody like Edwards is getting national attention you know this country is in deep trouble.
rplat on July 17, 2007 at 12:05 PM
Finally, I get the two Americas thing. The Edwards live in one, and the rest of us live in the other. Thanks bbz123
JiangxiDad on July 17, 2007 at 12:05 PM
Are we talkin’ mangina?
No wonder he’s so moody some of the time. I thought it was bad hair days.
Hening on July 17, 2007 at 12:06 PM
Did somebody say Harry Reid?
JiangxiDad on July 17, 2007 at 12:06 PM
Now I’m really confused. Is that the two Americas he means?
JiangxiDad on July 17, 2007 at 12:09 PM
The United States of Mangina?
Griz on July 17, 2007 at 12:11 PM
I saw an interesting analogy that compares this group of dems to the 1968 group.
Hilary is in the role of Hubert Humphrey, Obama is Gene McCarthy, and John Edwards is trying to be Robert Kennedy.
Hilary like humphrey represents the established party. Obama is the anti establishment side of the dems. And Edwards is trying to stake out a third road like RFK did because he hasnt the full claim to either being an established democrat or being fully into the anti establishment side.
William Amos on July 17, 2007 at 12:12 PM
One would have to be on a pshychedelic bender to see Cankles as anything but as a dishonest, calculating opportunist, tutored by the King of the Liars.
I’d like to see a follow up report on what they were high on.
fogw on July 17, 2007 at 12:15 PM
Oh say you’ll always be my Silky
We can make it shine, we can take the White House
On just 8 bucks at a time.
More than a woman, more than a woman to me
More than a woman, more than a woman to me
More than a woman, oh, oh, oh.
Pablo on July 17, 2007 at 12:16 PM
Heh!
4shoes on July 17, 2007 at 12:21 PM
If Liz Edwards has such an affinity for “being feminine in order to represent femininity,” maybe she should have life-partnered with a woman.
Oh wait - she did.
Good Lt on July 17, 2007 at 12:24 PM
Mrs. Edwards, make sure you place a call to Drudge and let him know he’s been unfair to you!
Bhaahaaha!
RushBaby on July 17, 2007 at 12:29 PM
Do you mean Mrs. Edwards, or Mrs. Mr. Edwards? Is this the two Americas?
JiangxiDad on July 17, 2007 at 12:32 PM
Rush is talking about it now
JiangxiDad on July 17, 2007 at 12:34 PM
She may have a point- liberal women do tend to have a thing for rich, urban, well groomed gay dudes.
Not that I’m suggesting that Edwards is a (British slang for a cigarette) or anything, but he could convincingly play one on TV.
Hollowpoint on July 17, 2007 at 1:01 PM
Chick fight!
John Edwards knows exactly what to do…whatever Liz says to do.
Commander in Chief Edwards first 90 days:
Uh Honey, AQ just says they will bomb us again. What should we do?
Liz: I’ll just go over a bitch slap him, the way I did Hillary…you just stay home and look pretty.
OK, honey…do you know where my hairbrush is…are?
right2bright on July 17, 2007 at 1:04 PM
Both of the Edwards losers needs to get a good lay!
SouthernGent on July 17, 2007 at 1:09 PM
If Edwards should make it to the final rounds of “Presidential Idol” I’m looking forward for seeing how the metrosexual Mr. Edwards convinces the electorate that he’s really a down-to-earth man’s man.
Faux duck hunting like Kerry did?
Going into barbershop instead of a salon?
A “spontaneous” touch football game with campaign staffers?
Whatever, I betcha Edwards campaign already has a whole team of “queer eye” types coming up with a strategy!
highhopes on July 17, 2007 at 1:13 PM
So this is the new campaign strategy?
John Edwards: A better women’s advocate - and prettier too.
This begs for some YouTube. The stuff writes itself.
ConfigSys.boy on July 17, 2007 at 1:15 PM
Mrs. Edwards follows in the long tradition of feminist thought that to be an advocate for women you have to be hard-core liberal. To claim that Shrillary is not hard-core left enough is really saying something. Her only mistake in this campaign was to support the war because she did not have the insight that Kennedy did, that with enough vocal support from Dems in Congress that the Iraqi insurgents could defeat the Republicans for them.
pedestrian on July 17, 2007 at 1:16 PM
Just remember, the Edward’s built their 100 acre plantation right outside of the “People’s Republic of Chapel Hill.” If ever a representation of two America’s, it is the State of North Carolina vs. People’s Republic of Chapel Hill.
Wuptdo on July 17, 2007 at 1:50 PM
Update: Is John Edwards Elizabeth Edwards’ trophy wife?
saint kansas on July 17, 2007 at 2:01 PM
Now that’s pretty funny.
Randy
williars on July 17, 2007 at 2:54 PM
Maybe he’ a transgender.
canopfor on July 17, 2007 at 3:58 PM
I’m starting to think that her cancer has metastasized to her brain. She’s made a number of increasingly agressive (and moronic) statements in the last few months.
Pitty. In 2004, when it came out that she was suffering cancer during the campaign, I was impressed with her courage. Whatever good will I had about her evaporated when she publicly went after her gun owning neighbor.
georgej on July 17, 2007 at 4:07 PM
What is really scary is that….
There are people out there who think that Silky-pony and his wife are what this nation needs…..
CrazyFool on July 17, 2007 at 4:09 PM
Exactly. In fact I remember a post either here or at Michelle’s that said her grace period was over. That was after her relapse this year.
How anyone believes that this guy can do anything on his own in upper government is beyond me. But again, he was a senator. So there are believers out there. The memories of Kerry and him pawing each other, then playing catch in the parking lot to seem like real guys back in 04 were some funny stuff. Sickening, but kinda funny. Yeah we get along.
PowWow on July 17, 2007 at 10:35 PM