MSNBC Producer: Dems Hope GOP Reignites ‘War on Women’ by Grilling Hillary on Benghazi

Submitted by Mastodon on Sat, 2014-05-10 04:15

Article here.

'At a fundraiser on Thursday night, President Barack Obama chided Democratic voters for their “congenital defect” of turning out in presidential years but often staying home during midterm election cycles. In a segment on MSNBC in which the guests pondered ways to enthuse Democrats ahead of November, MSNBC producer Dafna Linzer suggested that Democrats are hoping Republicans call former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to testify on Benghazi and reignite the “war on women.”

“So, you want to know how you fire up the Democratic base? Here you go,” Linzer began. “You fundraise off Benghazi. That’s a great idea. As soon as the Republicans start doing that, that fires up the Democratic base.”

She added that it would be beneficial for Democrats if Republicans on the Benghazi select committee subpoenaed Clinton. “I would just love to see a table of Republican men question the Secretary of State all over again.”

“More war on women as a strategy to fire up the Democratic base,” Linzer concluded.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

If questioning female gov't officials over their actions while in office is considered taboo because it is always equated with sexism against them as women, then at what point (aside from elections) do female gov't officials become accountable to the Congress, reporters, or the public at large? Answer: They don't. This is esp. so if they are appointed officials (such as presidential cabinet secretaries), and if even the questioners themselves are female.

Imagine this: Congress is 70%+ made up of women, as is the presidential cabinet, and the Oval Office is occupied by one, too. Now something bad happens. Something is handled badly and the Congress wants answers. They want to bring one or more female high gov't officials in front of a committee for questioning. The committee is chaired by a woman, and most if not all its members are female. They start to question the cabinet official. As she starts to give evasive answers, the women on the panel get increasingly frustrated with her and start to show it. They start asking her more pointed and direct questions, which she continues to evade. The hearing ends with few or no questions answered and piqued promises from the committee members that "it won't end here!".

The media weighs in: The committee would not have treated her that way had she been male. Like clockwork.

Bull$hit. Ever see a committee hearing when the Fed chairman is being grilled over US monetary policy? We'll see how, as our debt continues to go up, they deal with questioning the first female Fed chairwoman on this or other topics.

By appointing loads of female officials to office, you could get a team which can't be held accountable because they're all or mostly female. Who is backing this in their choices of who to vote for? The voters, including men.

At this point in our history, nymphotropism isn't just an unfortunate form of bigotry we have to deal with as best we can. It is now endangering what's left of our democracy (assuming it can still even be called that). In any case, it endangers the Congress' ability to get answers from gov't officials who hide behind their titles and/or genders to avoid being accountable for their deeds.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Matt on Sat, 2014-05-10 14:29