August 03, 2005

Women without Sense??

Every time I wander onto some blogs, I wonder why I wasted my time even going there. Take this from Lashawn today:

Rice for President: One of my advertisers is a group called Americans For Rice, and Iíve been asked by several people where I stand on the Condi-for-president meme. I wouldnít vote for Condoleezza Rice for president of the United States. First, I donít think women generally have the sensibilities to run the country. Before you jump all over me, itís important that you know I donít care what you think. Youíre reading this blog, so you obviously care what I think, so there it is. Second, Rice is pro-choice and might be pro-race preferences. No moderate Republican who I know is a moderate will ever get my vote (emphasis added).

First of all, she doesn't think women generally have the sensibilities to run a country?

They only have the sensibilities to run households, raise children, run companies, be intelligent and poised and succeed in almost anything they desire. Although a woman has not been president yet of this country, they have been leaders outside of the United States (i.e. Margaret Thatcher, Yulia Tymoshenko, Gloria Arroyo, Indira Gandhi).

Yes, Lashawn, women have already proven themselves "sensible enough" to run a country but thanks for helping prove to many that conservatives are just rigid close minded people who want their women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen. That's fun too.

And as for caring what you think because I read your blog?

I just wonder how you have so many readers who do seem to care what you think especially if this is the type of stuff you're thinking. Fine disagree with Condi on her politics but to not want her to run and to not support her just because she is a woman is obviously just as bad as not supporting her just because she's black. No one picks their race, no one picks their sex. Just pick the right person for the job. Qualifications OVER appearances, please!

Please someone tell me why she is so high in the ecosystem?

Posted by Jody at August 3, 2005 06:41 PM | TrackBack

Way harsh and uncalled for. What did I ever do to you? Don't envy my ranking. I've worked hard for it. If you apply yourself, you can do it, too. By the way, save yourself the aggravation and don't wander over to my blog anymore. It's only going to get worse, I promise you. I'm starting to care less and less what people of any political stripe think of me, male or female.

Posted by: LB at August 3, 2005 06:58 PM

Geez, Louise. LB answers back, and does nothing in the process to make herself look more intelligent.

Well, as to the barefoot/pregnant/kitchen thing, I think I've made my preferences known.

Barefoot: why?


Posted by: Jeff H at August 3, 2005 07:49 PM

Don't get me wrong, I am all for saying what's on your mind ... and I also acknowledge that there are differences between the sexes ... but to say that no woman has the sensibilities to be President?


Posted by: TJ at August 3, 2005 08:33 PM

Damn, Jody, you seem to have really upset her...I do believe she's referring to you in her update.

Posted by: Tammy at August 3, 2005 09:04 PM

I donít think women generally have the sensibilities to run the country.

HEH. Looks like a textbook case of projection.

Posted by: Beth at August 3, 2005 09:19 PM

First and foremost, I want to say this. I wouldn't vote for Condi either, but not because she is a woman. Sadly, while there are some very qualified women in this country, I just don't see America electing a woman as President. More to the point, I would have to agree with Lashawn on Condi's politics (as far as her being pro-choice and possbily being "pro-race benefits". Another sad point (and keep in mind that I am a "right wing nut job"), America hasn't had a REALLY strong White House since 1988, but I see the current administration as being on the right track to turn that around. What I find absolutely HILARIOUS is that in 2000 when Bush won the electoral college vote w/o the popular vote (which is NOT the first time that has happened-e-mail me if you want the others), but in 2004 when he DID win the popular vote, the "left" was STILL screaming, and accusing him of "stealing" the election! Neither side is blameless here, but COME ON!

Posted by: Smoke Eater at August 3, 2005 09:25 PM

Tammy, Thanks for the heads up but based on the comment, email and deleted trackback from LB, I think she made it clear who she was referring to in her "update"... honestly if I had known it would've bothered her this much, I don't think I would've bothered. Except her view of women with no sensibility to run the country bothered me that badly! LOL :)

Posted by: Jody at August 3, 2005 10:09 PM

Well, let's all have a "banned by the Bitch" party!!!

I left the following comment on her post:

"I made it 45+ years without remembering--or ever hearing--"ol' LB's advice". I think I'll do just fine on my own.

And perhaps some humility will go a long way toward addressing whatever persecution it is you fancy yourself to be the target of."

Well, less than a minute after posting it, she deleted the entire text of the comment, leaving a blank comment post with my name. So I followed up with:

"Thanks for deleting the entire text of my comment."

Now I'm banned--can't get to her site.

What a control freak. What delusions of grandeur. She needs her meds upped.

But that aside, I'll bring my famous chocolate-chocolate chip cookies to the party. Who's got the drinks?

Posted by: Jeff H at August 3, 2005 10:22 PM

Pass the popcorn, I love a good catfight.

Posted by: Mad Dog Vinnie at August 3, 2005 11:50 PM

Jody - when you get under someone's skin, you know you've effectively gotten your point across. It is apparent that she *does* care what others think if she's deleting trackbacks and erasing comments that may not put her in what is perceived to be the best light. Keep speaking your mind - it's real!

Posted by: Merri at August 4, 2005 12:41 AM

I'm not sure if I'll vote for Condi either if we get the chance. She is a very impressive person and I admire her and her accomplishments greatly but I don't know enough about her to say she'll receive my vote right now (granted that's how I feel about most of the potential candidates) but I don't want to discount a candidate pool of half the population just because they're women. That's backward and wrong. I'd rather have the most qualified and the candidate that best represents my ideology, regardless of race, religion or sex.

Eric -- down boy ;)

Merri and everyone else, thanks for the great comments!

Posted by: Jody at August 4, 2005 09:30 AM

I too am Of The Banned over at La Shawn Barber's Corner. (Sounds like such a warm, fuzzy place, doesn't it?) She banned me after I took issue with her enthusiastic support for torture at Abu Ghraib.

Part of her says things just to get a rise out of people. But I often think, when reading her stuff, if this is what she's willing to say publicly, imagine what she's thinking!

Posted by: Adam at August 4, 2005 09:37 AM

Yeah. Tell me, who is this "LB"....never heard of her.

Posted by: sadie at August 4, 2005 11:59 AM

Question: If women don't have the sensibilities to run the country how can they possibly have the sensibilities to criticize those who do?

Posted by: Janette at August 4, 2005 04:41 PM

There are those of us who will not vote for a woman for President. I know, I am one. (Especially if her name is Hillary).

However the really frustrating thing about Rice is she is not the best qualified candidate. Period end of statement. She is not even the best qualifed person to be Sec State. She simply got rewarded the way Bush rewards all of his sycophants.

Nuff said. Now go vacuum the house and cook dinner!

Posted by: Skippy-san at August 4, 2005 06:12 PM

Wonder how LB walks around with her panties in such a bunch all the time?

Posted by: Jo at August 4, 2005 06:36 PM

Looks like LB lost even the pretense at humility.

Not a pretty sight. And you know what they say about too much pride and all.

Posted by: Darleen at August 4, 2005 06:52 PM

LB, how arrogant can you be? First, no one is jealous of your ranking. The fact that you would even bring that up, plus your mention of how you worked so hard for it, shows where your priorities are. We don't need to visit your website for your daily dose of wisdom. We've all done very well without you, and we'll continue to do well when you are gone and forgotten.

In short, stuff a sock in your word-hole.

Posted by: Greg at August 5, 2005 04:28 PM

Rock on, Jody!

i don't think Condi will run in 08. She's been pretty clear that she doesn't want to. i'd vote for her, though. So unfortunately, unless the Republicans can nominate someone good (which is in doubt right now) we may get Hillary, and then a lot more people will agree with LB.

Posted by: annika at August 5, 2005 06:00 PM

There are some inexplicable mysteries in life. Things that someday we may come to understand and until then puzzle over.

LB's blog ranking is one of those deeper mysteries.

Posted by: Roaring Tiger at August 5, 2005 09:03 PM

LB is becoming more and more sensitive. I haven't read her blog in months. She does seem to be secretly wishing there was a conspiracy for her to get upset about.
She probably can't handle the pressure of success, can't be as perfect as she'd like, and I have a feeling she gets a rush from anger.

Posted by: BobG at August 6, 2005 03:56 PM

I think she just sits around all day, looking in the mirror, saying "Ha!!! I was on MSNBC, and you haven't been!!!"

Posted by: Jeff H at August 6, 2005 04:43 PM

I left the following comment on La Shawn's blog, which she immediately deleted, and then she banned me:

" '...itís important that you know I donít care what you think. Youíre reading this blog, so you obviously care what I think...'

"I'm not reading it anymore. You really need to check the ego, La Shawn."

Is that so awful? I seriously think this gal is a bit off her rocker.

Posted by: Matt at August 7, 2005 02:16 PM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?