Title Match
Submitted by micandacam on Thu, 06/28/2007 - 12:52am
Everybody on TV is talking about the showdown between Elizabeth Edwards and Ann Coulter on MSNBC last night. I think Elizabeth did a great job while showing that you can have class and still participate in the political process. For years, I have been waiting for someone to tell Ann Coulter that what she does is not called for or journalistic. Hopefully, the message will get across this time.
The whole thing got me thinking about the role of political spouses. The Democratic spouses seem to be more and more involved every cycle. This year the big spouse stories have been: Elizabeth Edwards' cancer, Michelle Obama giving up her high-powered job, and of course, the possibility of a first gentleman. The question for me is how much should/does a political spouse affect the voters' decisions?
As an aside, Ann Coulter was in Charlotte just a few months ago for the Southern Evangelical Seminary program. I cannot imagine what she added to the spiritual discussion.
Cross posted at Pat go bye-bye.
I've generally thought
the Dem spouses are as strong or stronger than the Dem candidates . . . and that Republican spouses are irrelevant stage props. But then, my biases might be showing.
Do good. Be nice. Have fun.
You are right
This speaks to the divide between conservatives and liberals and the roles they believe men and women should play in the home and in society at large. Liberals put no limits on what women can do, while conservatives want women to bear children in younger years and do charity work in their later years. And during all of their years, they should be subservient to the wishes of the man.
So, I'm not surprised when the GOP spouses are stage props. We've had one in the WH for the last 7 years, like Hillary never existed. What's even funnier is that these GOP woman props are almost always fairly liberal in their philosophies (big exception---Darth Cheney's wife), but for some reason, they've sold out to the monied and conservative.
To me, this makes a woman like Laura Bush, who is by all accounts pro-choice and doesn't burn torches on "the gay agenda," a sellout no better than the young girl who quits hairstyling to be a stripper, because there's more money in it.
Regarding Elizabeth Edwards and her stand against Coulter, I couldn't applaud her more. I am really detesting Chris Matthews and others for giving Coulter the airtime in the first place. Bill Maher was de facto kicked off of network television for a 9/11 comment. Imus got the same for blatant racism directed at young women. What does Ann have to say to get her relegated to her neocon snakepit, Faux Noise?
War is over if you want it.
War is over if you want it.
Coulter is valuable to the MSM
because of the anger she riles up, on both sides! What could be more important to the money changers than that? It gets everybody watching and talking and they get to drag out these insipid exchanges for days and days. It keeps people looking over there when we should be looking over here. It fills the 24 hr spin cycle for them and they don't even have to pay anyone to go report the news.
Progressives are the true conservatives.
The Tonight Show
We watched John and Elizabeth Edwards on the Tonight Show, and I was impressed again with what equal partners the two are. It was a delight to watch them.
As for Coulter, I think that garlic and a silver crucifix might keep her away. Not sure - but so far it's worked for me. :)