Former CIA and National Security Agency director Michael Hayden suggested Sunday that Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) might have compromised the objectivity of a report on CIA interrogation techniques because she personally wants to change them.
On “Fox News Sunday,” Hayden cited comments Feinstein made last month in which she said declassifying the report would “ensure that an un-American, brutal program of detention and interrogation will never again be considered or permitted.”
Hayden suggested Feinstein feels too strongly about the issue on an “emotional” level.
“That sentence — that motivation for the report — may show deep, emotional feeling on the part of the senator, but I don’t think it leads you to an objective report,” Hayden said.
I dislike Dianne Feinstein, she’s an unrepentant hawk who supported every military weapon program and was unwavering in her support of Chimpy’s Great Adventure.
But there’s one thing I do know about her: she’s tough as nails. There is nothing emotional about her. I suspect that she pushed her kids out of the nest with gusto and relish, and so I doubt very much that her emotions have ever gotten the better of her.
So besides the obvious sexism here—and it doesn’t get much more obvious than this—it makes me wonder what is in this report that
Egghead Hayden really doesn’t want released? That’s a pretty desperate fourth and forty play.
Could it be… torture? Let’s call it by its real name, not some weasel-speak harsh interrogation technique. It was the policy of the United States to torture prisoners of war in off-shore gulags beyond the reach of our own laws. Blam-blam and Chimpy broke every last shred of decency we had in the world’s eyes, and they continue to walk the earth free.
(WaPo via Crooks and Liars)
“Take me through exactly what would have to happen, with a specific example of a man and woman, where a man is being paid less than the woman. Because this law is not just about women — it’s about men and women.”
– Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) asking how the Paycheck Fairness Act will not discriminate against men.
Remember, the GOP claims that women don’t want equal pay and are against having healthcare. They really have their finger on the pulse of American women.
Federal Court Judge Richard Kopf, a George H.W. Bush appointee, has some advice for the wimmins who dress like sluts who appear before him:
1. You can’t win. Men are both pigs and prudes. Get over it.
2. It is not about you. That goes double when you are appearing in front of a jury.
3. Think about the female law clerks. If they are likely to label you, like Jane Curtin, an ignorant slut behind your back, tone it down.
I have some advice for Judge Kopf: apply rule #2 to yourself, buddy.
Because it is never too soon to educate girls that their bodies are objects:
Earlier this month, Haven Middle School administrators notified parents that female students are no longer allowed to wear shorts, leggings, or yoga pants because those articles of clothing might be “too distracting” for their male peers.
And likewise it is never too soon to educate boys on how behaving like boors is acceptable. The message to boys is just as damning: you are animals incapable of controlling yourselves, so have at it.
So, the girls are fighting back:
… That’s sparked a protest among parents and students in the Evanston, Illinois area, who are arguing it’s not girls’ responsibility to accommodate the boys in their classes.
More than 500 students have signed onto a petition protesting the new dress code policy, which they say is sexist because it’s only targeting girls’ clothing. Some female students have chosen to defy the ban and are wearing leggings and yoga pants to school in protest. A poster plastered in Haven Middle School reads, “Are my pants lowering your test scores?”
Why not start now with training boys to be more, well, gentlemanly, and not to objectify girls? Why do the girls have to accomdate the boys? Let’s keep an eye on this one; I suspect the school has a real problem on the PR front now that parents are involved.
Assembly Majority Leader Bill Kramer may resign from his leadership post as soon as Saturday after being accused of sexually harassing at least two women while in Washington, D.C., for a GOP fundraiser.
Now THAT is productivity! Dude was in DC on Wednesday and back by Friday and managed to grope at least two women (though there may be more?), including on the plane!
But what takes it from general boorishness to Performance Art is that he was receiving money from women.
It is my belief that the War on Women is a front in the greater battle on the War on Democracy as waged by the Theocrats. They are still blaming women for the Fall (as they put it) from the Garden of Eden. Original Sin, all that nuttiness.
That said, there seems to be a down-side for wingnuttia, as the NYTimes tells us:
In the past few months, Republicans have called Wendy Davis, a Democratic candidate for Texas governor, “Abortion Barbie,” likened Alison Lundergan Grimes, a Senate candidate from Kentucky, to an “empty dress,” criticized Hillary Rodham Clinton’s thighs, and referred to a pregnant woman as a “host.”
Democrats do not just get mad when they hear those words. They cash in.
Emily’s List, the political action committee that backs female candidates who support abortion rights, has raised a record $25 million this election cycle.
Usually I do not advocate for wasting our breath trying to bring the knuckle-draggers into the modern era, but this gives me some hope. Methinks that Wingnuttia loves money more than life itself, and if they perceive that someone, somewhere is making money off of them, they might pay attention.
Ha-ha, I crack myself up.
“Bachmann says a lot of people “aren’t ready” for a female president. “I think there was a cachet about having an African-American president because of guilt.” (Presumably she means because of slavery and the lengthy denial of civil rights to blacks.) “People don’t hold guilt for a woman,” she says, adding that while people vote for women for virtually every other office “I don’t think there is a pent-up desire” for a woman president.”
–Michele Bachmann in today’s Cal Thomas column. One-L should mention that she knows that America is not ready for a woman preznint because she was so soundly rejected by Winguttia in 2012 (and investigations against her grifting campaign led to her quitting Congress at the end of this term).
But she has a great career ahead of her as the ambassador to whatever planet from which she receives radio signals.
The GOP Year of the Woman
‘Enough is enough’: Rand Paul suggests cutting benefits for unwed mothers with too many kids
Shorter Aquah Buddha: it is important to starve the bastard when punishing the whore. I guess he skipped the part about his hero Ayn Rand, the devoted atheist, was absolutely not a moral scold.
Why does it matter if the mom is married or not? There is something so strangely Xristian-centric about this, a world-view that assumes that marriage solves all problems, social and economic. It doesn’t.
This is just more slut-shaming. Oh, Rand, you do know that married people have whoopsie babies too: I was one.
His discussion should be about helping feed and care for a child, not punish a woman, a class of women, he disapproves of.
It reminds me of an old Edward Gorey poem:
To his clubfooted child said Lord Stipple,
As he poured his post-prandial tipple,
“Your mother’s behaviour
Gave pain to Our Saviour,
And that’s why He made you a cripple.”
One hopes that she is on her way to a new apartment, far away from the dude who thinks women driving is funny.
(Hat tip: Scissorhead Bruce388)
Fly the sexist skies!
(Hat tip: Scissorhead Pissed in NYCity)