This board has been busy the past 24 hours!

a few minor things..

The mindset of both of them seems strangely stuck in the past - late 1960s to no later than the mid-1980s. Since Brightstar says he is in his early forties, he would have been a child at that time. Yet he claims his mother was NEVER a feminist and that she was quite traditional. If she is/was a traditionalist, she would not look to kindly upon any gender-bending. Explorations into girls underwear and twirly skirts would no doubt have been punished or ridiculed.

By the way, AKA, I would have to be a certified GENIUS to be BOTH me and MMM. His style is more systematic and emotionless. I admire his encyclopedic sense of the gender terrain-- something I rarely see in guys.

I, on the other hand, tend to spill words in passionate slices of my psyche from different angles.

To your paragraph above. My mom is feminist in a neolithic way, ala Camille Paglia. She understands women have power in their lives and makes no excuse but engages life.

As for gender bending by me, when I was 12 my mom found my stash of girlie things. I was, of course, mortified. All she could do was sigh and figure at least I seemed straight, which I most definitely am, since being gay is a big Catholic no no in many families. My having lots of girlfriends over the years also eased her mind, I'm sure.

Of course, she does not know about my passion for twirly skirts! Those Dervishes knew something..

that the most aggressive men tend to become the leaders. Aggression being associated with 'male' and least associated with 'female', these men tend to look down upon women because their own egos naturally gravitate towards such a black and white conclusion-- man=aggressive, woman=not aggressive.

It is not even a leap to then see them populate the upper echelons with people like them, aggressive men who look down on women.

there is no mystery. but there is sadness.

among the hard libs.

but in the rest of America, if they ever read this about her, people will come away with an even more positive impression of her. I know I have.

to wit-- looking at her, you would think she plays to the cliche of a typical girly 'woman', whatever behavior that implies.

to hear that she is hard, opportunistic, cunning, conniving, on and on only helps to make her seem like a more appropriate candidate for office. We do not want powderpuffs in teh White House. This is why your Kerry failed. It is why the Greek Knight failed in 88. Cerebral but with a whipped cream complexion that blows over like a soap bubble in a hurricane does not, and should never, fly as a leadership credential.

let's move onto the next point. I thought lib theology was about women being effective leaders, doing whatever must be done, even if it imitates the worst behavior of the men.

I thought lib theology also included clauses that old white men, particularly old boy network men, were the most evil of the evil. So, y'all shluld be celebrating Palin's success over them, eh?

Which leads to the next conclusion, none of these exposees are done about Miz Hillary or any woman whom you DO agree with.

So it is all just more partisan bickering.

In a world where Democrats could write reams about how evil the right has been the past eight years, ripping on someone for being an effective and unsentimental leader is not that bright.

Me personally? I am a Ron Paul guy. Government is magnitudes and orders too big-- as is quite evident in the taxpayer handovers to trillionaires occurring this week against all our wills.

Or as someone said on the radio yesterday. A black kid sells $300 of crack and gets ten years. An old boy of a trillionaire bank takes home $100mil plus PER YEAR while the bank collapses and the proleple are forced to bail out the criminals, and they build statues of him on Wall Street.

is that the only seeming objection to Palin among the left is that they will no longer be allowed to murder babies in the last month of pregnancy.

A strong position to hang your hats on there, babes. FYI, the majority of America feels there are too many abortions and that there ought to be some limits, not outright bans, but some limits on abortion. Many fathers feel they ought to be legally included in this decision process too.

But the left continually takes a marginal position, then wonders why they consistently lose.

because he speaks clearly and reads cue cards convincingly?

much of America is still waiting for the deal closer from Obama. Maybe it is precisely the lack of evidence, witnessed in the absence of articles addressing these very concerns, is the only evidence people need that he is an inexperienced empty suit after all.

maybe y'all hope the "magic negro" effect will take him over the top?

at least with McSame you can say he has a lifetime of experience to help him make wise decisions.

is apparently inherent to ALL major academia, media and organizations.

the prejudice comes first. The data is massaged to fit the prejudice.

EXACTLY what I, and many others, have been arguing for years-- that all of these organizations are fundamentally ANTI-MALE and PRO-FEMALE, regardless of what the actual data might say.

I have no need for academic disinformation to tell me the whole of society is constantly biased AGAINST the needs of men.

But thanks for playing...

the rich never pay.

Step 1-- become very wealthy

Step 2-- tie your bank into the wealth of a big country

Step 3-- fuck up

Step 4-- give the country the ultimatum: "fix this problem for me or die. your choice. I'll continue to remain wealthy."

So, when do the jailers go after these evil thieves who continue to ravage the planet?