Letters to the Editor
-
You Hillary acolytes
say that it is sexist for Obama to insinuate that Hillary uses attack ads to boost her "mood." Now, I know I'll never be able to convince you that by "down" he meant "down in the polls" (which she IS, in case you hadn't noticed -- so much for inevitability), so let's just assume for the moment that he DID intend to insinuate this.
Guess what? It's true. She DOES launch negative attacks to boost her mood. Here's what she told reporters in Iowa, immediately before launching a series of negative attack ads:
"“But I have been for months on the receiving end of rather consistent attacks – well now the fun part starts,” Mrs. Clinton said, punctuating the word “fun.” “We’re into the last month, and we’re going to start drawing the contrasts, because I want every Iowans to have accurate information when they make their decisions.”
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/02/an-attack-from-the-candidates-mouth/
Get that? She thinks it's fun to launch negative attacks. You know it's true. I know it's true. We all know it's true. Now, whether you believe that she launched the Wisconsin attack ads in response to attacks on her will depend entirely on your leanings in the race (she started it, but I've come to expect cognitive dissonance from Hillary supporters), and I presume you will rush to the poor little lamb's defense by saying that she had to strike back against the nasty black man, but really, I find it laughable that you find it sexist to call out a woman for being combative when the woman at issue regularly poses for photos wearing boxing gloves and calls herself "tough" and a "fighter." She's no shrinking violet, ladies.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/31/labor.endorsements/index.html
http://www.myfoxcleveland.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=5776979&version=3&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=3.2.1
Calling a woman an aggressive bitch isn't sexist if she actually IS an aggressive bitch, ladies.