September 25, 2016

Flowers in the sewer — the misogyny of the disgust for Bill Clinton's lover.

On "Meet the Press" today, Chuck Todd was interviewing Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, John Podesta:
CHUCK TODD: Is your goal of this debate is to get under his skin? Is that why you gave Mark Cuban a ticket right in the front row?

JOHN PODESTA: No, I think Mark Cuban is one of the business leaders who was never involved in partisan politics who's endorsed Hillary because he thinks she'll do better for the-- for the economy. I think that, you know, you saw his reaction, which is to do his favorite sport, which is to dive in the sewer and go for a swim.
Trump's reaction, you remember, was "Perhaps I will put Gennifer Flowers right alongside of him!" Now, I have a feminist problem with Trump's remark, one that I haven't seen anyone else notice, and that is the idea that he can "put" the woman where he likes. Flowers is a person, not an object — like a vase of flowers — but Flowers has already responded positively to the notion of getting placed in front of Hillary.*

So let me move on to the feminist problem I have with what Podesta said. He says the name, Mark Cuban, and vaunts him as a business leader who is above politics, but he won't say the name of the woman and he speaks of her as a creature of the sewer.

Todd pushes him: "You said-- you referred to diving into the sewer, so you believe that inviting Gennifer Flowers is diving into the sewer?" And Podesta has the smarts to resist further disrespecting the woman. But later, there's a panel, and one of the participants is Stephanie Cutter (who was Obama's deputy campaign manager in 2012 and who helped John Kerry prepare for debates in 2004). Todd asks her about "the idea of gamesmanship, which is the Clinton Campaign deciding to put Mark Cuban in the front row," and the response had me shouting at the TV:
STEPHANIE CUTTER: ... What Clinton and Trump are doing are trying to throw each other off their game. The difference is Hillary Clinton is doing it with a legitimate businessman, also, a celebrity. And as John Podesta put it earlier on your show, Trump is just jumping right down in the sewer and swimming in it by inviting Gennifer Flowers.
The man is "legitimate," and the woman is a "sewer."

Chuck Todd turned to another panelist, Steve Schmidt (a senior adviser to John McCain in 2008).
STEVE SCHMIDT: [The tactic of inviting Cuban] was clearly designed to provoke Donald Trump and it provoked Donald Trump, it provoked Donald Trump into going down the Gennifer Flowers rabbit hole....
The Gennifer Flowers rabbit hole?! Don't call a woman a "hole." Don't speak of a human being as a lower animal, a rodent. Whatever these people want to say about Trump, they should say it about Trump, but they instinctively jumped to express disgust toward the woman — who's really just a bystander to the pre-debate mind-games. Is this misogyny? The argument that it is not depends on the idea that the disgust is with sexuality — what happens when the man and the woman — Bill and Gennifer — get together and not with the woman herself. But the instinct — in both Podesta and Cutter — was to take the man out of the picture. Bill, like Mark Cuban, is legitimate. That horrible woman over there should be treated as a nonentity — down in a hole, there in the excrement, a rodent, a filthy pest. Anyone who would name her or treat her with equal dignity has himself fallen down into the sewer with her — "swimming in it," swimming in shit.

Being on the side of the female candidate does not absolve you of misogyny. It blinds you to it. 
_____________________________

* The full tweet is: "If dopey Mark Cuban of failed Benefactor fame wants to sit in the front row, perhaps I will put Gennifer Flowers right alongside of him!" You can see that Cuban's autonomy is respected in the word "wants." What does Cuban want to do? By contrast, Flowers can be put where Trump wants.

241 comments:

1 – 200 of 241   Newer›   Newest»
Fabi said...

Trump could have said "seat" instead of "put", but his intent is clear.

holdfast said...

To be fair, I think Podesta means she's in a sewer, not that she's a sewer.

Anyway, how about the fact that Podesta is a creature of the Kremlin?

PB said...

Bill Clinton was a sexual predator and should not be allowed back on White House grounds.

PB said...

HIllary's protection of him is another reason she is disqualified from office.

John Taylor said...

if there is a coldness to it, I think it comes from the sense that this is a kind of chess game, with a line of gridded squares. Clinton team puts in a discovered check, and the Trump response is, I will not only threaten what you have brought forward, but plan to take it, and leave you in checkmate to boot. Therefore, the "placement," perhaps not feminist, but cold calculated gamesMENship, yes.

heyboom said...

I think what Trump said is just a figure of speech, Ann.

AprilApple said...

Meet the hacks.

Darrell said...

I suggested that Trump put a life-size Hillary Bobblehead in that first row seat, but he thought that was disrespectful.

Greg Hlatky said...

Podesta is a bigger whore than their accusations against Flowers can ever be.

Imagine meeting your Maker, being asked how you spent the life He gave you and having to say, "I was a fixer for the Clintons."

AprilApple said...

Anyone ask Marc Cuban why he supports an unindicted felon?

AprilApple said...

Bill Clinton was a sexual predator and should not be allowed back on White House grounds.

This is the correct answer.

Unknown said...

They've already called all of clintons conquests trailer trash. Mega are you really surprised about? If trump had said any of this the democrat media would have blown up.

YoungHegelian said...

Podesta, Schmidt, Todd, Cutter. These are morally horrible people, especially the first two.

It is truly a sad fact of modern politics, especially but not exclusively on the Democratic side, that as long as you mouth the correct party line, you can be a completely morally odious individual.

It's like African tribal politics now. As long as you're stealing, lying, whatever for the advantage of your tribe, it's all fine, 'cause, ya know, someone's gotta do it.

Rusty said...

Well. We now know how to get Ann all revved up.
It isn't wrong, Ann, because the Democrats are doing it.

Rhythm and Balls said...

Now, I have a feminist problem with Trump's remark, one that I haven't seen anyone else notice, and that is the idea that he can "put" the woman where he likes. Flowers is a person, not an object..

I have a humanist problem with your remark. You're assuming that he's applying a verb to a woman that he wouldn't apply to a man.

The Gennifer Flowers rabbit hole?! Don't call a woman a "hole."

You can't be serious. What is it with you and language?

Being on the side of the female candidate does not absolve you of misogyny. It blinds you to it.

Good. If the alternative is seeing outrage in every other verb and noun, then maybe a little blindness would be a good thing.

rcocean said...

"No, I think Mark Cuban is one of the business leaders who was never involved in partisan politics who's endorsed Hillary because he thinks she'll do better for the-- for the economy."

This is a complete lie. Cuban despite his name has parents who are left-wing Jews from Russia/Ukraine and Cuban was raised in in a very left-wing environment. He's always been left-wing, politically active, and disagrees with Trump on pretty much everything.

He's no more a "non-partisan" businessman then Soros, Zuckerberg or Joe Kennedy.

Jupiter said...

It's not entirely clear why there should be *any* spectators, but pretty clearly Clinton's team decided to weaponize them, and Trump responded in kind. I suppose the question should be, do the Clintonites expect the mere sight of Cuban to have an effect on Trump, or do they expect Cuban to violate the ground rules of the debate?

Notice that I say Clinton's Team made a decision, and Trump responded. Clinton herself is probably under restraint in a back room somewhere. How they think she is going to get through an hour or more of debate without regaining consciousness I don't know.

rcocean said...

BTW, for some reason stupid people seem to think that every rich person is "Right-wing" and that every person on Wall street is a Republican.

narciso said...

dr. evil, shirley they can't be serious, cuban is a 9/11 denialist and underwriter of that brian depalma 'snuff film' redacted, which triggered an attack on servicemen in germany,

Jupiter said...

What's with Gennifer Flowers, anyway? Last I heard, Bill Clinton had consensual sex with her, lots of it, a generation ago. And so what? It's pretty clear Hillary got over that a long time ago, if indeed it ever bothered her much.

I suppose the ability to overlook personal insults in favor of a one's political objectives is actually a virtue in a politician and national leader. Attempting to destroy women because your political mealticket raped them, not so much.

Rhythm and Balls said...

This is a complete lie. Cuban despite his name has parents who are left-wing Jews from Russia/Ukraine and Cuban was raised in in a very left-wing environment. He's always been left-wing, politically active, and disagrees with Trump on pretty much everything.

He's allowed to have an opinion, FFS. Heaven forbid people stay aware of what goes on in the world around them and what the politicians are doing to make it worse or better without being labeled an "(((activist)))".

Get a grip.

rcocean said...

This is another reason why Hillary needs to lose. I don't want to spend the next 4 years with Hillary and Bill and their lies and corruption. And even though Bill is 70, I wouldn't put it past him to be getting Lewinsky's in the White House again.

The only good thing about Hillary, is it reminds everyone what lying hypocrites most of the left-wing media are. I wonder how many American dummies will remember how the MSM gave Obama and the Clintons a pass on lies, corruption, and law-breaking if Trump is elected.

Ann Althouse said...

"I think what Trump said is just a figure of speech, Ann."

What is the meaning of the word "just" in your sentence?

How would a figure of speech be a figure of speech if it didn't express something?

Rhythm and Balls said...

BTW, for some reason stupid people seem to think that every rich person is "Right-wing" and that every person on Wall street is a Republican.

Not at all. There's a definite awareness of many poor, stupid Republicans who are more than happy to vote against their economic interests, year-in, year-out.

rcocean said...

"He's allowed to have an opinion, FFS."

D-u-m-b

Ann Althouse said...

"I have a humanist problem with your remark. You're assuming that he's applying a verb to a woman that he wouldn't apply to a man."

I've added a footnote to help you with that.

Rhythm and Balls said...

And even though Bill is 70, I wouldn't put it past him to be getting Lewinsky's in the White House again.

Oh, and what a nightmare that would be. As everyone knows, the minute the White House veers from being an extramarital blowjob-free-zone the Russians will detonate it. There are actually signs around the premises to this effect and plastic chain-linked posts to remind the careless.

Paul said...

So he is a 'feminist'? Flowers and the other victims of Bill Clinton have said they WANT to be at the debates. So he is clueless, or just another Clinton liar.

AprilApple said...

with the Clinton, sleaze and sewer is what we get.

Bill's old flings and rape victims are a reminder of that. Jennifer Flowers was one of the consensual affairs, right? Whatever - she is a reminder that the Clintons bring the sleaze factor. Until they drop dead or lose and are forced off stage left - no amount of media-white-washing or lame McCain advisor nattering will wash that away.

Clinton = sleaze and sewer. (and corruption, and money grubbing, and influence peddling, and tax-payer graft for personal enrichment, and lies.)

Shame on Mark Cuban for his support of all of that.

bigkat said...

but we did put a man on the moon in 69

coupe said...

"Now, I have a feminist problem with Trump's remark, one that I haven't seen anyone else notice, and that is the idea that he can "put" the woman where he likes."

Oh, I caught that right away. I thought, that poor woman, she was pulled out of history and planted where the Trump campaign wanted to plant her.

She took the low road. She should have said "wait a minute you f'n bastards, I'm not a potted plant!" But no, she missed her opportunity.

Anyway, it was a stupid thing on Trumps part, and he does stupid things a lot.

Big Mike said...

You can see that Cuban's autonomy is respected in the word "wants." What does Cuban want to do? By contrast, Flowers can be put where Trump wants.

@Althouse, sometimes your self-described feminism has you grasping at straws.

ndspinelli said...

The 1990's "Nuts and sluts" strategy has been dusted off for 2016. When will people stop whining about the blatant double standard. Liberals can ass rape women and it's acceptable. Conservatives can't say anything about woman w/o it being sexist. This is the MSM for the past 50 years. It has worked in great part over that span. The stranglehold the MSM has is ending. Rejoice, don't whine. Can't you smell the flop sweat??

AprilApple said...

Oh goody - If Clinton wins and we are ruled by that money-grubbing liar, we get to listen to leftists berate us again... "It's just sex/ it's just blow jobs."

can the 1990's die now? please?


One thing I appreciate about Obama, he knows how to keep the office he holds in line with the dignity it requires ( in terms of refraining from cheating, philandering, and raping in front of us. )

Ignorance is Bliss said...

— who's really just a bystander to the pre-debate mind-games. Is this misogyny?

Yes, it is misogyny of you to treat Flowers as if she is just a bystander, as if she is not actively choosing to play a role in the mind games.

Rhythm and Balls said...

I've added a footnote to help you with that.

Your "footnote" clarifies nothing:

The man is "legitimate," and the woman is a "sewer."

You're obscuring the fact that Cutter's reference to "legitimate" was to Trump's occupation ("businessperson," if it will help you feel less offended), and her reference to "sewer" wasn't to the person of Flowers or her gender but to the tawdry business of sorting out likely unknowable, intimate and interpersonal he-said/she-said scenarios. Most people agree with the advice of not delving into sexual smears - especially regarding those of a consensual nature. It would be tawdry if the innuendos and accusations involved a hypothetical same-sex male partner of Clinton's.

Seriously. If we're going to have Hillary in office for 4 - 8 years (or until a possible impeachment or indictment) then we need to learn to stop getting offended about applying language, and situations and criticisms to her that are just as gender-neutral as if they were applied to a male politician. I expect this stuff from Hillary's boosters but I thought you were a fan of applying some standard you coined as "cruel neutrality."

mockturtle said...

JMHO, Ann, but you're reading way, way too much into that conversation. You're looking for slights where none were intended.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Those were devastating quotes where HRC folks said they were disgusted by Flowers!

Oh, I guess that didn't happen.

Anywho, carry on.

The Cracker Emcee said...

Althouse is parsing the language. I doubt she's slighted by any of it. Delighted, maybe.

Robert Fulton said...

I'm trying a new browser and it led me to get interested in Professor Alhouse's post without recognizing that it was from her blog. I totally agreed with what she had to say - nothing new there in my thinking. However, I was shocked to discover who had written it.

Finally something has caused Professor Althouse to call a pig a pig, something that she has not been in a habit of doing. Guess it is the feminist thing. One can be a pig all day and be tolerated...until one does the feminist thing. Got it.

rhhardin said...

It's not anti-woman, it's anti-Trump.

Both Cuban and Flowers are props. They spin it their own way, though I think Trump won by having a sense of humor in his move.

Rabbits aren't rodents, and what's wrong with rodents anyway.

Rabbit hole is Lewis Caroll.

Ann Althouse said...

"You're looking for slights where none were intended."

The fact that Cutter and Podesta were blind to the significance of their words is part of what I am talking about in the post and is an important aspect of the subordination of women.

I'm not FBI Director Comey deciding whether they should be prosecuted.

I'm an analyst of words. Of course, they intended to say the words they in fact used.

rhhardin said...

White rats are better pets than hamsters or gerbils. More loyal.

R.J. Chatt said...

Clinton team has mastered the identity of victimhood and passive aggressive plausible deniability. Cuban is not just a plant to throw Trump off his concentration, Cuban is a legitimate businessman. Trump isn't interested in playing the victim or passive aggressiveness, he takes the winning shot regardless of the conventions of others. BTW, Gennifer Flowers is a woman who is personally knowledgeable about the Clintons, she's a legitimate character reference. I agree with Ann on this one. There is definite sexism in treating Flowers in derogatory terms.

BTW, the new comment verification system is insane.

rcocean said...

First it was OK for Clinton to lie under oath because "everyone lies about sex"

Now, its OK for Hillary to lie under oath to the FBI because "everyone lies about emails and selling access to foreign countries"

Now doubt if she's elected, her lies about possibly starting a war or a rescission will be met with "Hey, everyone lies about War and Depression".

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

"The fact that Cutter and Podesta were blind to the significance of their words is part of what I am talking about in the post and is an important aspect of the subordination of women."

Is being blind to imaginary things the same as being actually blind? Traditionally, most folks would call that being not blind.

Bob Boyd said...

You're right, they seem to feel completely entitled to disrespect Flowers, but the fact Flowers is a woman is incidental. They would be just as fast to de-humanize a man if he was a threat to their goal.
Flowers is deplorable, as is any man or woman who would thwart Hillary's ambition.

Ann Althouse said...

"Rabbits aren't rodents..."

Mmm. But they used to be.

David Begley said...

Althouse finally has figured out the Clintons. They will destroy - destroy! - anyone who gets in their way. Bill and Hillary have this sham marriage and Hillary has no objection - and in fact enables - him screwing thousands of women over the last 40 years. What kind of sickos are these people? And the sham marriage was in service to their bribery RICO enterprise. The Clintons ar the worst criminals imaginable.

But Trump has completely outwitted them. Trump tricked the press into reviving all of Bill's sex adventures. Do the American people want him inviting the Energizer Bunny over for sex romps when Hill is out of town? Jumping interns young enough to be his granddaughter?

No feminist should vote for these grifters. And it is a package deal. When Hillary has her stroke it will be an extra-constitutional power struggle among Huma, Bill and Kaine. Two are unelected!

Hillary Clinton must be defeated. Carthage must be destroyed.

paminwi said...

Oh FFS people: not everyone plans every word they say except HRC. Sometimes people just TALK!

Yes: as much as people hate it Trump is a "businessperson". Now you may not like what he has done as a "businessperson" but stop with the redefining of what he is. Add stuff to it, fine, but he IS a "businessperson".

Now Steve Schmidt: he's just a fucking asshole. He wasted all of Jeb's $ going after Trump and Jeb looked like an idiot in this campaign no matter how "smart" and "issue savvy" he was. And the MSM brings Schmidt on to be a fountain of knowledge. ONLY the Dems love this guy.

Podesta? He's just slime of major proportions and if I were on Twiiter I would be banned for saying I hope he disappears soon along with Sid. Add in Ezekial Emanuel (sp?) and it would the best trifecta to ever go down on a big way.

I hope ALL. The women who Bill screwed show up and educate the young 'uns of who Bill & HRC really are. Power hungry assholes who will step on anyone,at any time in any situation to get/remain in power.

And oh yeah ,you should read this article about the FBI & emailgate.

http://observer.com/2016/09/the-fbi-investigation-of-emailgate-was-a-sham/

Michael Fitzgerald said...

Parsing words that way, assuming intent of others based on your own myopic biases, is exactly the kind of bullcrap the racists and feminists pull to keep the perpetual outrage honed- and it is bullshit. Speech's intent and meaning is not subject to the whims and attitudes of the listener.

Ann Althouse said...

"Rabbit hole is Lewis Caroll."

Does that make it not a vagina (metaphorically)?

rhhardin said...

I'm an analyst of words.

They're using the words to influence women, not men.

The men don't care about any of it.

Except you could make a joke, deflowering Flowers, for the spin effort. Guys would like that.

mockturtle said...

The fact that Cutter and Podesta were blind to the significance of their words is part of what I am talking about in the post and is an important aspect of the subordination of women.

With all due respect, Ann, horseshit! You're back on that 'owning the impact of remarks' track.

rhhardin said...

I never took the rabbit hole as sexual.

I took sneezing as sneezing too, and the effort to say it meant farting as a mere attempt to make the story interesting.

Cavell did remark that putting the place of love in the place of excrement was a typically human fate; but imaginining a better placement tended to wind up being ridiculous.

buwaya puti said...

Its not a matter of being "blinded" of course - they are paid to say these things, these aren't anyones personal opinions among the messaging professionals involved.

Bob Boyd said...

They aren't blind to it. They just don't care. And why should they? They won't be held to the standard they, as Democrats, claim to represent. Bill wasn't, Hillary isn't and neither are their surrogates.

rcocean said...

"Now Steve Schmidt: he's just a fucking asshole. He wasted all of Jeb's $ going after Trump and Jeb looked like an idiot in this campaign no matter how "smart" and "issue savvy" he was. And the MSM brings Schmidt on to be a fountain of knowledge. ONLY the Dems love this guy."

Exactly. He's a DC insider, who no matter how often he loses or is wrong, always seem to be on TV and get hired by losing campaigns. His sole success was helping Arnold win Re-election in 2006, but Arnold's "campaign" had very little to do with it.

David Begley said...

Yeah, Steven Schmidt should be run out of town. Complete loser. Has he ever won a campaign?

rhhardin said...

Putting all of Clinton's lovers in the front row is a great idea. Can Trump pull that off?

What a great show that would be.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

"He wasted all of Jeb's $"

Mike Murphy was in that, I didn't know Schmidt was along for the ride.

rhhardin said...

I have found that feminists are very grim about being competent, where guys just go along with the flow.

I think this means the feminists are out of place, meaning out of anything interesting to them.

Equality being one idea that seizes grim feminists. They subordinate themselves and then notice subordination everywhere.

Ken B said...

It's certainly treating Flowers disrespectfully and contemptuously. It's not just because she's female; the Clinton machine has consistently over two decades portrayed her as "white trash": the deplorable class. To these people -- the Clintonistas I mean -- "white trash" is fair game.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Considering all these WJC personal issues and looking at the character of the alternative in 1992, I can't grasp how HW came to support HRC this time around.

If HW isn't holding WJC's lameness against HRC when voting in 2016, what makes the DJT folks think that the general public will do so?

Harold said...

So, the media spin I can see on Mark Cuban v. Trump is this.

Mark Cuban is a brilliant businessman, and well qualified to opine on and pick his favored candidate, Monica Lewinsky's ex-boyfriend's wife, Communist Party candidate for president and corrupt alcoholic enabler of her sexual predator husband. And everyone else who supports her is also brilliant and smart and the right type of person worthy of having an opinion.

Donald Trump is an idiot businessman who has somehow stumbled his way to success and to a nomination for president, and has no business impeding the coronation of Monica Lewinsky's ex-boyfriend's wife, Communist Party candidate for president and corrupt alcoholic enabler of her sexual predator husband. And anyone who supports him is either deplorable, trailer trash, racist, stupid, or some other derogatory term.

Is that about right?

Meade said...

"What is it with you and language?"

It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is.

Ken B said...

Much as I agree with the tenor of this post I have to say that rabbit hole is not meant as a metaphor for vagina. It really does come from Alice in Wonderland and is a common enough phrase. He did not call her a hole, he called the allegations, which he referenced using her name, a rabbit hole.

Yancey Ward said...

Trump's real mistake was choosing Flowers as the invited guest to sit next to Cuban. I might have gone for Juanita Broaddrick instead, but then I might get into trouble with Ms. Althouse for using "gone for". The mother of the dead Seal from Benghazi might have been even better.

In any case, I think Trump shouldn't invite anyone to sit next to Mr. Cuban, and if I were Trump tomorrow night, I would make a point of walking right to Cuban and shaking his hand.

rhhardin said...

Cuban might mean penis to Flowers's rabbit hole.

You can go there but you have to add a lot of your own context to push it through.

Empson's _The Structure of Complex Words_ would say that it's not in the original if you have to do that. It's when the author does it that it's a fair analysis.

Gusty Winds said...

Hillary and her supportive ilk think we are all in the sewer. Trump speaks the truth when he says the political press are horrible people.

David Begley said...

Meade:

Give your wife a hug and a kiss.

rhhardin said...

As ye sewer so shall ye rape.

Fabi said...

Sometimes a rabbit hole is just a rabbit hole.

Hagar said...

Gennifer Flowers do not need anyone to defend her; she is quite capable of doing the honors herself. I have liked her from when I first heard of her. She is bright and has got spunk.

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

Like Althouse, I too, have a feminist problem with all this. And I have a confession to make.

There's an expression I've never quite gotten: "I'm going to ruin you for all other men." Does that mean that the sex that's about to happen will be so wonderful, loving and fantastic that their relationship will last forever? Or does it mean that the guy is boasting that his gigantic penis will stretch out her vagina so much, permanently, that every guy who bangs her from now on will feel like he's throwing a hot dog down a hallway?

Perhaps there are other possible interpretation I've not considered.

Hey! This is hard stuff!

Utterboondoggle said...

Rabbits are not rodents.

rhhardin said...

I wonder where disrespect as a noun started.

rhhardin said...

Freud tended to list vagina words and penis words as working without context.

An author though likes to add the context to make words work that way that don't on their own.

Galvanic stirrings.

Jon Ericson said...

Ann Althouse said...
"Rabbit hole is Lewis Caroll."

Does that make it not a vagina (metaphorically)


Perfectly tuned attention to detail I expect from this blog's authoress.
Ew.

rhhardin said...

A beaver hole might be sexual. Caroll avoided that animal.

traditionalguy said...

Show a little respect here. Ms. Flowers was not another stray trailer park quickie for Bill's cock of conquest. She was a courtesan lover of the State of Arkansas's Governor for 12 years of long term intimacy. Bill must actually have loved her a little bit.

Cuban's coming is meant to ridicule Trump as being just another wild and crazy TV personality with no qualifications, but Cuban admits he is wild and crazy.

Trump played a possible Flowers invitation to sit next to Cuban as a Trump card. And everybody understood it that way.



Gerard Grosso said...


Oh, Ms Althouse, pls give me a 'f....ing' break! What is this question - misogyny?!?
When did u become so precious? Do you need a Safe Place?

Maguro said...

I'm shocked, shocked to see liberals ignoring their feminist principles in pursuit of political power.

- Capt L. Renault

rhhardin said...

Woman word analyst dealing with context

... I was once involved in a panel discussion at which the idea was voiced and elaborated that riding horses was a good way for girls to prepare for marriage because it gave them practice controlling something powerful and dangerous between their legs. I thought, and at enormous risk of self- exposure said, that controlling something powerful and dangerous between my legs didn't characterize either marriage or horsemanship as I had experienced them. It is true that some activities that fall under the heading ``sex'' can be dangerous, but before AIDS it was the thing the man sometimes had in his hand, and not the thing between his legs, that was worrisome. And there are some differences between husbands and horses that I thought worthy of consideration, including the fact that in the case of husbands direct mutual genital contact is to the point, whereas it interferes with horsemanship. I don't doubt that it is possible, only that it is horsemanship.

``The persons propounding the P&D Between Your Legs theory were both male shrinks, and Lord knows what they made of me, given their experience of horses and other things between their legs.

``I am sorry to speak so crudely. There are many men of subtle and strong hearts and intellects who quite easily distinguish between horses and penises

Vicki Hearne, _Bandit_, p.205

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Is there some reason Althouse doesn't have an Amazon link to Flowers' literary offerings?

Amexpat said...

Why even have audiences at the debate? It's not like they are going to be a nuetral cross section of the population that will react in a non partisan way. The focus should be on the candidates' views of important policy issues. It shouldn't be some sort of mass entertainment gladiatorial event.

The format should be simple. Each candidate has allotted time to respond to questions and comments made by the other candidate. The moderator's sole roll should be to make sure that the candidates stick to the agreed upon rules. Have a clock, that all can see, that counts down the candidates allotted time.

Mary Beth said...

Darrell said...

I suggested that Trump put a life-size Hillary Bobblehead in that first row seat, but he thought that was disrespectful.

9/25/16, 5:45 PM


Trump sells a Hillary bobblehead. Not life-size but has a stunning outfit.

mockturtle said...

Trump sells a Hillary bobblehead. Not life-size but has a stunning outfit.

I like it but it flatters her too much.

John Kindley said...

I think Trump's response was both brilliant and diabolical. I think the "sewer" remark was warranted, was not directed at Flowers personally, and therefore was not misogynistic. Why put Flowers there? To throw Hillary off, supposedly. How is Flowers supposed to do that? By being the woman Hillary's husband cheated on her with. To throw something like that in somebody's face - to mock them for being a cuckold - is ordinarily regarded as a very low blow. I say this, despite utterly despising Billary. Oddly enough, I think the "sewer" remark would be far less justified if Juanita Broaddrick had been invited instead.

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

Rhythm and Balls,

There's a definite awareness of many poor, stupid Republicans who are more than happy to vote against their economic interests, year-in, year-out.

As there are many rich, stupid Democrats who are more than happy to vote against their economic interests, year-in, year-out. Both groups are voting their social interests. Why is one obviously wrong, and the other obviously right? The only obvious difference I can see is that the rich Democrats are admittedly sacrificing some of their own earnings, while the poor Republicans are merely not pilfering other people's earnings. But both are voting along social lines, not economic ones.

Comanche Voter said...

Gennifer Flowers is a rabbit hole? Let thousands of folks tell you what an A hole Mark Cuban is.

Amexpat said...

Trump could have said "seat" instead of "put", but his intent is clear.

Saying "seat" instead of "put" doesn't change a thing. Both indicate that Trump has the power to use Flowers as he sees fit. He's the active party, she the passive. As Althouse noted in her footnote, that contrasts with Cuban doing what he "wants".

rhhardin said...

The original script for The Proposal had Sandra Bullock falling into a hole for the rescue scene, but she was falling into a hole in another film already and they were worried about inter-film reconances, so they had her fall into the sea instead.

The mode of inter-film resonance is a little analysis-resistant. Some third walls are broken.

chickelit said...

Althouse asked: "Does that make it [a rabbit hole] not a vagina (metaphorically)?"

Call that girl Alice when she was just small.

Hunter said...

@ Ann Althouse
Being on the side of the female candidate does not absolve you of misogyny. It blinds you to it.

Replace those words with "black" and "racism" and we have the last 8 years.

Or so it would seem. But in fact this has nothing to do with supporting the woman or the black guy. They support the woman because they're anti-sexist and the black guy because they're anti-racist. Obviously. How could they not?

It's just that part of being REALLY anti-sexist and anti-racist involves a little bit of dirty work when it comes to, say, pro-choice women or black conservatives.

Fabi said...

Only if you believe that Flowers has no agency in this matter, Amexpat.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

"Trump sells a Hillary bobblehead. Not life-size but has a stunning outfit.

I like it but it flatters her too much."

I just ordered one. They sent email saying it'd ship in 1-2 weeks because of high demand.

Gk1 said...

Just like the Hillary crowd, bringing piss to a shit fight. Trump humiliates them with ease. Can anyone imagine any of the republican candidates from this season fighting back instantaneously, hard and without apologies?

Bill Crawford said...

Professor, I agree with you 100%

exiledonmainstreet said...

" Both indicate that Trump has the power to use Flowers as he sees fit. He's the active party, she the passive."

No, if she had said, "Please, leave me out of this. I don't want to go," Trump would have no power whatsoever to put her anywhere. What do you think he would do, kidnap her and have someone carry her in and tie her to the seat?

Mary Beth said...

Gennifer Flowers wasn't officially invited and isn't going. It would be interesting if Monica Lewinsky were invited but I doubt she'd go because she's still trying to live down the last time she was in a room with a Clinton and a Cuban.

tim in vermont said...

Trump's crime is to point out the sewage that the Clintons drag with them everywhere they go and "polite company" is supposed to pretend it's not there.

tim in vermont said...

Meanwhile though, they get to not talk about the fact that the FBI has said that Obama used Hillary's private email server, the one he denied he knew about.

TA said...

Bil and Jennifer fucked. Bill was married and Jennifer wasn't.
But with Democrats, Bill is still a great guy, and Jennifer is a slut.
Blah blah blah. What complete horseshit

Mary Beth said...

You can't be serious. What is it with you and language?

Binders full of women.

geoffb said...

Flowers Trumps Cuban.

Parse and punctuate as you wish.

Sebastian said...

"Now, I have a feminist problem with Trump's remark.' That's because you are one of those people who a very sensitive to what they see and hear. The rest of us know perfectly well what he meant and also know that, under the circumstances, invoking feminism against Trump is entirely beside the point.

Supporting a female candidate doesn't blind progs to misogyny. It just means they have to use it more selectively. Consistency is for foolish cons. Prog ethics are entirely situational. As the Clintons themselves showed long ago in their vilification of the actual women actually mistreated by Bill. Any "feminist" supporting her at this point only make a mockery of the notion of feminism, as if any were needed.

Hagar said...

Is that the same Steve Schmidt of the Schmidt couple that FUBARed the McCain campaign back in '08?

And Gennifer Flowers has never been shy about going public with her opinion of the Clinton's after Billy Jeff dumped on her in 1992 (and I think in Arkansas before that). She is no shrinking Flowers.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Anyone who has ever had to create a seating chart for an event has dealt with putting people in seats. That is the correct terminology for that activity.

Professor, you are taking Trump literally, but not seriously.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Bil and Jennifer fucked. Bill was married and Jennifer wasn't.
But with Democrats, Bill is still a great guy, and Jennifer is a slut.
Blah blah blah. What complete horseshit

9/25/16, 7:43 PM

Yes, isn't that "slut shaming?"

exiledonmainstreet said...

Good one, Mary Beth!

YoungHegelian said...

@Hagar,

Is that the same Steve Schmidt of the Schmidt couple that FUBARed the McCain campaign back in '08?

Yes, the very same. The very one who stabbed his employer in the back by publicly bitching about Palin.

chickelit said...

Althouse is just feeding our heads.

I kind of hope there are cameras trained on both Cuban and Flowers. Their facial responses could help or hinder their respective candidates.

vicari valdez said...

Fabi said...
Trump could have said "seat" instead of "put", but his intent is clear.

9/25/16, 5:38 PM


yes. put.

exiledonmainstreet said...

And Mary Beth at 7:41 PM wins the thread!

Ken B said...

Am I the only one who, when reading the "put" complaint, thought of the seriously/literally thread of a day ago?

Aside from anything else, "put" is often used to indicate "imagine something". If I say I could put your good posts in one list and your bad posts in another do you think I really must physically move posts around?

walter said...

heyboom said...
I think what Trump said is just a figure of speech, Ann.
--
To be fair, she did admit to having a feminist problem with it.
But it's the same sort of problem/projection/distorted lens issue of those who see Racists round every corner.
But then, Trump crowed about how Hillary "had to be there!" at his latest wedding...not realizing it was a reflection on himself as well.

Bob Boyd said...

The entire Clinton phenomenon is rabbit hole
and Hillary is like...rabbit hole dentata

Jon Ericson said...

walter,
You're gonna get into sooo much trouble.

cubanbob said...

Trump could invite Ken Starr instead. Trump could mention to Starr I'm giving you a chance to redeem yourself for blowing it the last time. Starr's presence ought to make Hillary soil her depends since would be signalling that if he were to win she would be look at a criminal investigation.

n.n said...

Trump is giving a victim of female and male chauvinists the stage and she agreed. As did the victims of anti-native factions that launched his campaign. As have the individuals discriminated by the class diversity bigots. Next, several million [wholly innocent] victims... I mean, colorful clumps of cells, aborted and cannibalized under the "final solution" directed by the progressive liberal Pro-Choice Church.

southcentralpa said...

Honestly, Professor, you're starting to get into the territory of the folks who lambasted Romney because he referred to "binders of women", instead of saying "binders of women's resumes", which was clearly inferable from the context.

Fabi said...

Pole vault over all the mouse turds you'd like, vicari valdez. Do you think Hillary "put" Cuban where she wanted? Yeah, me too.

M Jordan said...

Trump won this round bigly. Today Chris Wallace tried to get a moralistic reaction from his fellow high priests and it fell flat. Hillary tried to bait Trump, Trump stole the bait and caught her. The name Gennifer Flowers reappeared in the public sphere and that is not a positive for Hillary no matter what they say. But Cuban will be nothing more than a shadow in the seat, triggering no one.

But the real story going on is this: Trump is consolidating the base and taking the lead in state after state. Ohio now appears to be his. Iowa too. Colorado is trending. NC is as well and FL too. A tsunami wave is developing before our eyes and Mark Cuban and everything else is going to get washed way in it.

Amexpat said...

What do you think he would do, kidnap her and have someone carry her in and tie her to the seat?

No, that's not how Trump thinks he could control Flowers. He can give her another 15 minutes of fame which she in turn could monetize.

tim in vermont said...

Trump chose Flowers because she is hot, or at least was hot, I haven't seen a recent picture. If it was just Flowers, I wouldn't give a rat's ass about Bill's sex life. Who would want to go home to Hillary for sexual satisfaction?

Anne said...

Excellent post. I have less trouble with what Trump said in anger than what the Uniparty crew coolly said on Sunday...meanwhile the 20 somethings now know who Flowers is.

A discussion about class in this election would be interesting. The Clintons were deemed trailer trash back in the day....yet are very ready to tar others with that brush. Trump is seen as low class....or worse, as a person ready to help out the lower orders. I remember when the Clintons had that reputation...and were deeply hated for it by the D.C. villagers...like Trump is today.

chickelit said...

Althouse, since you don't seem to be doing a cafe post tonight, I'm going to put this here: a far more serious problem is the ear mic use which the candidates are apparently going to be allowed to use. See the story at Drudge currently. I think this is scandalous and you touched on the issue a while back and mentioned how easy to t might be for a woman to conceal such a device.

SukieTawdry said...

This comes as a surprise? The Clintonistas have always disparaged Bill's women in no uncertain terms from coining the term "bimbo eruptions" to "if you drag a hundred-dollar bill through a trailer park, you never know what you’ll find." I don't know how we're supposed to reconcile these loathsome displays of misogyny with Hillary's celebrated feminism.

rhhardin said...

Rabbit hole in politics refers to the Warren court.

chickelit said...

Couldn't this Mark Cuban creep easily become the next George Soros? I'm glad that Trump put him on everybody's radar.

walter said...

Blogger tim in vermont said...
Trump chose Flowers because she is hot, or at least was hot
--
Of the list of Bill's women, she had perhaps the least abusive "relationship".
Is there something about her in Trumpbrain that is a parallel to Cuban?

Sammy Finkelman said...

Then they later on, said:

http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meet-press-september-25-2016-n654021

CHUCK TODD:

Back now with our Endgame segment. We don't live in a bubble here on TV. We're not the only show on television on a Sunday morning

GWEN IFILL:

What?

CHUCK TODD:

I was shocked myself. But apparently on another program both Kellyanne Conway and Mike Pence have said Gennifer Flowers in not coming to the debate. Mike Murphy, this seems to be a classic protect Trump from Trump moment.

MIKE MURPHY:

Yeah, the problem is that Trump breaks out of the cage. So, three hours from now, what will he tweet? We will see what happens. There is not a traditional Trump campaign. There are people floating around Donald Trump. I think the bottom line of the debate will be, he will start out sedated, maybe for real, but the real Trump, just like the tweet with Flowers will break out.

boycat said...

How comptent do we suppose Hillary is to listen to and otherwise surreptitiously operate a concealed listening device? Watch her eyeballs to see if they roll around in opposite directions.

Sammy Finkelman said...

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/25/us/politics/gennifer-flowers-debate-trump-clinton.html

That's one of the thing wrong with Trump - his ideas of counter-punching/ It doesn't matter what the basis fof the charges is. This was probably not anywhere near as thought through as the idea of putting someone theer to disturb the candidate.

walter said...

Heh..if she is vulnerable to stimulus overload, that might cause a short-circuit or two.

Quaestor said...

I don't know how we're supposed to reconcile these loathsome displays of misogyny with Hillary's celebrated feminism.

Feminists have allowed the Clintons to square that circle since their first appearance on the national stage. Althouse is a feminist, and yet I would gladly wager against her on a poll of feminists on the question of Cutter and Schmidt's objectification of WJC's paramours and sexual victims. This is not to say Althouse is mistaken here. The problem is feminism itself, which has proven to be remarkably malleable from a moral perspective. Feminism is the proverbial house built on sand.

traditionalguy said...

The great Arnold Palmer has died.

The first time I saw Arnie play up close was at a Masters tune up round put on at East Lake in Atlanta. That was fun. I was 11 years old, and Palmer was the new hot shot playing against all of the older famous men at Bobby Jones' true home club. They played The Fed Ex Cup there this weekend; and a true Scots-Irishman named Rory McElroy won it on the fourth playoff hole.

Palmer was a Scots-Irish guy from up in Pennsylvania (as Bobby Jones was, but from Georgia.) Palmer was very friendly, but competitive as hell even in an exhibition round.

I was struck most by his being a strong athlete with massive forearms in 1956, and not anything like the older guy we see Start the Masters with Jack Nicholas and Gary Player each April.

mockturtle said...

Palmer was my father's golf idol. He met him several times on the PGA tour and found him very personable. My father was an excellent golfer, too, but Palmer was a legend. RIP, Arnie!

Fabi said...

Amexpat can read Trump's mind and Flowers' motivations. Do you have a newsletter I could subscribe to?

walter said...

Great Scot!

Rhythm and Balls said...

The fact that Cutter and Podesta were blind to the significance of their words is part of what I am talking about in the post and is an important aspect of the subordination of women...

I'm an analyst of words.


No, you're a prisoner of words. Just like someone could do to you in return when it comes to your wholly objective error of misapplying the word, "rodent." Obsessing over subjective details pertaining to this trivial word choice or that. Language cannot simply be a function of what the listener prefers to hear. That is the opposite of language. It is the mark of someone who prefers not to understand.

Someone with an agenda, and doesn't mind sowing confusion to achieve it.

And subordination is an interesting word. I don't notice men imprisoning themselves with trivial slights perceived by something as ridiculous as word choice. Maybe it's because they think actions speak louder than words.

Of course, they intended to say the words they in fact used.

Surrogates usually do, but where does this end? Why stop at word choice? Perhaps now pronunciations should be scrutinized for their "subordination" potential. To-MAY-toe is innocent, but To-MAH-toe is elitist, and a clear indication of the speaker's intention to rape the listener. Discuss.

Rhythm and Balls said...

Feminism is the proverbial house built on sand.

Hey, man. Have you scrutinized your privilege for the subordination potential of "proverbial?" As everyone knows, the Book of Proverbs is riddled with the anti-female views of pastoral Hebrew society. And what about "sand?" Aren't you aware of the burdens women are oppressively faced by when it comes to sand and bathing suits? You need to return your penis to the Federal Department of Masculinity and Language PRONTO, Sir! Either that, or be banned from using it for TWO WEEKS. This domination display of yours will not be tolerated!

Meeeea said...

I'm with Ann, those were utterly revolting remarks.

As for Trump's "put" what TF? They made an issue of that while they do the she's a trashy uneducated whore, but since he's a male he gets all the positive sentiments--rich, blah blah blah.

MBR said...

Not just misogyny. Raw class hatred of the master class for the insignificant.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

R&B is killing it today.

Rhythm and Balls said...

I predict Professor Althouse is anticipating a very boring retirement. Who knew? Usually academics use a retreat from the ivory tower to get away from such insane, anti-intellectual, Stalinist garbage as trigger warnings and other strange speech codes. Apparently Althouse embraces these things wholeheartedly, though. Who knew?

And who cares.

Enjoy it, Ann. Make sure not to make any retreats to the vastly superior University of Chicago on your retirement travels, lest your ears be bothered by free minds.

Rhythm and Balls said...

Well PBJ, there's just one thing I hate even worse than speech codes and the academic bureaucrats who push them: The cockamamie pseudo-intellectual theories that agitate for them.

It is truly a sign that there is a glut in our post-secondary "education" bubble. Feelings-based (social) theories in search of an empiric, objectively observed reality to back them up.

Utter fucking rubbish.

David said...

" What does Cuban want to do? By contrast, Flowers can be put where Trump wants."

Maybe he has already talked to her and knows what she wants?

Yeah, I know. Maybe. Doubtful but possible.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

I have a challenge for any Althouse acolyte who's up to it: Find, and link to, an Althouse post that matches the best of R&B in this thread for wit, incisiveness and command of words.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Not to mention being interesting, which is said to be important in Meadehouse.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

I long ago started assuming that Althouse posts dopey things to feed her traffic.

OTOH, I sometimes worry that her lameness is legit.

Rhythm and Balls said...

Bil and Jennifer fucked. Bill was married and Jennifer wasn't.
But with Democrats, Bill is still a great guy, and Jennifer is a slut.
Blah blah blah. What complete horseshit

9/25/16, 7:43 PM

Yes, isn't that "slut shaming?"

9/25/16, 8:07 PM


There is no shame in being a "slut," because "slut" has no meaning other than whatever the feral pack of Heathers associated with said "slut" wants it to mean. The shame is in seeking to cash in on it, or to purchase any kind of political gain with it.

Jon Ericson said...

losers.

mockturtle said...

And subordination is an interesting word. I don't notice men imprisoning themselves with trivial slights perceived by something as ridiculous as word choice. Maybe it's because they think actions speak louder than words.

Nicely stated, R&B.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

"losers."

Well we've got one strike out.

Anyone else?

Jon Ericson said...

Did you look that one up?
Somewhat humorous.

Rhythm and Balls said...

Well, PBJ - she sort of walked into this one. Her blog is blessedly free, comparatively speaking, for speech in the comments sections - definitely so by the standards of someone who is basically still a hobbyist blogger, as insults and even strident opposition are generally difficult to host - even for someone who does this sort of this sort of thing professionally. (I'm talking to you, New York Times).

So when she strongly advocates for (and presumes the validity of) the very same language games that have become the stuff of campus speech codes, trigger warnings, and other anti-intellectual nonsense currently discrediting academia and slowly inviting their own demise, it's a set-up for conflict. It disagrees with the very spirit of an approach to public discourse that makes free speech worthwhile in the first place. Why value free speech if you presume that language can't be subjective? Do we now live trapped inside each other's minds, presuming to know what they experience? Who would want that? Why even fucking converse in the first place if you already know what's in someone's mind?

Insane. And anti-social.

walter said...

So R&B, can you imagine the dynamic here being better leveraged if Juanita was alluded to instead?
Play the woman card with an Hispanic name. Twofer!

Rhythm and Balls said...

Thanks, mockturtle.

walter said...

(I mean..Flowers is simple adultery..which Trump has engaged in..vs "alleged" sexual assault)

Rhythm and Balls said...

Well, walter. Along with the language games, the minority grievance Olympics are also blessedly nearing their end. Part of that dynamic was seen in the insurgent Sanders campaign, as progressives are tiring of racial sensitivity hierarchies and racial sensitivity champions and coming to understand that economics trumps all. Poor whites and poor people of every other color have more in common than whatever the politicians want to use to divide them - and they are not getting it in part because the politicians are too distracted by money, racial sensitivity, and other forms of inertia. And they are stagnating in these things to the detriment of the people.

Rhythm and Balls said...

Oh, you can add misogyny Olympics to the useless grievance industry, as well.

This is not to say that bigotry is not a problem. Or that misogyny is not a problem.

It's to say that these things have become obsessions. Very unhealthy obsessions that are being used to hold the country back.

Jon Ericson said...

Balls and Turtle sittin' in a tree...

Rhythm and Balls said...

Whatever floats your marble boat, Jon.

Birkel said...

...in which I find myself agreeing almost completely with "Rhythm and Balls"...

But so long as it remains profitable, the grievance industry will produce grievances.

Mary Beth said...

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

I have a challenge for any Althouse acolyte who's up to it: Find, and link to, an Althouse post that matches the best of R&B in this thread for wit, incisiveness and command of words.

9/25/16, 9:53 PM


Matches? No, there's nothing on R&B's level here. Try tumblr.

walter said...

"minority grievance Olympics" Ha! I can imagine a lot of soap boxes at that event.

"Sanders campaign, as progressives are tiring of racial sensitivity hierarchies and racial sensitivity champions and coming to understand that economics trumps all."
Oh yes..he really advanced understanding of economics. He just transposed the grievance olympics a bit...maybe half an octave.

walter said...

Btw, "progressives are tiring of racial sensitivity hierarchies and racial sensitivity champions"
Heh..do tell.

walter said...

(I'll agree the Rachel Dolezal angle has thankfully faded..but beyond that idiocy, the rest thrives among "progressive s")

Jon Ericson said...

Such a waste of time, this late.
Enjoy a glimpse at the bottom of the food chain.

Jon Ericson said...

of the?

Jon Ericson said...

of the bottom, that is.
(cue Monty Python music)

John said...

Chickelit,

Using earmikes to get info and simultaneously speak smoothly it is a difficult skill to master.

Who do you think will do better with it?

Trump with his 15 years of TV experience using them (the Apprentice)?

Or Crooked Hilary who has relatively little experience using them. That is true even if she does not have brain issues which might make processing audio into speech even harder.

I would say that if used, the advantage goes to Trump. Crooked Hilary should be raising Hell to keep them out of the debate.

John Henry

walter said...

Right Jon,
Though her handlers will most certainly have been coaching her and tempering their chatter so as not to "trigger" undesired short-circuits.
Hey folks: Rachel's new son! (fathera secret)

Jon Ericson said...

Dig it.

Gretchen said...

I think the parsing of words is silly.

Flowers is a good foil for Cuban, Trump claims he will strengthen the economy, Cuban is a billionaire who backs Hillary. Hillary claims to be a champion for women, Flowers is a woman who was abused and dismissed by Hillary for her sexual affair with Bill.

By this logic, Trump is a misogynist for reminding the world Hillary enabled a sex offender and called Bill's victim's bimbos and trailer trash, and Hillary is the democrat ideal of fiscal responsibility because a .00000001%er says so. When Cuban agrees to make his employees incomes equal democrats should listen.

Terry said...

The only reason why Gennifer Flowers works as a goad to Hillary is because Bill lied about their sexual relationship for years, and only revealed the truth in the late 90s when he was giving a sworn statement to Paula Jones' lawyers during her sexual harrassment suit against Bill Clinton.

Sources: Clinton Admits Sexual Affair With Flowers

By John King/CNN

WASHINGTON (AllPolitics, Jan. 22) -- President Bill Clinton in sworn testimony has acknowledged he had a sexual relationship with Gennifer Flowers during his tenure as Arkansas governor, something he flatly denied in the 1992 presidential campaign, sources have told CNN.

Sources familiar with Clinton's deposition in the Paula Jones sexual harassment case say Clinton denied Flowers' claim of a long-running, 12-year affair. But the sources say he acknowledged they did have a sexual relationship.

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/01/22/flowers.king/

So by talking about 'sewers', Clinton's defenders are doing what they did successfully in the 1990s -- try to make Clinton's affairs about sex instead of his lying.
Even in 1998, Clinton still lied. He said he had a single sexual encounter with Flowers in 1977. This was, apparently, as much as he thought that Flowers (or Paula Jones' lawyers) could prove.
I think that even Bill and Hill's psychopathic supporters know that A) Bill would never have admitted so much as a single sexual encounter with Flowers if he thought he could have denied it and avoided a perjury charge, and B) if he had a hundred or a thousand sexual encounters with Flowers, if he could avoid a perjury charge by admitting to just one sexual encounter with Flowers, that is what he would do.
What a nasty bag of lies the Hillary voters intend to put in the White House in January.
BTW, you youngsters, to get a hint of just how in the bag the media was for Bill Clinton, here is a report on Clinton's confession that he had and affair with Gennifer Flowers. It is by Larry Sabato, who not only wrote for the WaPo, but is actually employed as a professor of political science, and is, of course, a partisan Democrat.
I wonder if it says "stooge" or "sucker" on Sabado's office door at the University of Virginia.

Bill Clinton and Gennifer Flowers – 1992
Feeding Frenzy On the verge of an expected victory in New Hampshire, Bill Clinton's presidential campaign faced the biggest frenzy of 1992 when allegations arose of an extramarital affair with Arkansas state employee and cabaret singer Gennifer Flowers.

Revealing claims that no respectable news outlet had been able to substantiate, the Star, a trashy supermarket tabloid, "broke" the Flowers story on Jan. 23, 1992. Armed with ambiguously damning taped phone conversations and well compensated by the Star for her revelations, Flowers claimed a 12-year affair with Clinton.

During the next week, almost every legitimate news source would pick up the story in some form or another and the allegations would nearly torpedo the Clinton campaign. To counter the allegations, Clinton appeared on CBS's "60 Minutes" with his wife immediately following the Super Bowl on Sunday, Jan. 26. With 50 million Americans tuned in, the Clintons tried to shake off the charges. In the end, with the help of a relatively weak Democratic candidate pool and the public's focus on economic issues, Clinton was able to contain the damage caused by the Flowers frenzy and his presidential ship stayed afloat.

Six years later, in his deposition to lawyers representing former Arkansas state employee Paula Jones in her sexual harassment lawsuit against him, Clinton reportedly acknowledged for the first time in any known forum that he did have sexual relations with Flowers, saying it occurred just one time in 1977.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/frenzy/clinton.htm

Ctmom4 said...

Stephanie Cutter was the Obama campaign operative responsible for the commercial in which a man accused Mitt Romney of causing his wife to die of cancer. She denied it, but a phone call surfaced where she spoke with the man and thanked him for helping them. When some talking head called her on it, she smirked and laughed . She is pond scum. As is Podesta.

openidname said...

Rabbits aren't rodents. They're lagomorphs.

openidname said...

I suppose you think a black hole is also a vagina reference. In fact, a reference to a black vagina.

walter said...

Assuming it was consenting and knowingly..what sort of character reference is Flowers?
"Yeah, I was shtupping him..but she just wasn't nice"
Is Mark Cuban fuckin' round in these circles? Dunno..

Jon Ericson said...

Don't ask the elite schtupperettes, they are sworn to silence.

Rhythm and Balls said...

I'm pretty sure original credit for coining "grievance olympics" (or something along those lines) goes to either Dave Rubin or Gad Saad. A hierarchy must be maintained.

mockturtle said...

I suppose you think a black hole is also a vagina reference. In fact, a reference to a black vagina.

Quelle horreur! Racism AND misogyny!

Bad Lieutenant said...

Ann, I'm afraid this is indeed a case of hamster brain. "Put" is bad? John Fogerty doesn't mind it:

Centerfield https://g.co/kgs/x2LknY

Send is no better?

http://biblehub.com/jps/isaiah/6.htm
Isaiah 6 JPS Tanakh 1917 - Bible Hub
Bible Hub › jps › isaiah › 6.htm
8And I heard the voice of the Lord, saying: Whom shall I send,. And who will go for us? Then I said: 'Here am I; send me.'

You must be an extremely tedious and unpleasant person to be around if everybody has to use 50 words niggling when one will do when talking to you. Why don't you be a little more broad minded?

The abuses of Gennifer Flowers by the Democratic apparatchiks, on the other hand, are real, and they're spectacular.

Rhythm and Balls said...

"Rabbits aren't rodents..."

Mmm. But they used to be.


Right. But men (and other women) are "subordinating" women through the subjective feelings of certain female listeners.

Our transition to a feelings-based society is complete. Goodbye, fact-based society. It was nice knowing you.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

"I suppose you think a black hole is also a vagina reference. In fact, a reference to a black vagina."

I'm sure Althouse has this angle covered. She can even solve the black hole information paradox: the answer is DJT a victim of lib lame stream media. Idiots like Hawking get all the PR, even though a WI lawprof has all the answers.

walter said...

Oy..kinda sullies the bible, invoking it anywhere near this mess.
Another "feminist problem" with this is the idea of Flowers as a true victim...like she was a child.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

"Another "feminist problem" with this is the idea of Flowers as a true victim...like she was a child."

Hopefully she'll sell some more books.

Anywho, it's cool to claim that HRC's folks are dragging her through the mud, because it's not like DJT is the one who brought her up to use her as a political prop.

Carry on.

Jon Ericson said...

Such a bunch of vulgarians!

walter said...

Flowers apparently contends she commenced schtupping Bill around the time Chelsea was born until she was about 12.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

"Flowers apparently contends she commenced schtupping Bill around the time Chelsea was born until she was about 12."

Sheesh.

Why does Walter want to ruin the ending? Now if her book sales don't pickup we all know who is to blame.

Bad Lieutenant said...

The point is that there are 10, 20 50 others Trump could have named. If you don't like Gennifer Flowers there is Juanita Broaddrick or Dolly Kyle Browning or Kathleen Willey or Paula Jones or Monica Lewinsky or Elizabeth Ward Gracen or or or or or. Go on, Democratic partisans, drag this out. Because this is so good for you. You don't like being in the gutter or the sewer, tell your candidates to stop living there.

And Ann, what more empowering to the victims of a sexual oppressor like Bill Clinton or his asexual abettor wife Hillary Clinton than to "put" them together in the same room on camera live?

Put you in the driver's seat? Put can be plenty empowering. There is plenty of putting you'd like to get. Would you like to get put on the Supreme Court? Would you like to get put on a waitlist for a new heart if you needed one?

I'd give a shiny penny to know if you mean it or if you're just making this s*** up.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Even w/ Walter spoiling the ending, I would like to see Althouse post a link to the Flowers' literary compendium.

This is a win-win:

1) Althosue can help Flowers in her own words stand against whatever it is that Althouse imagines the HRC folks are saying about her as a the HRC folks respond to DJT inviting her to come to the debate.

2) Madhouse, er, I mean Meadhouse can pick up some dough from the Amazon kickback.

walter said...

It's just a damn fine (s)election for the "character matters" voter...

Jon Ericson said...

Try harder. lame ass.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Walt, BadL and like minded folks,

If 41 is supporting HRC, how can y'all fool yourselves into thinking this stuff is going to keep folks from voting for HRC?

In 92, I could not believe that sleazy Bubba beat 41. The Bubba failures didn't have juice against Bubba. Now, 41, well aware of Bubba's gals problems, is looking at the field, and he says HRC is the way to go. Either you see that this means something, or, I suppose, you can say the dude is old and his mind is lost.

Jon Ericson said...

Omerta.

walter said...

Get real, Jelly. 41 watched his son go down under a Trump IED.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 241   Newer› Newest»