Althouse: Harry Reid called New York senator Kirsten Gillibrand "the hottest member."

September 21, 2010

Harry Reid called New York senator Kirsten Gillibrand "the hottest member."

Blatant sexism from the Democrat's leader in the U.S. Senate.

Gillibrand, who was sitting right there, turned bright red.

57 comments:

Sprezzatura said...: They say she's actually number three. Which seems like some serious grade inflation.; 9/21/10, 7:49 PM
Anonymous said...: The National Organization of Women issues a press release condemning blatant Senate sexism exhibited by Harry Reid in ... 3, 2, 1....

Um.

Wait.

Hello?

Hello?

Anybody there?

Is anybody out there?; 9/21/10, 7:49 PM
NotWhoIUsedtoBe said...: It must be tough to be old and not get how much has changed.

The argument that we need younger people in leadership positions has a lot of merit.; 9/21/10, 7:54 PM
Anonymous said...: "They say she's actually number three."

That's number 3 on Capitol Hill.

She's the top piece of ass in the Senate - according to Harry Reid - and obviously he's not counting John Dingell.; 9/21/10, 7:55 PM
Clyde said...: "What's wrong with being sexy?"

-- Nigel Tufnel; 9/21/10, 7:56 PM
traditionalguy said...: So a Searchlight Mormon lusts after all the women he can see. So what. It worked out well for Brigham Young in the wilderness of Utah. But remember, Kirsten that if you lay down with a dog, you will get up with his fleas.; 9/21/10, 7:57 PM
Automatic_Wing said...: "Kirsten, why don't you go bring us some coffee, honey".; 9/21/10, 7:59 PM
Martin L. Shoemaker said...: I get tired of the "In any public company, this would get him fired" argument. Not because it's not true (it is), but because it seems pointlessly repetitive. Congress doesn't follow rules, Congress just makes rules. This is the way our system works today; and barring an historic turnover and the tea party candidates proving more principled than the 1994 Republicans, it's not gonna change any time soon.

But still, in any public company...; 9/21/10, 8:00 PM
rhhardin said...: I don't get the offense.

At least she's good looking, is the idea.

A lot of women at work are like that.; 9/21/10, 8:02 PM
Anonymous said...: ... if you lay down with a dog, you will get up with his fleas.

And if you lay down with Harry Reid, no doubt you'll get bedbugs too.

Democrats ... are infested.

Fuck them at your peril.; 9/21/10, 8:05 PM
GMay said...: I wanna see Ritmo defend this one like he did Robert "Sheets" Byrd a few threads below.

But seriously folks, this is Harry Reid here. He'll issue an apology and he'll get a clean bill of health just like he did after the "negro dialect" remark.

Move along, nothing to see here.; 9/21/10, 8:05 PM
KCFleming said...: As long as you profess to be a Democrat, and vote for legislation that gives money and power to Democrats, you can do anything you damn well please.

Except the 'live boy or dead girl' thing. I believe that still carries some disapproval.; 9/21/10, 8:14 PM
Sprezzatura said...: N.H.H.,

Indeed. So, just looking at the Senate, it could be argued that Gillibrand is the hottest--there isn't a lot of competition.

But, I do think that Landrieu could give her a run. Maybe McCaskill, she seems to have a funness about her (and, I repeat; there isn't a lot of competition in the hot-stakes). Now if you go older, maybe Hutchinson. [Sticking w/ the Golden Girls, if Dole was still around, I'd say she had some appeal, maybe it was her voice and southern charm.]

All things considered, Reid may be right.

Of course if that Delaware witch (especially if she can get back to her Maher-days-self) wins, Gillibrand et. al. will be battling it out for second place.; 9/21/10, 8:23 PM
Anonymous said...: Harry can pretty much forget about getting his shirt ironed then.; 9/21/10, 8:24 PM
lucid said...: I don't understand why it is sexist to call someone "hot" when they clearly try to appear hot in a very public way.

Does she wear form-fitting clothes? Does she put on makeup and work on her hair? Does she wear underclothes that form her breasts and that appear to be seamless over her hips and buttocks underneath thin cloth skirts and pants?

So is one NOT supposed to notice and respond to this?

The same goes for women who display extensive decolletage in work and school settings.

One is not supposed to be thinking of them as "hot?"

Who is kidding whom?

If Reid is sexist, he is so only to the extent that Gillibrand intended him to be.

And I am not a fan of either of them.; 9/21/10, 8:27 PM
Bob_R said...: If Harry Reid was caught having a three-way with a live boy and a dead girl the WaPo would put the story on A5 and would not mention he was a D until the fourth paragraph.; 9/21/10, 8:34 PM
bagoh20 said...: Harry, this war is lost.; 9/21/10, 8:40 PM
Anonymous said...: I'm still waiting for Ann to:

Acknowledge the Leftist, Marxist radical base of feminism that inspired the actual movement, and likely her own thinking and perhaps even created opportunities for her to enter the legal profession

...yet also point out that it has crept into public life, steered the debate and jarred the country left without accounting for all of its logical flaws and radicalism...especially its effects upon our instututions and public discourse and what are likely Ann's many conservative impulses (conservare).

I submit that it's also backed us into potentially more strife, an unthinking leftism (there is a thinking Left) and, placed a great burden upon our politics from which we have yet to recover (I'm hoping the recovery won't involve greater conflict,,,

She can do it, though maybe she saves it for the classroom.; 9/21/10, 8:42 PM
jungatheart said...: "A Reid spokesman confirmed it happened, but also noted that the Democratic Majority Leader also praised Gillibrand for her work."; 9/21/10, 8:43 PM
Sprezzatura said...: lucid,

I'm guessing that you've never been a manager in corporate America.

It would be extremely unwise to start declaring which female staff members were the hottest.

Beyond the fact that it's obnoxious/demeaning because it is calling attention to BS that has nothing to do w/ work performance, it's also bad for business for another reason. Women staff are capable creating all sorts of drama amongst themselves w/o the encouragement of men, so adding fuel to the fire is stupid.; 9/21/10, 8:51 PM
eluc455 said...: just unbelievable. I can't imagine a man in corporate America would not get dressed down for publicly introduce a colleague in that manner and not going to sensitivity training. But I guess when you are a democrat those sins are more easily forgiven.

I also want to know who "we" is? which senators are privately discussing her "hotness."

Reid seems more like one of those Pennsylvanians clinging to their guns and religion and showing antipathy for people not like him.

Time for change.; 9/21/10, 8:53 PM
damikesc said...: The same group that sided with Clinton over women who claimed he raped them; who mentioned that he harassed them while they were mourning over the death of their husband; who had sex with a man when they were almost the same age as his daughter?

I'm glad Clinton was in office solely to show what a fraud the feminist movement was. They will do nothing here...as per usual.

...and will wonder why so few people take any of them seriously. I look forward to the bursting of the higher education bubble because you know these gender studies professors won't be having much fun any longer.; 9/21/10, 8:54 PM
Anonymous said...: Kristen is great. Harry is great. They are changing the media lede. Good show. Harry is a great Majority Leader. We want him to be there till after 2016. All we need now is the 2nd term for this administration. That's all. Every thing else is expendable. All mistakes will be forgiven. Just focus on getting through 50-state victory in Nov. 2012.; 9/21/10, 9:16 PM
KCFleming said...: "Harry Reid's hottest member."?

Sounds like a 70s porn movie, costarring Dirk Diggler.; 9/21/10, 9:20 PM
bagoh20 said...: "Everything else is expendable."

The Democratic platform in 4 words?; 9/21/10, 9:22 PM
Unknown said...: Ah, Dingy Harry, the gift that keeps on giving. First he slimes Mrs Gillibrand, then tries to tie the Demos to an immigration amnesty act.

She shoulda smacked him.

(The Blonde would have); 9/21/10, 9:24 PM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: I just came back from our monthly tea party.. most of the grunt work is done by the women btw.

I cant say they are "hot" but I can say they are very animated about the election coming up.. we had a lady from the philippines just stood up and spoke about how fed up she was with the rising taxes for less and less services. I stood up and suggested she ought to run for office.

Everybody was exited about O'Donnell.. We had people standing, the place was packed.; 9/21/10, 9:25 PM
Ralph L said...: Can Harry tell us who is the biggest member?

So she turned red but said nothing. Send her to assertiveness training.

WV - cracomb - ironrails' favorite tool, razors not allowed; 9/21/10, 9:26 PM
bagoh20 said...: Do women really want this to be a firing offense in the workplace? I mean, that just drips of helplessness and inferiority.

She should have gave as good as she got. It would be easy to return the insult if she felt it was one (I don't).

If people, don't like it they just don't vote for him.

In the workplace, women should do the same, and if management thinks that crap is just fine, then work somewhere else. The same as you would if they were all Nazis or occasional bathers or French.

In short, handle your own problems, or you don't deserve equality.; 9/21/10, 9:39 PM
KCFleming said...: "Can Harry tell us who is the biggest member?"

Milton Berle.
Easy.; 9/21/10, 9:40 PM
bagoh20 said...: When Milton was up and coming, Harry often looked up to him.; 9/21/10, 9:43 PM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: I just got this email from my sister.

THE TAX SYSTEM EXPLAINED IN BEER

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100...

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7..
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do..

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20". Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?

They realised that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.

"I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,"but he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"
"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics.

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible; 9/21/10, 9:44 PM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: I just got this email from my sister.

THE TAX SYSTEM EXPLAINED IN BEER

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100...

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7..
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do..

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20". Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?

They realised that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.

"I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,"but he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"
"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics.

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible; 9/21/10, 9:44 PM
Anonymous said...: @Ralph L the biggest member must be Sen Lugar. I saw him in the gym once and he is hung like a horse! I know TMI but I had to share.; 9/21/10, 9:46 PM
LonewackoDotCom said...: Good to see Althouse is paying attention to the important things in politics.

Meanwhile, I've spent the last few days trying to get @SharronAngle to use Reid's amnesty plan against him. If she had pointed out the highly negative downsides of the anti-American DREAM Act, she could have cost him 10 points.

Instead, she wimped out. She never made the most salient argument against that anti-American bill.

And, her supporters in the teaparty movement largely ignored that anti-American bill too.

Some "patriots".; 9/21/10, 10:08 PM
HKatz said...: Or maybe Scott Brown is the hottest:

http://www.hulu.com/watch/124880/saturday-night-live-new-senator

(but even in the skit, Reid is the only one immune to his charms!); 9/21/10, 10:14 PM
Martin L. Shoemaker said...: Do women really want this to be a firing offense in the workplace? I mean, that just drips of helplessness and inferiority.

At this point, it hardly matters what women want, on average. As long as there are a small number of women who want this to be a firing offense, and a small number of attorneys willing to sue on their behalf, it will be a firing offense. Top management and boards of directors aren't willing to tolerate the risk of such suits, even if their female employees and managers and board members make no complaints.; 9/21/10, 10:22 PM
Sprezzatura said...: "Everybody was exited about O'Donnell.. We had people standing "

That's fine as long as the excitement didn't result in standing erect....you know where that could lead....and What Would O'Donnell Say (WWOS)?; 9/21/10, 10:54 PM
Anonymous said...: 1jpb -- Why do you suppose it is that two undeniably sexually appealing women candidates (Palin and O'Donnell) cause the left to shit its collective drawers for weeks? Don't you think there's some fascinating psychology there?; 9/21/10, 10:57 PM
jr565 said...: At least he didn't call her a MILF.; 9/21/10, 11:06 PM
Kurt said...: At least he didn't call her his "pet."

wv: suredsp; 9/21/10, 11:12 PM
A.W. said...: i don't want to know about harry reid's hot member.

Honestly, i think his goal was to say something so stupid that it would distract from his "my pet" comment about coons.; 9/21/10, 11:40 PM
Sprezzatura said...: Seven,

There could be some sort of psychological thing going on for some of the folks who go after these two. Likewise, some of their supporters could be motivated by some sort of psychological thing, e.g. starburst.

But, it's undeniable that these two provide a lot of irresistible punch lines for trollish/snarky critics who don't have any weird psychological motives. And, it's also fun to mock some of the cons who support these two gals when they seem to be smitten, e.g. see starbursts above.

Where's the mystery?

P.S. How would your theory apply to Katherine Harris? Are you saying she was mocked because she's attractive?

What about Michele Bachmann, she isn't very attractive, but she receives plenty of incoming?

And, let's face it Palin and O'Donnell aren't really that attractive, unless you compare them to other politicians.; 9/22/10, 12:44 AM
jamboree said...: I don't know, but it may be his aging, ham-handed way of trying to pump up the Dems "hotness" quotient into an arena competitive with the Republicans with Palin and now O'Donnell in the news.

Creepy anyway, especially as she wasn't forewarned.; 9/22/10, 12:55 AM
Anonymous said...: I didn't say they were attractive. I said they have sex appeal.

I've never heard of Michele Bachmann. Come to think of it, though, poor Katherine Harris is similar to Palin and O'Donnell in that she is a woman with power or potential power who doesn't fit a narrowly defined narrative.

For the record, I have never been a fan of Sarah Palin the politician. I do like Sarah Palin the conservative. I think O'Donnell is a third-rate hack who lucked out riding the Tea Party wave.

All that said, you don't see this kind of ridiculousness concerning Democratic female candidates. They are to be treated as pure equals. Yet Republican women are just pilloried mercilessly, for reasons that I think have to do with both philosophy and sexuality.; 9/22/10, 1:09 AM
Fred4Pres said...: That is disturbing.; 9/22/10, 2:53 AM
Anonymous said...: Ann, you're a very clever woman who feels incredibly entitled. You like having a lot of stuff. And, you clearly feel like you should be the boss.

I get the feeling that you like to have it both ways. I'll bet you've used your physical attractiveness whenever possible to get what you want, and that you bitch about being the victim of sexism whenever possible to get what you want.

You're very clever. Looks to me like it works.

I'll give you credit for playing that game. I don't give it any credence as a political issue, but you live in a world where it is a political issue.

You've got game. You've got the men coming and going.; 9/22/10, 8:12 AM
MadisonMan said...: Missed opportunity.

She should have walked up to the podium and slapped him.; 9/22/10, 8:18 AM
Fen said...: No, they save that for cocktail hour.; 9/22/10, 8:21 AM
Shanna said...: Do women really want this to be a firing offense in the workplace?

Depends on how creepy it is. Seriously, not really. The pendulum swings too far one way, and then too far the other. I don’t think we should go back to mad men days (even if the clothes were fab!) but we’ve swung too far the other way now. What we need is balance. And a sense of humor on one side and manners on the other.

THE TAX SYSTEM EXPLAINED IN BEER

I love that one!; 9/22/10, 8:45 AM
Phil 314 said...: "A Reid spokesman confirmed it happened, but also noted that the Democratic Majority Leader also praised Gillibrand for her work."

why does that statement sound/feel like the old:

Some of my best friends are Black

Maybe the Read spokesman she have said:

"the Majority Leader highly praised her political assets; 9/22/10, 9:16 AM
Clyde said...: I wonder how Ann would describe this story:

KFC pays college women for ad space on buns

Me, I'm double down with that!; 9/22/10, 9:35 AM
Anonymous said...: In response to the KFC story, this:

The nation's largest women's group doesn't like it one bit. "It's so obnoxious to once again be using women's bodies to sell fundamentally unhealthy products," says Terry O'Neill, president of the National Organization for Women. What's more, she says, KFC has forgotten something important: Women make more than half the decisions about what to eat for dinner.

"... fundamentally unhealthy products!"

Gotta love the double edged attack.

Can we use women's bodies to sell things if the products are fundamentally healthy?

Does NOW exist for any other reason than to respond to pre-packaged news stories like this?

Well, I mean besides cheering for abortion on demand?; 9/22/10, 9:44 AM
Anonymous said...: Forgot to ask:

What in the world do the Beatles and Bob Dylan have to do with feminism?

Looks to me like both exemplify the adolescent male dream of being a Jesus Christ like figure with a harem of willing and adoring women.

Is there something I missed?; 9/22/10, 10:18 AM
Greg said...: And she speaks with no sign of a blonde dialect; 9/22/10, 10:25 AM
former law student said...: Before we condemn the Reidster: Does a septuagenarian even know what teh hawtness means? He might still be going by the old definition of "Arousing intense interest, excitement, or controversy"

Ex: Kirsten Gillibrand's the hottest thing since the iPhone.; 9/22/10, 11:38 AM
Christian Schneider said...: What's ironic is that it took a blind governor to give us our first hot senator. Who would have figured that?; 9/22/10, 6:26 PM