I listened to the whole thing — here — after seeing (on Instapundit and elsewhere) that she got "testy."
"Testy" is an interesting word to use to describe a woman. To me, it resonates with Hillary Clinton's discussion, in the "Fresh Air" interview, that as Secretary of State she was regarded, in those countries that don't recognize women's rights, as an "honorary man." ("When you're a secretary of state, as [Condoleezza] Rice and Madeleine Albright and I have discussed — it's perhaps unfortunate, but it's a fact — that you're treated as a kind of an honorary man or a unique woman who comes from another place outside of the religion, outside of the culture.")
But I'm indulging in etymological guesswork and can only insinuate that writers who use the word "testy" to disparage Hillary imagine — as I did — that there is a connection to the word "testicles." In fact, the word — which the (unlinkable) OED defines as meaning "Prone to be irritated by small checks and annoyances; impatient of being thwarted; resentful of contradiction or opposition; irascible, short-tempered, peevish, tetchy, ‘crusty’" — is derived from the Latin word for head, which relates to being "headstrong" or "obstinate" (which is the older and obsolete meaning of "testy").
It's true that the interview gets more intense at one point, on the subject of same-sex marriage, but that is because Terry Gross (the interviewer) decides to keep following up, probing, in an effort to get Hillary to concede that, years ago, she covered up her support for same-sex marriage because it was politically opportune. Gross was trying to pin something on her, and I liked it that Hillary noticed and, in the midst of eloquently elaborating her thought-out talking points on marriage equality, turned on a dime and put Gross in her place.
We need that kind of sharpness on our side. You can't be sliding along, acting amiable, when you're talking to Vladimir Putin. I want someone with that kind of mental and verbal skill working for us.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
८१ टिप्पण्या:
Ann: "Gross was trying to pin something on her, and I liked it that Hillary noticed ..."
What a load of crock. Gross wasn't pinning anything on her.
Gross was noticing that Hillary was saying contradictory things and called her on it.
Naturally, being on the left, Hillary is not used to having her obvious BS called out.
Oh, and I'm sure Putin will be impressed by such contradictory and impossible lies by "I was named after Sir Edmund Hillary" Hillary to an American journalist.
We need that kind of sharpness on our side.
Somebody with some brains would be nice.
I mean, somebody able to understand stuff that men understand.
It would be even better if she had used that sharpness as Secretary of State, rather than to put a third tier journalist in place. Color me unimpressed.
Ann Althouse said... You can't be sliding along, acting amiable, when you're talking to Vladimir Putin.
Yeah, one day when she's Secretary of State I bet she'll put ol' Vlad in his place. I can't wait for her to shine in that role, especially against tough actors like Putin. Wait, what's that, now?
I know that Hillary can be sharp in defense of her political ambition. Do we have evidence that she was as sharp in defense of US national interests during her four years as Secretary of State? If so, how did that work out?
"You can't be sliding along, acting amiable, when you're talking to Vladimir Putin."
In the early days of the Obama administration, my this-might-not-be-so bad reasoning included the following:
Mrs. Clinton is tough, smart and has a mean streak a mile wide. Not a bad combination in our top diplomat.
Is there any sign that she capitalized on those qualities while Secretary of State? For example, did she ever put a geopolitical foe in his place, or does she save it for insufficiently loyal liberal journalists?
What real-world evidence do you have that she has that level of capability?
"For example, did she ever put a geopolitical foe in his place, or does she save it for insufficiently loyal liberal journalists?"
Isn't putting a "geopolitical foe in his place" more the job of the SoD than the SoS?
Testy? Hmmm, Along with her easily irritated, impatient and somewhat bad-temper, that old gal has testies!
"I want someone with that kind of mental and verbal skill working for us."
Oh God, I thought you had learned.
Remember the "Reset Button ?"
Of course not.
Prof A: you're pulling our chains no?
I'm sure that Putin is shivering with dread in anticipation of having to face the fearsome Hillary Clinton in negotiations once she is crowned Madame President.
Terry Gross should be applauded for not acting as Hillary's lapdog and instead posing uncomfortable questions that expose Hillary's hypocrisy and opportunism. I wish there were more MSM journalist like that.
Except that Hillary already dealt with Putin and he thinks she's a joke like Obama.
Other world leaders walk over Hillary just like Bill did.
She's a doormat.
Let's face it. Barack Obama, a neophyte, ate Hillary's lunch back in 2008.
He made her look like a waffler, a whiner, and a weakling.
She couldn't even stand up to Obama, who Putin and others just push around.
"We need that kind of sharpness on our side."
You like the fact that she, like her husband and today's President, is a lying sack of shit, who will say anything to get elected and then lie about having said it, if later it becomes "hate speech"?
We can look forward, I see, to your Presidential endorsement in 2016.
McCain was an honest man. Romney an very honest man. I guess that is not a characteristic you seek in a President?
It used to be that catching a President in a lie (Eisenhower and Francis Gary Powers comes to mind) was an incredible event. Now, you think it's a feature, not a bug?
She sure is smarter and speaks English better than Bill, who says things like "...for Hillary and I."
Meade said...Isn't putting a "geopolitical foe in his place" more the job of the SoD than the SoS?
Not necessarily, no.
Mao has it that "Politics is war without bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed." Clausewitz is paraphrased as "war is merely the continuation of politics by other means," and the inverse is also widely accepted.
Terry Gross (the interviewer) decides to keep following up, probing, in an effort to get Hillary to concede that, years ago, she covered up her support for same-sex marriage because it was politically opportune.
But, HRC never claims that she always supported gay marriage, or even that she did so in the 1990's. She claims that her views evolved over time, as society changed around her.
I'm afraid you're missing the real reason why HRC got "testy" with Terri Gross. HRC wasn't worried that her previous lack of support for SSM, a lack of support shared until recently by basically the whole country, would be an embarrassment. She was worried that Ms Gross would probe further & discover that she (HRC) had absolutely no good moral reason to change from her 1990's opposition, and that it was her new-found support of SSM that was rank political opportunism ("uhhm, Sec. Clinton, what changed in your moral reasoning from the 90's to now?").
Meade: "Isn't putting a "geopolitical foe in his place" more the job of the SoD than the SoS?"
Oh, I don't know.
I recall Adlai Stevenson standing up to the Soviets and Daniel Patrick Moynihan standing up to the lefty/islamist "Zionism is Racism" crew at the UN doing a pretty good job of putting our enemies in their place.
To bad she put more energy into a defense of her hypocrisy on Same Sex Marriage than she did into defending our consulate in Libya and the men running it.
Nope. Couldn't be bothered.
And that compound that she assured us was "heavily fortified?"
It was secured along at least one wall by... drumroll... a chain link fence!
How can you admire her for a "great job" running her mouth, when she was such an incompetent as Secretary of State?
Obama gives GREAT speeches, I hear!
Yeah, a woman Democrat being interviewed by Terry Gross on NPR is just like negotiating with Putin.
This is stupid.
"Isn't putting a "geopolitical foe in his place" more the job of the SoD than the SoS?"
Since when did the SoD become the chief diplomat for our country?
So, short answer: No. And it has never been so.
Even if you mean the military is in charge of putting a geopolitical fore in its place, then that role falls to the president as Commander-in-Chief.
So no matter which way you slice it, the answer will always and everywhere be an emphatic NO.
Sounds like you are making a political endorsement of that lying sack of sh*t.
So, you're thrilled with Hillary's ability to fend off a completely friendly interviewer from an organization totally in the bag for her?
I hope this was a parody.
Isn't putting a "geopolitical foe in his place" more the job of the SoD than the SoS
No.
In fact it is the state Department's job in the first place. The military only gets involved if the State department can't or won't.
"War is diplomacy by other means"
I think Ann is just baiting folks here. She is too smart to listen to Hillary on this and other interviews and be impressed. Hillary is doing bad because she is insincere and not that bright (she failed the bar exam). So she is not very good in interviews (or much of anything else).
Here, she would not give the interviewer a direct answer about whether she changed her mind, presumably because she did not want to be pressed on when and why. He got angry when the interviewer persisted and Hillary thought she was trying to trap her.
Want to beat Hillary in 2016. Say, "Hillary has been in politics for over 40 years and, aside from making herself fabulously rich and famous, she has achieved the type of accomplishments for our country that show she should be president."
Troll Post. !!!
Is that a thing?
Needs a trolling my readers tag.
Remember, Ann voted for Obama.
Well, Hillary has already had discussions with Putin. I don't see any evidence that Hillary has been effective with Putin. If she was effective, it is a closely guarded secret.
I wouldn't characterize Hillary's remarks as putting Terry Gross "in her place". An interviewer should push a presumptive presidential candidate on that sort of position. I don't think there's anything out of place with that. Hillary wanted to obfuscate as much as possible. I thought that Terry Gross' mistake was in assuming she knew what was going on with Hillary's position (in Hillary's mind) and then trying to get her to say that. Gross' assumption might have been wrong. She would have done better to listen more carefully and follow up more specifically to what Hillary was saying. That might have made for better news than their friction did.
I think when Althouse says she likes something, we should take her at her word.... and here we go, the first in what I'm sure will be many, many posts justifying her vote for Hillary 2016.
Hillary didn't sound the least bit testy.
It's interesting that she credits Senators Wyden and Udall for raising mega-data privacy issues pre-Snowden, but Rand Paul gets relegated to "and others". That's ungenerous.
Well, she's got as vagina (supposedly), so there's that.
Ann, you're the most balanced, logical and fair-minded political commenter I follow, but I can see already that you're going to vote for Hillary simply because you like the idea of a female president. Just remember how you talked yourself into voting for Obama, and how that turned out. Don't do it. There's no there there.
I'm with Ann on this one.
She did well. Kinda hard to be wrong (when the question was whether or not her personal story is defined by the conventional thinking of Terry Gross) but still, she didn't mince words about an ugly insinuation. There'll be more.
If she's got the stamina necessary to take all comers that way, not only should journalists take this as a warning, but she'll waltz to the White House - bed of burning coals-style - without too much trouble.
She still sounds like she wants it,...
God's teeth! You want our future president to demonstrate intelligence and verbal skills against terri fucking gross.
I give up.
YoungHegelian,
"...She was worried that Ms Gross would probe further & discover that she (HRC) had absolutely no good moral reason to change from her 1990's opposition,…"
Speculate much?
God's teeth! You want our future president to demonstrate intelligence and verbal skills against terri fucking gross.
I give up.
Barry Dauphin,
"I thought that Terry Gross' mistake was in assuming she knew what was going on with Hillary's position (in Hillary's mind) and then trying to get her to say that."
That's what's on the recording. Now compare it to what Drago just claimed is or isn't there:
Drago knows "Gross wasn't pinning anything on her" when Gross surely was. Look at how far off the mark he is:
"Gross was noticing that Hillary was saying contradictory things and called her on it."
WTF?
It's true that the interview gets more intense at one point, on the subject of same-sex marriage, but that is because Terry Gross (the interviewer) decides to keep following up, probing, in an effort to get Hillary to concede that, years ago, she covered up her support for same-sex marriage because it was politically opportune. Gross was trying to pin something on her, and I liked it that Hillary noticed and, in the midst of eloquently elaborating her thought-out talking points on marriage equality, turned on a dime and put Gross in her place.
Is there a difference between vetting and "pinning something" on somebody?
She was rolled as Sec of State repeatedly.
Isn't putting a "geopolitical foe in his place" more the job of the SoD than the SoS?
We were insured they WEREN'T a foe. Can you name any geopolitical situation that was improved during her term?
Let's face it. Barack Obama, a neophyte, ate Hillary's lunch back in 2008.
He competed (both with her and others) in a way that pols aren't used to. By passionately making the case for under-appreciated ideals.
Putin just competes for RWA love on both sides of the Atlantic. Fortunately for us, it only gets him anywhere in the tyranny of Russia. But our American cons still love him for it!
AA
I don't know that she did so well. All that bobbing and weaving about same sex marriage. She just sounds like someone who doesn't know her own mind.
If Hillary gets elected, it will force the Democrats to take ownership of the issues.
"Our side"?
Hillary's glass jaw is showing. If some Democrat with the same nerve--audacity, if you will--of Obama circa 2008 would get this and take a shot at her, we'll see her whole disgusting facade fall apart. There's nothing there! She literally is a total nothing, with nothing but ambition and theft to justify her.
Grilled down by NPR. This is the first sign. Break the glass jaw.
huh, I don't think Terry Gross has the testies to interview Obama like that. In fact, Hillary evolved long before Obama ever did but don't expect Gross to bitch about Obama. Women like her must like hounding other women.
And Ann signals she is just as much a Progressive as she has ever been. People who read this blog and keep thinking they see modreration are delusional. Remember folks, this is a law professor in Wisconsin.
Here we go. 2016.
Geez.
Sometimes a test is just a quiz and not some freudian fly paper to trap the unwary.
I can't even imagine the type of preoccupied mind that would associate "testy" with testicles, first because my mind isn't in the gutter, and second because it doesn't even make sense.
"in her place" is an interesting phrase to use when talking about a woman. To me, it resonates with Althouse's discussion, in this post, in that if somebody wants to grasp at some anodyne term and get all feministy about it, it's not that difficult.
I'm indulging in less etymological guesswork than Althouse in my insinuation that she intended to convey the idea that a woman has a place, and it's a more deferential submissive place than she'd occupy if she weren't placed there by somebody else, such as an honorary man. The phrase I picked up on unmistakably refers to a woman as a woman, right there in the possessive pronoun. Althouse, on the other hand, relies on both a mistake as well as a sort of hope that other writers would make the same mistake.
Frankly I'd like somebody with more mental and verbal skill working for us.
Seriously Althouse?
The woman is a dolt. A life time of being propped up by her husbands position or whackjob feminists.
Here is what you really get:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBVzR8afMwM&t=0m42s
The fuxking idiot declared that the five returned GITMO prisoners posed no threat to the US.
Can't believe you all are calmly discussing how a modern day Eva Braun did in an interview.
She ought to be ashamed to show her face in public.
You sycophants and cult of personality groupies are pathetic. And, enablers that you are, you are symptomatic of everything that is wrong with America.
The Crack Emcee,
I think that Terry Gross assumed that Hillary was privately always in favor of same sex marriage but she "couldn't" publicly admit it. In the interview Hillary seems trying to avoid explicitly saying that she privately believed her public position (i.e., opposed to same sex marriage). She avoids being clear probably because she wants to avoid being clear on that.
Hillary brought up the issue of certain (un-named) politicians whose minds never change. It was fair for Gross to press her for what was on her mind and not just her public position. Gross didn't pursue the line of questioning with the precision she often displays.
Everybody "knows" to be true that which Grooss was trying to get Clinton to admit to.
Why Hillary wouldn't, I don't know.
It would be fascinating to hear Obama similarly questioned.
Anyway, neither Clinton nor Obama seem to be especially good at handling Putin. No need to try to imagine how they might be with him.
I have a visceral dislike of being lied to and taken for a fool, so I choose not to cause myself agita by watching Hillary! if I can help it.
Same deal with Barry. Life's too short.
I could possibly see your point Professor if there weren't years of data showing that Hillary! won't use that putative intelligence in any meaningful way when she is actually responsible for making a decision. (Again, same deal with Barry.)
The Democrats have a short bench, but there's got to be someone better than Mrs. Clinton. Even if you can't bring yourself to vote for a Republican (other than Walker, whom I still don't think can get the nomination) in 2016, please don't enable the brain-damaged Enabler. Cuomo would be a reasonable choice. Manchin from WV wouldn't be bad, if he can win this year in the face of the National Party's continuing meltdown. God help me, I think even Warren would be better than Hillary.
Please, think of the children.
"Isn't putting a "geopolitical foe in his place" more the job of the SoD than the SoS?"
Only if you believe our military should be doing the diplomacy.
Speak softly and carry a big stick. The big stick is the SoD, the SoS speaks softly, putting them in their place, because the SoD is standing right behind them.
Putin will not be moved by mere words. He will watch instead what the American president does. With O , there's not much to see. With Hillary!, as president, I don't see why anyone would expect much more.
"One of my big problems right now is that too many people believe they have a direct line to the Divine..."
Hillary has problems with the believers. That will play well in flyover country.
Loyal reader for years -- but JEEZE I'm getting tired of you trolling your readers (or letting Crack do the same on your behalf).
This puts me in mind of that scene in the Muppet Movie.
"How did you know where to find us?"
"We read the script!"
Hillary has shown how well she does in a leadership role.
The burned out annex in Benghazi is proof. As is the amateur filmmaker who went to jail for a lie and a cover up, of which she still lies about in her book.
Ambassador Stevens cannot be reached for comment.
She only throws her thorns at her political enemies.
You will vote for anyone who says the right things regarding gay marriage no matter how disastrous their record is.
Whereas I thought her flailing was painful to listen to. Hillary couldn't bring herself to say either
'Back in the '90s I opposed gay marriage, like virtually everyone else, but I've changed my mind for [insert reason].'
or
'Back in the '90s I was personally in favor of gay marriage, but couldn't say so for fear of upsetting the rubes.'
All liberal politicians get a pass on (verbally) opposing gay marriage in the past, because their supporters have mind-reading abilities that tell them they really supported it deep in their hearts.
Hillary was forced to toss out a heaping word salad that didn't really say anything. Good job by Gross for realizing it.
Ann, aren't you essentially congratulating Hillary for continuing to lie about this?
Barry Dauphin,
What are you doing here? You don't sound crazy:
"I think that Terry Gross assumed that Hillary was privately always in favor of same sex marriage but she 'couldn't' publicly admit it."
Right.
"In the interview Hillary seems trying to avoid explicitly saying that she privately believed her public position (i.e., opposed to same sex marriage). She avoids being clear probably because she wants to avoid being clear on that."
I thought she was quite clear - just as whites claim they "don't even THINK about race" - she was saying she hadn't even IMAGINED gays existed to marry.If you can believe the former, then the latter ain't so hard to swallow. Just plain ol' blind ignorance.
"Gross didn't pursue the line of questioning with the precision she often displays."
Fair enough, though I've never seen "the precision" you have - no stiletto there - Gross just usually finds a weak/sore spot ("gross") and gracelessly burrows down on it until the interviewee gives and admits something - Hillary would not. And that'll win it for her:
The Hilldebeast can, and will, take it.
"Nice" Hillary will get eaten alive,...
Ah. Already her supporters, using the guise of feminism, are insulating her from any substantive criticisms. By psychoanalyzing innocuous adjectives used to describe Hillary -- "testy" is but one example -- to label her inquisitor as SEXIST, her answers are all but irrelevant. Mission accomplished! We've come a LONG way, baby! Makes one shudder to think how it will play out when a reporter says she "bristled" or turned "prickly." What she says isn't important, because what difference, at this point, does it make? The days we strived to elect an effective leader for our country are long gone. Today we elect causes!
One "privilege" a white conservative candidate will never enjoy is any sort of PC BS press defense to an incisive critique of his policies. The conservative will enjoy only the critique. If Hillary has a binder full of phalli -- she's into diversity and inclusiveness, you fool! -- and you've got a problem with that, you'll have to go through me. Are we clear?
If you're a color-blind, gender-neutral champion of critical reasoning and you don't give a damn about anyone's sexual orientation, you're a full-on racist, ageist, misogynist. (Is it sexist to ask if "ageist misogynist" is redundant?)
But moving along, lest I slip in the sexist tumble weeds, how was Billy Joel so prescient, able to distill the essence of this fallow gal years before we'd even heard of her? Can't you already hear his song playing during her moving video montage at the convention, when she agrees, so sacrificially, to be her party's nominee?
_____________
She can kill with a smile
She can wound with her eyes
She can ruin your faith with her casual lies
And she only reveals what she wants you to see
She hides like a child
But she's always a woman to me.
______
Of course it's sexist! That's the point. Look at all she's had to overcome! Dead-broke when she left the White House, juggling multiple mortgages and such! That's why Joel's song is so consciousness-raising, protective and perfect, you see. Because no matter what, Hillary's always a WOMAN to thee.
Let he among you who is not -- or without -- woman, cast the first stone. If you dislike Hillary, you plainly don't don't like women, including your daughter, your sister, your wife, and your mother. Indeed you must be in need of psychiatric counseling, so riddled with issues, you are.
Obama ran these "I'm untouchable" traps for years, to great success. Now he's got an invincible successor in Hillary. The slur of "SEXIST!" is the new black.
So gaze deep into your navels during this transgender craze, ye impotent knaves. Hit the big Staples "RESET" button, and etymologically analyze that. Don't speak now and would you forevermore stop holding your piece? Guns don't kill people: testicles do.
Philip Lodine,
"Loyal reader for years -- but JEEZE I'm getting tired of you trolling your readers (or letting Crack do the same on your behalf)."
Compared to what? One endless series of posts after another on subjects ONLY boring middle class whites can really find interesting as the killing continues?
CNN: HARRISON FORD HURT ON STAR WARS SET!
Here, walk through any ghetto - or any black part of America - and check the interest level for:
Aussie sheperds.
Dad Pants.
White One-Armed Journalists.
Amazon music.
Gary U.S. Bonds (a name sure to elicit a "Who?")
Bergdahl's journal
Funny - when blacks are living in the streets of Wisconsin, and squalid conditions all over this country - those topics don't seem to have the same "ring" as the role of slavery, racism, and reparations in black lives, wouldn't you think?
NYT: 22 JUMP STREET IS A JONAH HILL MOVIE!!!!
No, you probably don't, "think." Not before you speak, anyway. (Your life - propped up by historical theft - is probably too good.) Because then you'd have to admit what's important - American citizens being treated like shit and dying for white's historical racism - isn't as important to sociopathic whites as their precious trivialities.
WAPO: THE WORLD CUP OF SOCCOR IS ON!!!
Just as what happened to the Jews wasn't important to the Nazis who did it to them - their luxury was all.
GAWKER: START-UP SPENT TWO YEARS DESIGNING A CUP
Let me tell you something, Mr. Lodine - from Jazz and Motown to MLK and Malcolm, you should be happy and grateful for anything trying to rescue whites from the cultural bubble of inconsequence they inhabit, and force on others, to the detriment of all.
HOT AIR: GEORGE H.W. BUSH JUMPED OUT OF A PLANE!
Just as black Americans are made slaves, so some blonde idiot could ride a pony, whites still think the bullshit they imagine to be interesting is, somehow, of any worth to the rest of America, except for investigating how we are held down by, and can get from under, it's collective feather-thin philosophy and weight.
SLATE: HOW HAVING A KID MADE A WHITE GUY A BETTER WRITER.
I'm trolling you?
SALON: 9 MOVIES THAT ARE BETTER THAN THE BOOKS
Fool, whites are the trolls of every fairy tale that mentions the word "evil," because NONE of them feature black characters, so - this - here's a topic I'd love to stay out of and just listen to whites discuss openly:
NATIONAL REVIEW: MEXICAN TV SHOWS BRING FREE MARKET IDEAS TO MEXICO
The levels of evil, and horror, that even whites admit is all theirs alone - no running to Africa and saying "Look at this!" Just what you all-educated, totally-brilliant-first-world-thinking individuals have done to ruin everything for everyone who isn't pale - and even many who were.
AMERICA: BLONDE GIRL WANTS A PONY
The list - even before the discussion - could go on for centuries.
AMERICA: BLONDE GIRL WANTS A PONY AND DOESN'T CARE WHO HAS TO SUFFER SO SHE CAN HAVE IT
And, once the discussion was underway, you leave blacks totally out of it - it'll be a distinctive collection of evil white history by whites - for everyone's peace of mind.
AMERICA: BLONDE GIRL WANTS A PONY AND DOESN'T CARE WHO HAS TO SUFFER SO SHE CAN HAVE IT AND HER FATHER AGREES
Somehow, I think you'd hate that just as much.
AMERICA: BLONDE GIRL WANTS A PONY AND DOESN'T CARE WHO HAS TO SUFFER SO SHE CAN HAVE IT AND HER FATHER AGREES AND SO DID HIS FATHER BEFORE HIM
Go on, Ann, keep making them feel good about themselves - by distracting them, as much as possible, from all the blood on their hands.
AMERICA: BLONDE GIRL WANTS A PONY AND DOESN'T CARE WHO HAS TO SUFFER SO SHE CAN HAVE IT AND HER FATHER AGREES AND SO DID HIS FATHER BEFORE HIM AND HIS FATHER BEFORE HIM
Like David Duke, you can win tons of fans in America like that,...
Contrast Rick Perry; asked about the party plank that says a program to "cure" gays should be kept available, he says that same sex attraction is a genetic trait, but that people have choices to participate in gay behavior or not (then, unfortunately) like some people have a genetic predisposition to alcoholism. And rather than locking onto "Gay is genetic" people are screaming "Perry says gay is like a disease."
Should add the program has been declared illegal (?in Ca.?) based on debunking by the same organizations that in the past declared homosexuality to be a psychological disorder.
Why didn't he say that people should be allowed to select their own treatment? The interview was in Ca. where some of the goofiest non-scientific medicine in the world is routine.
Bob Ellison said:
"This is stupid."
Today's internet winner!
As others have mentioned Hillary! is a lying sack of shit with no accomplishments in life but because she has or had a uterus she is, going in, the clear front runner to the Democrat nomination.
I can't believe women have the vote.
You're gonna do it again, aren't you, Ann?
Didn't learn a damned thing from Obama...
Man, you people cannot handle the cruel neutrality.
Fool, whites are the trolls of every fairy tale that mentions the word "evil," because NONE of them feature black characters
Oh my God...you mean the traditional folk tales of a civilization that had little or no contact with Black people don't feature Black people? The horror!
How long into the disastrous presidency of her Hillaryness will it be when Althouse (not to mention half the rest of the country) comes to her senses and realizes her vote for Hillary was not just wrong, but a bad thing?
How long into the disastrous presidency of her Hillaryness will it be when Althouse (not to mention half the rest of the country) comes to her senses and realizes her vote for Hillary was not just wrong, but a bad thing?
"Teacher, teacher," he cries while waving his arm frantically, "What's a cruel neutrality?"
I mean, really, WTF, how does anyone think like this?
I came back in to this topic to see what others had to say, but do not see much I want to bother with. (No one will probably even read this, but I will post it anyway as it is early in the morning and I am on my first cup of coffee.)
My take on this was to see that Hillary was not going to give Terry Gross the answer she wanted, so Gross kept pestering Hillary until she provoked her. I don't see any reason to doubt that Hillary changed her stance on gay marriage as public opinion shifted, not because of any real change of heart herself. But so has every politician done that. So to me the interesting question is why an NPR liberal leaning interviewer decided to press Hillary into doing what no other politician will do or ever has done. It seems to me the significance of this story is that liberals like Gross have doubts about Hillary and are not as ready to march to her drum as they often seem.
I cannot quite see a sign in this of Hillary showing real toughness, though I did enjoy her put down of a rather annoying journalist. I think real toughness, given the current state of p.c. craziness, would have been for Hillary to say it's time to stop beating people up for every little departure from the current definition of what it means to be a decent human being. I mean who really cares whether Hillary did or did not favor gay marriage years ago?
I recall the Madison gay community from the time of the Back Door in the early 1970s. NONE of those gays favored gay marriage then, as far as I can recall. Marriage was itself a bourgeois construction they were gleefully in the process of dismantling. People change. Good for them.
LeitBart, you said the most insightful thing in your comment:
"If you're a color-blind, gender-neutral champion of critical reasoning and you don't give a damn about anyone's sexual orientation, you're a full-on racist, ageist, misogynist." Indeed!
So, Hillary wasn't playing games on gay "marriage"? Great! All she had to do was tell Gross when it was that she changed her mind.
But she wasn't able to do that. I wonder why?
Hysterical refers to the uterus. Guess you can't use that one either.
It seems to me that testes as witness and testy as relating to 'head' still have a common origin.
To have a third 'head' present when witnessing something legal.
And don't forget other uses of head.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा