Ah, Marcel, my dear friend ...
> <<<For Chavez, as a Hispanic and as a woman, to deny
> the existence of a glass ceiling is CRAP. >>>
>
> This is positively laughable. Linda Chavez obviously
> has never faced a glass ceiling because shes a
> conservative and has been a super achiever so she
> would have said so if she had.
There's a certain truth to something Clark wrote
during the election fracas (and I paraphrase) about
how Republicans think that everyone else has grown up
and lived the way they have, so why should anything
change? If you've never encountered a glass ceiling,
of course you don't believe in its existence.
But WOULD Chavez have said so if she HAD encountered
such? She didn't ante up the information about
sheltering and (possibly) employing illegal
immigrants, so what makes you think she'd be truthful
about her personal experiences with glass ceilings or
anything else? She tows the party line, just as you
say the rape-ignoring Dems do.
> HOWEVER, she has now. Look at what the Dems
> are doing to her for purely ideological reasons>
Purely ideological reasons? Or payback time regarding
the (hypocritical) argument over TRUTH? I'm not
saying it's right; it's not. It's disgusting, really,
but given the political climate it's also
understandable.
Perhaps Chavez would have been a good Secretary of
Labor. I remain hesitant because of her views on
affirmative action and minimum wage, however.
> This is to totally attack someone BECAUSE they are
> competent AND a woman AND one who refuses to fall in
> line with the program of vicitmology.
Oh hell, Marcel. MEN of both parties attack
successful women, period. It's just the way it
(still) is. That's exactly how the "glass ceiling"
stays in place. What's really sickening is when WOMEN
attack successful women (think Phyllis Schafly).
As for the "program of victimology," I agree that the
concept of victimization is overused and abused, but
people do continue to be held back because of their
color, gender, etc. The only people who seem to
consistently deny that are Republican white men and
their followers (think "Uncle Tom" -- or Uncle
Clarence).
I realize that because of the way the election played
out, Bush hasn't had as much time as he should have to
put together his "dream team" of Cabinet nominees.
But I really wonder if Chavez isn't a bit of a "fall
guy?" Why she didn't spill her guts and volunteer the
information that should have been known ahead of time?
Or are we playing a little game of shooting ducks to
tire us all, so the Senate will have to eventually
confirm SOMEONE, perhaps the worst possible choice?
As Don Rowe pointed out, we may end up in a situation
where, after all is said and done (and destroyed), a
very conservative Supreme Court justice doesn't look
so bad. Frankly, the idea frightens me.
> The left is attacking all the women Bush has named
> from Whitman to the Interior cabinet member nominee
The Left is attacking ALL of Bush's nominees, as they
will do (with the possible exception of Rod Paige).
If Gore had won, the Republicans would do the same.
> Successful women have to realize the price they must
> pay.
Believe me, successful women DO realize the price they
must pay, in politics especially.
But ANYBODY who wants to get into politics has to
realize the price they must pay. If they don't, they
have no business in the game. It's sad that things
have seem to have degenerated to the place they have,
but here we are.
Lori
in DC,
who has been reading Rita Mae Brown's "Dolley" (a
novel of Dolley Madison in love and war) and learning
that the game of politics really hasn't changed all
that much ...
Yahoo! Photos - Share your holiday photos online!
http://photos.yahoo.com/
