Roseanne Is Mad at You

Why I do this, I have no idea, except that I really enjoy my irritainment. I read Free Republic, Taylor Marsh’s blog, and for the same reason.

Of course, I’m talking about Roseanne’s blog. Yes, that Roseanne: the domestic goddess who had her own sitcom back in the 90s.

To read her blog when she writes about Hillary is to venture into a strange and unknown world where Hillary is the best thing EVER and where blog posts are usually no longer than a sentence or two and where capital letters are not welcome.

Let’s take a look at this post she wrote on April 3 about Randi Rhodes’ words (if you’re not familiar with that issues, click here):

what randhi rhodes said

(calling the working class’s candidate a whore) was equivilent to using the N-word in reference to Obama. How women can allow themselves to implode and spew out horrifying misogynism at a woman who has reached higher than any other woman ever has is the reason the dems will not win the presidential election.

Hillary has reached higher than any other woman? If you’re speaking about American women only, well, Senators Boxer, Feinstein, Mikulski, and Landrieu have all been in the senate longer than Clinton, so haven’t they, in a senatorial sense “reached higher than any other woman?” Don’t Janet Napolitano and Kathleen Sebelius (both accomplished and popular governors) have the right kind of executive experiences to become president, and thus have “reached higher?”

Haven’t Madeline Albright and Condoleezza Rice “reached higher” than Hillary?

Does Nancy Pelosi count? What about Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Barbara Jordan?

And internationally? Indira Ghandi, Michelle Bachelet, Margaret Thatcher, and Angela Merkel might disagree.

Every bit of this is the fault of Howard Dean, John Edwards, john kerry, bill richardson, Ted Kennedy and Barack Obama’s boy’s club. I am ashamed of what passes for “progressive”. It is the left wing anti female taliban.

Uh, no. Rhodes is responsible for her own words, no matter how reprehensible those words were. She said them as a comedian and certainly was not influenced by the “anti female taliban.”

The purge of feminists from the Democrat party continues…do not be deceived! The entire party has nothing but contempt for its female and blue collar base…they need to clean up their act in order to win will in November!


Roseanne, there is no purge of feminists from the “Democrat party” (and BTW, why do you use that right-wing phrase “Democrat party?” It’s the Democratic Party. Democrat is a noun, Democratic is an adjective, just in case you weren’t sure). When elected, I am certain that Obama will place many women in cabinet positions and there is still a good chance that he might even pick a woman as a running mate (I happen to think that Sebelius would be an excellent choice).

I am convinced that there will be a woman president in this country before I die. It’s simply inevitable, and that will be good for women and the country.

Unfortunately, it doesn’t appear that Clinton will be that woman.

Many Democratic voters don’t like the idea of having two-family rule in this country for 28 years. Surely, you must agree that there are good people worthy to be president whose last names are not Clinton or Bush.

Other Democrats oppose Clinton for her vote on the war. That’s a serious issue. It’s not that she caused the invasion of Iraq, but rather that she supported it and now claims that Bush tricked her into voting that way. In the buildup to the war, I knew Bush was lying, why didn’t she?

Another subset of Democrats would rather that Clinton not get the nomination because they don’t want to have to re-live the drama of the Bill Clinton years.

But perhaps most importantly, most Obama voters think that he is the best candidate. No, it’s not his “turn,” but we’re Democrats and have never been ones to nominate the person whose “turn” it is. If that were the case, Lieberman would have been the nominee in 2004. Obama supporters tend to be behind him because they believe he has the right kind of experience, ideas, and temperament to be a good president, if not a great one.

So, please, you can hate Obama all you want. Do your damnedest to help Clinton get the nomination.

But please, don’t equate support for Obama with misogyny.


6 responses to “Roseanne Is Mad at You

  1. With friends like these….I doubt that Roseanne’s endorsement is a big plus for Hillary Clinton. That, of course, would not be Hillary’s fault. However, the fact that her top tier of advisers, including Bill, are involved with the Colombian trade deal – that is her responsibility and it’s a biggy.

  2. You took the words from my head. As soon as I read the quote I instantly though: but what about Margaret Thatcher, Indira Ghandi and more recently Benazir Bhutto.

  3. Zenyenta – Ha! You’re right. I’m still trying to figure out what her real stance on Colombian trade deal might be.

  4. Richard, I think poor Roseanne is a little bit delusional, but that’s what makes hers a fun blog to read!

  5. I must be a glutton, because I just waded into that cesspool. And I must say, there is some real bullshit in there.

    And Senator Clinton has reached higher than any woman ever? Not only are the examples in the world of politics myriad, but I have a feeling Carly Fiorina and Meg Whitman might feel that they’ve reached greater heights – all on their own – than Senator Clinton.

  6. It’s a cesspool, but a schadenfreuderific one!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s