|
AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
|
 |
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
|
|
IT'S IN THE BREAKING NEWS SIDEBAR THANKS! |
|
Posted on 10/14/2003 9:41:11 AM PDT by Stultis
My office phone rang and rang Sunday. The voice mail quickly filled up. Same with the e-mail.
I had written a piece raising the question of why women voted for Arnold Schwarzenegger for governor of California, given his alleged history of manhandling women.
I compared him to Bill Clinton. I said in the column that unlike Schwarzenegger's accusers, the women Clinton hit on had welcomed his advances.
When I wrote that, I was thinking of Monica Lewinsky, Gennifer Flowers.
The callers and e-mailers had other names in mind. Paula Jones. Kathleen Willey. Juanita Broaddrick. Women who said they didn't want Clinton's advances.
In my haste to make an argument regarding Schwarzenegger - my right as a columnist charged with expressing opinion - I overlooked them.
That said, what I don't get, and never will get, is the other, and most singular, part of the calls.
I'm talking about the tirade of those who believed that my failure to name the other women exposed some leftie bias on my part, and proved beyond a doubt that I am a card-carrying member of the mainstream liberal media conspiracy that tried unsuccessfully to stop Schwarzenegger.
Here's a sample of the tirade.
"You are a reprehensible ideologue."
"You're an obvious hypocrite."
"Face it, Mary Jo. You've been Clintonized."
"I don't know where I would get my daily laughs if it weren't for all you commie-loving lefties."
There was another message in the words.
I could hear it in the voices, the tenor of the sentences. My experience with this column, and these responses, is typical of the way we Americans conduct our politics these days. Balls fly from either hard left or hard right. Too many of us have lost all sense of the middle. We're past the stage of speaking in normal tones. We're into shouting now.
Have you tuned into talk radio lately? Or cable TV? You barely have to push the volume control. It's set so high from the start. And the only stories that get covered seem to be the ones with the highest confrontation quotient. That's the way the programs are set up from the start.
Then there's the Internet, the wonderful Web that was supposed to inform and liberate us. It has become instead a machine capable of spreading a lie like wildfire. People, reading the lie, swallow it whole. Meanwhile, a sea of newspaper ink, more often the product of solid shoe-leather reporting, is dismissed as malevolent fantasy.
This is not only the province of the far right. The right is just better at it.
Those who said women should have soundly criticized Clinton for his conduct, who said that he should be held to the same standard as Schwarzenegger, were correct. I would argue that Clinton has been judged. Nothing speaks louder than impeachment, although that point never satisfies the rabid Clinton haters.
Some of them come across as truly scary.
Newspapers, cable news, talk radio and the Internet are all part of how we talk to each other about how we want to govern ourselves. We are supposed to do it by compromise. But increasingly, the tenor is not about compromise. It's about taking no prisoners.
We shout into the microphone, call names across cyberspace.
No wonder Europeans are increasingly afraid of us.
This isn't democracy. It's cacophony.
You want to call me a liberal? Go ahead, although if you think that what I wrote about Clinton was intended to give him a pass on his sexual misconduct, you're seriously mistaken.
Doesn't it seem strange to you that some of the same conservatives who couldn't forgive Clinton readily embraced Schwarzenegger?
Is that question somehow less valid than wondering why Schwarzenegger's critics were silent about Clinton?
Or am I just one of those goofy lefties, mouthing off again?
- You can reach Mary Jo Melone at mjmelone@sptimes.com or 226-3402.
"Then there's the Internet, the wonderful Web that was supposed to inform and liberate us. It has become instead a machine capable of spreading a lie like wildfire. People, reading the lie, swallow it whole. Meanwhile, a sea of newspaper ink, more often the product of solid shoe-leather reporting, is dismissed as malevolent fantasy."
Notice how her "solid shoe-leather reporting" resulted in her missing credible accusations of rape against Bill Clinton in her story.....
|
AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
|
|
|
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
|
|
IT'S IN THE BREAKING NEWS SIDEBAR THANKS! |
|
Why on earth did female voters help elect Arnold?
St. Petersburg Times ^ | October 12, 2003 | MARY JO MELONE
Posted on 10/12/2003 5:24 AM CDT by Cincinatus' Wife
'Clinton's Women' Wanted to Be Molested, Columnist Says
Newsmax ^ | 10/13/03
Posted on 10/14/2003 10:05 AM CDT by LandofLincoln
That's just evidence that she has turned a blind eye to his witness tampering, his lying under oath, his lying to the American people, his destruction of evidence, and his use of the IRS as a political weapon.
If we want, we can delve into his actual sex crimes (Juanita, Kathleen, Paula) but there's plenty of read meat even without the sex. But this "Leftist-in-denial" seems to think that it begins and ends with Monica and Gennifer.
Clinton lost his law license. And he had to pay Paula Jones $750,000. Why? Because he committed crimes. The only folks who wanted to focus on hanky panky under the desk were the Leftists who wanted to shift the focus away from the actual crimes. And some of those Leftists are still at it.
"You are a reprehensible ideologue."
"You're an obvious hypocrite."
"Face it, Mary Jo. You've been Clintonized."
"I don't know where I would get my daily laughs if it weren't for all you commie-loving lefties."
WHAT??? No comments like:
"Mary Jo, you are letting your kneepads show."
Clinton wasn't impeached for womanizing. He was impeached for breaking federal laws - obstruction of justice and purgery.
He even lost his law licence on ethics violations.
Oh no. No media bias here - NOT!!!
It seems as thought left wing spin media is MUCH better at it!
Rush Limbaugh had a right to express his opinion about racial attitudes and Donovan McNabb. Your opinion was far more loathesome.
That said, what I don't get, and never will get, is the other, and most singular, part of the calls. I'm talking about the tirade of those who believed that my failure to name the other women exposed some leftie bias on my part, and proved beyond a doubt that I am a card-carrying member of the mainstream liberal media conspiracy that tried unsuccessfully to stop Schwarzenegger.
No, we just think you're an idiot.
I could hear it in the voices, the tenor of the sentences. My experience with this column, and these responses, is typical of the way we Americans conduct our politics these days. Balls fly from either hard left or hard right. Too many of us have lost all sense of the middle. We're past the stage of speaking in normal tones. We're into shouting now.
So this twit starts a food fight and then is upset that she got food thrown back at her?
Have you tuned into talk radio lately? Or cable TV? You barely have to push the volume control. It's set so high from the start. And the only stories that get covered seem to be the ones with the highest confrontation quotient. That's the way the programs are set up from the start.
Note that she cannot attackt the content of that media, so she attacks the presentation instead.
Then there's the Internet, the wonderful Web that was supposed to inform and liberate us. It has become instead a machine capable of spreading a lie like wildfire. People, reading the lie, swallow it whole. Meanwhile, a sea of newspaper ink, more often the product of solid shoe-leather reporting, is dismissed as malevolent fantasy.
Oh, really? Have you checked just how many corrections the NY Times has issued this year? And does the name Jayson Blair ring a bell?
This is not only the province of the far right. The right is just better at it.
We're better with the truth, that's for sure.
Those who said women should have soundly criticized Clinton for his conduct, who said that he should be held to the same standard as Schwarzenegger, were correct. I would argue that Clinton has been judged. Nothing speaks louder than impeachment, although that point never satisfies the rabid Clinton haters.
The articles of impeachment never mentioned Clinton's sexual harassment. Slick has NEVER been punished for his sexual predation.
Newspapers, cable news, talk radio and the Internet are all part of how we talk to each other about how we want to govern ourselves. We are supposed to do it by compromise. But increasingly, the tenor is not about compromise. It's about taking no prisoners.
No, it's about countering the lies that liberals like you spew every time you write.
We shout into the microphone, call names across cyberspace. No wonder Europeans are increasingly afraid of us. This isn't democracy. It's cacophony.
So it would be more democratic for us rabble to just shut up and listen to you pontificate to us?
You want to call me a liberal? Go ahead, although if you think that what I wrote about Clinton was intended to give him a pass on his sexual misconduct, you're seriously mistaken.
Uh, you just did, when you claimed that impeachment was punishment for Clinton's sexual harassment.
Looks like this nimrod just compounded her errors. She couldn't just say she was wrong, could she? She had to make all this the fault of us right-wingers out there. So Hillary-esque of her.
LOL. As Ross Perot would say: "Do you hear that sucking sound?"
Maryjo..it doesn't take much to frighten europeans..the sun rising in the east does that just as well..
Maryjo..it doesn't take much to frighten europeans..the sun rising in the east does that just as well..
Europeans are "increasingly afraid of us" because they've have enjoyed a vacation from history due to our largess for the past 58 years, thereby allowing them to feminize and socialize Europe at the cost of instituting sensible security measures.
Europeans are "increasingly afraid" of EVERYONE, a Spenglerian sign of decline if there ever was one. The hoped for Age of Aquarius -- a childish, feminized ideal of a utopia -- has not come to pass, must to the dismay of the detritus of the sixties like Melone. And it never will come to pass, no matter how poetically John Lennon may have "imagined" it. 9/11 is only the latest reminder of the reasons why.
Sorry to burst Melone's bubble, but History doesn't brake for pouters.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.