By now you’ve all seen the pic of one of Obama’s HopeyChangey speechwriters groping a Hillary cardboard cutout while another frat-boy dweeb pretends to force feed her beer. Hillary herself downplayed the whole thing, but former Clinton staffer Dee Dee Myers ain’t having any, even after years of pooh-poohing The Creep’s obvious problem with women:
What’s bugging me is his intention. He isn’t putting his hand on her “chest,” as most of the articles and conversations about the picture have euphemistically referred to it. Rather, his hand—cupped just so—is clearly intended to signal that he’s groping her breast. And why? Surely, not to signal he finds her attractive. Au contraire. It’s an act of deliberate humiliation. Of disempowerment. Of denigration.
And it disgusts me.
Oh, I know: If Hillary can get over it, why can’t I? Her spokesman, Phillipe Reinnes, tried to make light of the incident. “Senator Clinton is pleased to learn of Jon’s obvious interest in the State Department, and is currently reviewing his application,” he told the Washington Post in an E-mail. Obviously, she has no interest in making a federal case out of this particular incident, particularly as both the Clinton and Obama camps work on letting bygones be bygones. She has to pick her battles, and for her this ain’t a hill worth dying on.
But there is a larger issue at stake. At what point does sexist behavior get taken seriously? At what point do people get punished in ways that suggest this kind of behavior, this kind of thinking, is unacceptable? At what point do we insist there will be consequences?
Oh, I’d say that’s clear enough by now: the moment the LLMSM finds out the offender is a Republican, and not one second before.
For what it’s worth, though, I’m with Captain Ed here:
Really, have we become such pantywaists that we can’t tell the difference between a joke and “denigration”, “disempowerment”, and “humiliation”? I’d suggest that one bright line would be whether a live person was being fondled or a cardboard cutout. The latter doesn’t humiliate anything but the inanimate object, while the former happened with Myers’ co-workers without her getting this exercised over it.
As Ed says, I can’t get terribly worked up about something that amounts to a stupid juvenile lark, and Hillary’s response, purely the function of political expediency that it so obviously is, seems to me to be the right one. But — as with the Code Pinko leadership not only willingly donning the hijab in Iran, but blathering about what a wonderfully free and open place that hellhole is — it sure is something to see how the elasticity of their supposed “standards” forces Democrats to pretzel themselves into all sorts of amusing contortions, innit?