Now That The Precedent Has Been Set
By Mitch Berg
We’re about 18 months away from the next round of elections to the US House of Representatives.
I remembered that when I got this email from an anonymous source:
Let’s talk about MN 4th District Representative Betty McCollum.
“B-Cup Betty”, as she’s known to her smarter colleagues on Capitol Hill – which is, let’s face it, all of them – is a product of Saint Catherine’s, a fifth-rate Catholic women’s college that seems to succeed only in teaching its graduates how to use that hot Catholic school girl uniform to get what they want. Which was, in fact, the only way she could get a job, much less a guy.
McCollum, being too homely and brunette to get a job in entertainment or the media, not smart enough to get into law school and not masculine enough to land a women’s studies professorship, went into education.
She stank at it, of course – the Saint Paul School District has a sub-50% graduation rate, which sank while she was teaching, and has only fallen further since she’s been in Congress.
Unable to finish the job she was given, McCollum manipulated the DFL’s gender-equity bylaws to get herself what is broadly regarded (by anonymous but reliable DFL sources) as an “affirmative action” nomination in a cakewalk district, the Fourth. “This was basically the political electoral equivalent of walking into a bar full of guys and saying “any of you big strong fellas wanna help me push my car?” and showing a little leg” said an anonymous source. And even at that, for two straight elections McCollum has shown neither the guts nor the brains to face any challengers in a debate, saying (in effect) “They might talk mean about me! They hate women!”.
“Of course she wins in the Fourth” said an anonymous DFL source. “The DFL could endorse a pile of monkey poo and get 55% of the vote in the Fourth! Good lord, those people are all lobotomized union droogs! The real question isn’t “why did an inexperienced, not-so-bright, poorly-educated party hack win in the Fourth” so much as “is there another district where such a lightweight could win any office? I swear, if she didn’t have her gender going for her, she’d come in third for Water and Soil District Commissioner”.
Anonymous sources say McCollum – who is anonymously known for being a strutting man-hating martinet – runs an office renowned for dubious ethics. Although specific charges have neither been filed nor prosecuted, anonymous sources say it’s just a matter of time. “McCollum shows all the signs of being an ethics disaster” said a source who asked not to be named, but is a higher-up in the DFL; “She’s female, she’s unqualified, ill-educated and dumb, she’s a castrating bitch – or so I’ve heard – she’s Catholic, she’s of Irish descent, she’s been a union member, and she’s a woman in politics; you just know she took every bit of swag that people left on the floor”.
“She’s dumb, poorly-educated, has no political background and was a failure as a teacher, she’s never run a race against serious competition, and she’t not even close to hot”, the source continued, “and yet she’s a high-maintenance diva!”.
Well, I went and filed that piece in the “Stupid Hack Piece” drawer.
Along with this. And this. And this.
Because there’s just no room for corrosive, stupid sexism in politics! Why, just because every single thing in the scabrous email above was identical to similar defamations of, say, Sarah Palin or Linda Chavez or Margaret Thatcher or Laura Ingraham or Michele Bachmann or…
…um, where were we?
UPDATE: For those of you who need a “Sanitized By Jon Stewart For Your Protection” label on your satire, or believe that only Steven Colbert has a license to practice satire – the “email” is indeed a fake.
Well, at least as applied to Rep. McCollum.
July 8th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
I just gotta know… does that e-mail actually exist?
😉
July 8th, 2009 at 12:58 pm
He got it from noted McCollum opponent Flash, Badda.
July 8th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
does that e-mail actually exist?
Nope.
Not literally. Not about McCollum, anyway.
July 8th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
Who was the real target of the real email?
July 8th, 2009 at 1:55 pm
Comedy Gold.
That would be tame for slamming Michele Bachmann.
July 8th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
Mitch wrote:
“Well, I went and filed that piece in the “Stupid Hack Piece” drawer.
Along with this. And this. And this.
Because there’s just no room for corrosive, stupid sexism in politics! Why, just because every single thing in the scabrous email above was identical to similar defamations of, say, Sarah Palin or Linda Chavez or Margaret Thatcher or Laura Ingraham or Michele Bachmann or…”
Thank you Mitch. I have said it here before, and will say it again. You don’t just talk the talk, you walk the walk in being a gentleman as regards women, a statement I can make as a woman who has known you as a friend for many years.
Thank you for comments made elsewhere by you – and Ed – regarding a certain Playboy piece of an especially hateful AND partisan nature regarding women politicians. And thank you for the segment you and Ed did on the radio regarding the movie “The Stoning of Soraya M.”.
I certainly make no claim to speak for women everywhere, but I am pretty sure that I am not alone in my appreciation for the attitude you demonstrate. I hope you will influence more people by your example.
Unfortunately, this kind of bad behavior faked in your email towards women in politics is not unique to men; regrettably sometimes women do it to other women, nor is it unique to one political side of the fence. The most recent one I have come across, NOT a fake, was Anne Coulter on Fox asserting that “liberal women hate Palin because they are jealous their boyfriends think Palin is attractive.”
I don’t give a damn about Coulter’s politics in this; I would have been as offended by any woman making this kind of comment about another woman who was in politics. Let me emphasize again – this kind of offensive material can come from ANY point in the political spectrum. It is always offensive.
I hope other people will stand up and object WHENEVER it does, without regard to the politics of the target or the originator.
July 8th, 2009 at 2:55 pm
We have to take people one at a time, DG. That liberals in general hate Palin is indisputable. My personal belief is that because liberalism has a distinct collectivist nature it lends itself to a pack mentality. That’s how you get a person like Bill Maher or David Letterman. Or Keith Olbermann, for that matter. Little critical thought, much learned invective.
July 8th, 2009 at 3:20 pm
Huh? How was Coulter offensive to women?
July 8th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
In fact, if we are to believe D. MacKinnon (who does not name names), a psychologist says the Envious Spinster track has possibilities.
http://townhall.com/columnists/DouglasMacKinnon/2009/07/07/sarah_palin,_liberal_nerds_and_an_envious_spinste
July 8th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
“Badda Says:
July 8th, 2009 at 3:20 pm
Huh? How was Coulter offensive to women? ”
Badda, I would’t dream of rising to that bait.
If you really DON’T understand, I’d suggest asking any woman you know to explain it to you face to face. I’m guessing most women would find the comment objectionable; and a suggestion (metaphorically speaking, more or less) if you are feeling particularly slow to understand, you might want to wear an athletic cup, to protect your bits against an involuntary knee-jerk response from the lady.
July 8th, 2009 at 8:10 pm
The most recent one I have come across, NOT a fake, was Anne Coulter on Fox asserting that “liberal women hate Palin because they are jealous their boyfriends think Palin is attractive.”
Isn’t the truth an absolute defense in these matters?
July 9th, 2009 at 8:22 am
Dog, it isn’t bait. It is a question… and if you don’t want to answer it simply, don’t write circuitous comments that include references to getting a knee in the seeds.
Otherwise, you look disingenuous when you do.