Still Lying On Boxer

Why are these folks so intent on perpetuating this lie? I was watching the hearings on C-Span myself and, if anything, I felt an ouch because I remembered that both of Condi's parents were dead. Nancy was saying that Condi, along with herself, had no one in the family eligible to die in Iraq. Many conservatives are always quick to call a spade, a spade when it comes down to blacks and things like crime and education but speak the truth about their beloved Condi (who in fact is a single, parent-less, childless woman who would be branded a femininazi and probable lesbian if she were a Democrat) and they are connecting dots that aren't even there.

"The libertarian Republican commentator [Larry Elders], on Sen. Barbara Boxer's (D-Calif.) sexist comments vs. Secretary Condi Rice
President and Commander in Chief Abraham Lincoln had no child serving in the Civil War. President Harry Truman, who dropped bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, had a daughter, but she did not serve. President Bill Clinton sent troops to Somalia, Bosnia and Kosovo, but his daughter did not serve. President John Kennedy increased the number of advisers in Vietnam and supported that war, but had no children involved. Watching the liberal 'pro-women's rights' Boxer go after the single and childless Rice seemed almost surreal....But for Boxer, the sky remains out of reach if, like Rice, you are unmarried and without children. Yet a recent article in The New York Times practically celebrated the phenomenon of the growing number of women living without spouses. For the first time, the number of women living without a spouse exceeds the number of women living with one."

Mr. Elder continues his commentary: "Wasn't the 'women's movement' about choices -- the choice to have a family or not, the choice to have a career or not, the choice to have children or not? But, Boxer's Law says that Rice's choices effectively disqualify her from the position of secretary of state, given her support of the war. I thought we'd come a long way, baby. Guess not."

I think this is projection. They are fixated on Condoleezza Rice's single/childless status so they assume that everyone else is. I know Larry Elders is not that dense and intellectually stunted. Further, I think it is sexist to conclude that even if Boxer was criticizing her lack of children, it is somehow shrewish and "cat fight-ish" in nature. As I state before, where was all of this hoopla when Laura Bush said that Condoleezza probably wouldn't want to run for President because she had no family? That's a bigger stretch than implying that not having kids means you may not understand the sacrifice mother makes when she sees her child off to war.

I wish these folks would find a different windmill to battle and stop bashing Boxer for things they've thought but not said.

powered by performancing firefox