Patterico's Pontifications

3/23/2017

There Is No Feminism. . .

Filed under: General — JVW @ 11:09 pm



[guest post by JVW]

. . . quite like whiny Dog Trainer op-ed writer feminism.

– JVW

10 Responses to “There Is No Feminism. . .”

  1. Back in the old days Patterico used to do a fair number of brief blog items that were just links to pieces from various media outlets. It’s kind of what the early days of blogging were like.

    JVW (5de783)

  2. The idea that Hillary Clinton “never gets a break” is hysterically funny. The line “If she were a Republican” gets overused, but the sober truth is that if she weren’t the Democrats’ Darling, she would be on trial for major willful security breaches as I write this.

    If somebody wants to give Chelsea a break they will take her aside and assure her that she doesn’t HAVE to be her parents’ puppet, and encourage her to pursue a more wholesome career, like drug running or prostitution.

    C. S. P. Schofield (99bd37)

  3. Chelsea would starve as a prostitute.

    Rev. Hoagie® (785e38)

  4. At least she would starve with he dignity intact.

    C. S. P. Schofield (99bd37)

  5. The propping up of all Clintons shows to go ya just how shallow and weak the Democrats bench is.

    Colonel Haiku (8d00c4)

  6. But…bu…but…Chelsea’s writing a book!

    http://patriotretort.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Chelsea-book-800×420.jpg

    Rev. Hoagie® (785e38)

  7. Chelsea’s career in 1.3 minutes.

    https://youtu.be/qgrTqezwnjs

    Chris Tuckers last line is the best.

    Rev. Hoagie® (785e38)

  8. In that vast majority of American lives, an annual salary of $600,000 for “work” you were hired to do because of your parents is the very definition of catching an enormous break. Obviously op-ed writer Ann Friedman did not read the LAT’s own Michael Hiltzik’s reporting on Chelsea’s $600,000 a year break:

    NBC’s hiring of Chelsea Clinton as a “special correspondent” in its news division was widely recognized as an exercise in corporate cynicism when it was announced in November 2011.

    Now a price tag has been hung on that scandal, with Politico’s reporting that Clinton has been paid a salary of $600,000. The network hasn’t confirmed the figure, but it hasn’t denied it either, and responded to Politico’s questions by asserting that it “continues to enjoy a wonderful working relationship with Chelsea, and we are proud of her work.”

    It’s that last part that’s particularly head-scratching, for as a news correspondent for NBC, Clinton hasn’t done anything to be proud of. Quite the contrary. The disclosure raises the obvious question of NBC’s goal in giving a person without any measurable journalistic or broadcasting experience or any particular public following a high-profile job and apparently paying her a top-echelon salary.

    The answer is equally obvious. Plainly, it was done to curry favor with the Clinton family.

    If journalism is defined as publishing information that the subjects of your reporting don’t wish to be made public, then it’s hard to find any journalism in Clinton’s oeuvre whatsoever. Every piece we reviewed appeared to be painstakingly engineered to give no offense to anyone.

    Clinton is obviously an intelligent person. It would be shocking if she doesn’t have useful insights on the issues that have animated her parents’ political careers. NBC News has turned out to be the wrong platform to show them. If she really does want to make a contribution to bettering society, as was suggested by the fatuous PR surrounding her hiring, she should give up the NBC deal and turn her focus to honest work.

    Dana (023079)

  9. “Clinton is obviously an intelligent person. It would be shocking if she doesn’t have useful insights on the issues that have animated her parents’ political careers. NBC News has turned out to be the wrong platform to show them. If she really does want to make a contribution to bettering society, as was suggested by the fatuous PR surrounding her hiring, she should give up the NBC deal and turn her focus to honest work.”

    And possibly arrange a to testify in return for immunity and a new identity….

    C. S. P. Schofield (99bd37)

  10. Even allowing for it being an opinion piece written by a political hack, the LAT was closer to reality when it was printing unfiltered North Korean propaganda on its front page than it is with this steaming pile of dynasty fluffing.

    M. Scott Eiland (1edade)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0658 secs.