James O'Keefe's alleged "stunt" exposes the misogynist dark side of the right-wing media
September 29, 2010 1:13 pm ET by Julie Millican
One thing shouldn't get lost in the coverage of James O'Keefe and his cohorts' alleged plot to "punk" CNN reporter Abbie Bourdreau by luring her onto a boat filled with sex toys and porno, in order to stage a secretly videotaped seduction which they would then allegedly use to "embarrass" Bourdreau and "make CNN look bad." And that is, if the reports are true, their deluded and sexist motivation for wanting to do this.
According to Bourdreau, O'Keefe and his buddies concocted this scheme because the believed "Abbie has been trying to seduce" O'Keefe into doing an interview for a documentary CNN is doing on "the young conservative movement." They apparently believed that "this bubble-headed-bleach-blonde" was using her sexuality to convince O'Keefe to do the interview so that she could turn around and make him look bad in the documentary. So, the alleged plan, was to turn the table on her, and according to documents obtained by CNN, O'Keefe was to record an introduction to the video, saying, in part, "This bubble-headed-bleach-blonde who comes on at five will get a taste of her own medicine, she'll get seduced on camera and you'll get to see the awkwardness and the aftermath." O'Keefe denies that he had anything to do with the plan and says he "did not consider them for one minute following it." However, Bourdreau says that O'Keefe's denial "does not appear to be true," according to emails CNN received.
Earth to O'Keefe. Just because a reporter is female does not mean that the reporter is trying to seduce you. And, the "bubble-headed-bleach-blonde" you and your buddies allegedly described is an award winning investigative reporter who earned her keep the hard way--by keeping her nose to the ground, working hard to find stories and eventually being rewarded for her work. According to her bio, since 2007, Boudreau's "work has earned her the Livingston Award for international reporting, a national Emmy nomination, a National Headliner Award, a national Clarion Award, and she was an IRE finalist for an investigative series called 'Hurricane Giveaway.'" That's a hell of a lot more than hacks like O'Keefe could claim.
Perhaps even more galling, is that if their plan got exposed, O'Keefe and his cohorts reportedly were going to accuse CNN of sexism. According to CNN, their "CNN Caper" document "discuss[ed] the potential fallout from the operation." One option they reportedly considered was this:
[I]f they go on the attack, you should point out the hypocrisy in CNN using the inherent sexuality of these women to sell viewers and for ratings, passing up more esteemed and respectable journalists who aren't bubble-headed bleach blondes and keep the focus on CNN.
Apparently they see no irony in calling a professional journalist a "bubble-headed bleach blonde" while accusing CNN of sexism.
Boudreau explains well how "tough" it is to be "a woman in the news industry," writing, "as a woman in the news industry you have to be tough. I have always had to work harder than my male counterparts to be taken seriously and to be treated with respect. As a woman in the news industry you have to ignore all of the silly talk from your managers about the clothes you should wear on-air or what color your hair should be. I have had my share of conversations like that, and to be honest, it stings." She goes on to express a longing for "people to pay attention to my work" and to be "respected" as a journalist, rather than be judge and dismissed solely "because of the way I look."
All of this reminds me of the recent incident involving a female sports reporter who was allegedly harassed by players on the New York Jets. As word of the story broke, almost instinctively, right-wing media figures jumped to blame the reporter for the harassment because of the way she looked. For instance, Rush Limbaugh called her a "bootylicious" reporter who is "making no attempt" to hide it "because she wants access for her job." Glenn Beck called her a "chick" and suggested her shirt may be to blame for the alleged harassment. Tucker Carlson's Daily Caller's response to the story: "Baby got back." On Hannity, the "Great American Panel" suggested that wearing "tight jeans" and "calling yourself...hot" means "[y]ou have to expect some level" of "kid[ding]" from "the guys" if "you are in a sports arena" and everyone should "lighten up." And Fox's Brian Kilmeade advised the reporter to "get a Whoopi Goldberg outfit, like a big tent."
It seems clear that despite their protestations to the contrary, many in the right-wing media have some issues with women. And rather than stand by silently, respectable journalists should rise in defense of their colleagues when they are subjected to such misogynist attacks. Let's hope they don't miss the opportunity to do so here.
















-Seahawks123
The Force is Strong in you, despite your Evil Aimes.
When you go to Prison, remember to keep your Back to the Wall.
It will protect you from STD's, just Pray you don't ever Trip & Fall.
Speak truth to power.
Mr. News
If they go on the attack, you should point out the hypocrisy in CNN using the inherent sexuality of these women to sell viewers and for ratings, passing up more esteemed and respectable journalists who aren't bubble-headed bleach blondes and keep the focus on CNN.
Apparently they see no irony in calling a professional journalist a "bubble-headed bleach blonde" while accusing CNN of sexism. --from the article
Seems that FOX NEWS could be inserted in place of CNN quite easily.
And if she chooses to bleach her hair, just like if Nancy Pelosi chooses cosmetic surgery to improve her looks, it's up to that individual person. Again, it's behavior that one should comment upon.
Too often, those on the right love to go after women, and they fail to recognize their behavior is offensive when they do so!
And O'Keefe thinks that she was trying to seduce him? Well, lesser men have thought that a woman was giving them a "come hither" look when nothing could be further from the truth! LOL
Can somebody please take this idiot's 'Best of Don Henley' CDs away?
comprehend what nothingness is.
we can only reason on what is. it really goes no farther then that.
we can theorize on infinity because we know that pi is a never ending sequence.. but can we prove it? no, are life spans are limited.
How can you get something, from 'absolute nothingness'? We have to assume that something can come from 'absolute nothingness'. This is explained by our existence.
'Absolute nothingness' is only an idea. It is the fact that 'absolute nothingness' can never exist, that something exists.
life is nothing more then potential for progression. you want something to change, then create ideas and apply them to reality. the purpose is what you make of it. maybe your in poverty so your current purpose is to intake energy. maybe you have a test due so your current purpose is to study.
the universe is relevant to the observer in the sense that the observer can manipulate the universe to their advantage through applied ideas. although with many separate observers it is probable that when you manipulate something, even without the intention, it can possibly effect another observer.
life is not about trying to become one with the universe or find the light, it is about trying to evolve with it. spiritual thinking is not going to advance humanity or unlock an awakening within.
because, how else does something come about from nothing? the only explanation is there is always potential for existence.
50/50 flip, eventually you will get something, this is proven because we exist.
its the forces of nature which govern evolution in the universe, its up to the observer to understand them correctly(science). not for nature to understand itself, because obviously it can or it wouldn't exist
booooooooooop
God is just an observer created idea, it can't be proven fact in reality, therefore it is ALWAYS irrelevant in reality, it can only be contemplated.
If you came into existence earlier in reality, say as a farmer, wouldn't you pray for rain to support your crops. Now, we have the ability to manipulate water to fit our needs. Look to the heavens, water comes down from above to fuel us! praise the existence of the universe! praise the existence of water!
bible- there will be end times, an 'apocalypse of sort you could say', an end to all existence..
logic- there will be end times, be from universal randomness(say an asteroid hits) or when humanity destroys itself or it's environment (or maybe we discover a way to exist outside of earth) and human consciousness can no longer exist within reality because, the earth environment is the only place known to support the existence of conscious reasoning life forms.
more re:
competing realities? are you saying an individuals consciousness is not part of the same reality as another individuals consciousness? im talking about human consciousness not alligator consciousness. im talking about consciousness in reality, not that reality is conscious of itself, which it is because, as observers we can see reality is real.
idols of mind, good read, appreciated
no, im not angry, im just expressing my view of reality. this belief in a 'god' or 'all' is contemplated, i might be sure, by all observers. But when you just accept reality and accept that reality is conscious it exists, that reality will never be unconscious it exists.. walah, there is your 'eternal life' or 'truth' that, REALITY KNOWS IT EXISTS BECAUSE IT CAN OBSERVE ITSELF EXISTING. there is no proof that something exists outside reality. reality encompasses existence.
/Jesus
Jesus- i am god in flesh, i will have everlasting life, believe in what i say and you will to..
logic- i exist because i have an individual consciousness in reality. I will never be unconscious to reality once i am conscious that it exists. Believe that the universe is conscious that it exists and it will always be conscious it exists..
that is the paradox of existence
50/50 flip
heads, potential for something
tails, absolute nothingness
keep flipping
keep flipping
you WILL get potential for something, why? because we REALLY exist , nothing can be proven to exist outside of existence itself
..."mind is like the eyes, they can see in all directions but inward.. or a light, that until turned on is not noticed.."
RE: Your not illuminated by light as we speak? are you sitting in complete absolute darkness or can you spiritual people not get a grip on REALITY? not making assumptions just assuming
That is the classic text book justification for rape, murder, and every abuse that perps perpetrate.