NY Sun headline: "Could Edwards Become First Woman President?"
A March 8 article in The New York Sun, headlined "Could Edwards Become First Woman President?" reported that former Sen. John Edwards (D-NC) was endorsed by Kate Michelman, described in the article as "a veteran of the abortion-rights movement." The article noted that "Toni Morrison famously dubbed President Clinton America's 'first black president,' " and added that "the comments of a prominent feminist" -- Michelman -- "are provoking debate about who may lay a similar claim to the title of America's first woman president."
The article included three quotes from Michelman on Edwards' commitment to women's issues:
- "I've gotten to know a lot of political leaders over the years that I've been an advocate for women's rights. I know the difference between those who advocate as a political position and those who understand the reality of women's lives."
- "As a lawyer, as a senator, as a husband, as a father of two daughters, he understands the reality of women's lives. He understands the centrality of women's lives and experience to the health and well-being of society as a whole. ... He understands that on an extremely personal level."
- "He doesn't just understand. You have to begin with understanding. It's an understanding but it is a commitment. ... He understands in a way that is tied to all of his beliefs about lifting everyone up."
The article did not point to anyone engaged in a "debate" about whether Edwards will be given the title "America's first woman president." It also asserted that "[c]ompared to Mrs. [Sen. Hillary Rodham] Clinton [D-NY], Mr. Edwards is short an 'X' chromosome, but listening to Ms. Michelman, that is easy to forget."
The CNN weblog Political Ticker linked to the Sun article on March 8 but reproduced only the headline and did not offer any excerpts or a synopsis.
Simliarly, National Review Online's Daily Web Briefing linked to the Sun article and provided the headline, author, and outlet, but did not provide any excerpts or synopsis.
National Journal's Hotline Wake-Up Call linked (subscription required) to the Sun article under its "What's News" section, asserting, "It's International Women's Day. And inquiring minds want to know: 'Could Edwards Become First Woman President?' "
As Media Matters for America has noted, a conservative smear of Edwards as the "Breck Girl" often surfaced in media coverage of Edwards' 2004 bid for the White House. Indeed, New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd referred to Edwards as the "Breck Girl" as recently as her February 14 column. Right-wing pundit Ann Coulter touched off a firestorm recently by referring to Edwards as a "faggot" at the Conservative Political Action Conference.
That made me laugh! Hahahahaha, I mean it's pretty funny to splash that as a headline, come on. Edwards might end up with e/d over this.
"Could George Bush Become First Incarcerated President?"
Now THAT'S Funny.
Randy
pResident you meant, after all he lost the 2000 election, only to be annointed by the SC so it follows that the 2004 was not legitimate, so he never really has been 'elected' to that office.
You know what, I don't care what anyone says. If and when George W. Bush is found guilty of treason, I don't think he should be executed.
I think he should have to do decades of orderly duty at VA hospitals. Not as punishment per se... I would like to see him come to grips with the harm he caused before he dies.
Bittermarv,
Not even for promoting the North American Union (NAFTA on steroids) behind our backs?
Col. Roy (and others), anybody here knows what "laugh" means.What's with the extra "ha ha ha ha" every time?
I'm just curious. " ?????????????????????????????"
Anyway, I do think it's funny. Not the headline, but the fact that the p*ssy rightys consider anybody who's not scared of everybody else (women, non-white people, gays) is "girly".
i agree... I think that every time someone says another is 'soft' or a' ___-lover' or what-have-you... If you emphathize with someone of another gender, class, race, etc., you are less manly somehow... disgusting
I am being serious, if you want to see where a lot of that behavior comes from go to a local zoo witha 'monkey house' and watch them. If a big one picks on someone smaller, the picked on one goes and finds someone small then they are and picks on them. And of course the poo-flinging thing to as Coulter and O'Lielly types are so fond of. That is what you see in many of these types who find that kind of talk comedic. Funnily enough, a lot of them will scream they are not related to monkey's :)
It's just that, some time back, it occurred to some that they should try something new, and leave the collectivism of the monkeyhouse, even with all its promise of progress, behind.
Thus was born the Republican Party.
Evolution.
And some time ago humans abandoned the hunter gatherer, nomadic mode of existence. They came together invented tools, learned to turnover earth to plant seeds and domesticated animals, thus they became agrarians. They learned that the earth could sustain them and they could devote more time to each other and form communities, thus they became a collective.
Evolution.
And from that sense of community was born the liberal philosophy.
I read this as being similar to Toni Morrison's statement about Bill Clinton, which seems to be the tack the Sun was taking. This doesn't seem to me like a smear on the level of Coulter's. (I bet she wishes she could go back in time and get laughter and applause from Young Republicans by calling Bill Clinton a n****r.)
Silly, imature-perfect talking points for the right wing inner child
Apparently this is how the Flying Monkey Liars plan to deal with Edwards...plant the seed in the Troglodytes' brains that Edwards is a closet gay. It's pretty much the same as painting Gore as a serial exaggerator, or Kerry as a Purple Heart faker. They're trying to paint Obama as corrupt, and Clinton as a Harpy. Notice that they can't seem to engage the Democrats on the issues?
Republicans AND the press can't seem to engage Democrats on the issues. The stories always seem to gravitate toward this week's political sliming, not what the candidate stands for. All we know about Edwards is that Coulter thinks he's gay, and the NY Sun thinks he's a woman. Issues? We don't need no stinking issues!
Randy
ALL you know about Edwards is that Coulter says he's gay???
C'mon.
Our current acting King is a dry-drunk. Just wait until he is out of office and watch his health deteriorate. You will also witness that the press will not interview him, just like they ignored Reagan, because he has nothing intelligent to say. Contrast that with someone with actual leadership skills like Clinton or Carter, who are still sought for their opinions.
Our current acting King is in it for the money. The ONLY decisions I have seen him make seem to benefit his family and cronies in so many ways. Has he done anything for women, or minorities, children, poor, etc? I thought not.
Does anyone have anything good to say about King George in terms of his leadership? I didn't think so.
Excellent points. I've said this before, but I'd love to find out how much of a windfall the Bush family has gotten from his tax cuts.
I do have one good thing to say...in another 21 months he has to leave office and can never again be elected.
I agree with you. We hear an awful lot of talk about fair-play when it comes to the liberals... That is, just don't call conservative press on it. Then it's the same old story... "too sensitive", "can't take a joke", "sarcasm". That stuff doesn't fly. Who knows how this info has been received or processed though the press.
Not to mention, how many of the same sort of 'jokes' do we hear about McCain or Guilliani or Romney? All we get is how pretty or bold or tough they are. There's a complete double-standard. To paint so-called 'liberals' as babies for pointing out this stuff is unfair.
That's how it works. Even if people start to hate Coulter & Co their comments become part of the public dialogue.
I'm just wondering why it has taken us over 230 years to seriously address women's issues? Sure, they're no longer considered property (unless you're Hugh Hefner - that was a joke) and they can vote, but would it really be a bad thing to give women the complete freedom to have control over their own lives and bodies?
You get it?? By championing women's rights... you're a woman! Whoa. See? They're reeeaaally sort of complimenting him, no? Lame.
That's fine. When ALL women go out and vote for Edwards (the purported f-word and woman)... he'll have the last laugh. So will all the folks who vote for this reasonable and qualified candidate... who also has sway in the Southern (red) states.
The Edwards camp should (and likely does) look at this stuff as good press. The hounds are nervous.
This is hardly a smear piece against Edwards. This piece is a glowing review of Edwards by a prominent woman who was head of NARAL for 20 years and is supporting Edwards over Clinton.
MMFA is REACHING on this one.
Any "joke" that isn't complimentary or pc against a beloved Democrat is a baseless, unfunny smear. Those are the rules.
We need some new rules. Better call Bill Maher.
No it's not. I find many jokes that over-play stereotypes quite funny. However, as a Liberal I wouldn't repeat any joke or comment that would demean a member of another ethnic group, creed or sexual orientation, unless I could tell it to someone of that group and not be uncomfortable about it.
And I as a conservative don't make jokes about people's sexual orientation or race either. Although sarcasm and humor are used all the time, especially on these cable shows. If they aren't allowed a little humor leeway, then what do they have - they become C-Span.....and who would watch that?
People in the public eye get skewered all the time, to me they are fair play, to a point. They can defend themselves and are big boys and girls. And usually, if the "joke" goes too far, as in Coulter's, then that person usually feels the heat and the intended is viewed sympathetically. The marketplace works these things out, for the most part. The cable talkers just love to enflame it all for ratings.
So are your saying is this is just buiness as usual and we shouldn't care?
"Chirp...Chirp..."
-"Cricket"Tommy
Glenn Greenwald had a very interesting post about the "feminization" of Democrats by the pseudo-macho right. I think it's at least worth discussing this article in that context, even if some of you don't agree this is an instance of that dynamic.
For the quadrillionth time, I just don't understand what you guys hope to accomplish by the "why is this here" family of posts.
Wrong again, Officer Tommy. The rules, at least for me, are that in order for jokes to provoke laughter, they have to be funny.
...and, you'll see the headline all over the place (without the content of the article)...as MMFA is saying.
This was obviously meant to be taken the same way as referring to Clinton as the first Black President, however seeing it's coming on the heels of Coulter's remark, it will be seen as only a slur.
I must say though the Breck Girl thing is especially funny if you watch this guy getting his hair oh so perfect on that you tube video. My wife doesn't fuss with her hair as much as Edwards does here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AE847UXu3Q
I'd think twice before electing someone who might let a bad hair day effect his judgment ;-) [kidding here folks so relax]
That IS funny. You gotta love YouTube :)
That is funny. However, this is disturbing.
Uhhhhh gross!!!
I'm glad I didn't watch that right before or right after lunch.
Thanks open_mind I hope I can exorcise that out of my mind before dinner.
If Edwards is smart, he would parody himself about his video.
It would be pretty easy to do and would probably boost his image, while putting the issue to bed. It seems to be hard for people to make fun of you while you are making fun of yourself.
I have reservations as to Edwards judgement, though. I don't think he is wise enough to try it.
Watch it again. With a hairline and smile like that, wouldn't a person try their damnedest to NOT style and comb their hair like Alfred E. Neumann? Look at it again.
Then I saw the socks. Cheap ba$trds, those bankers.
EEEEEWWW! That is, shall we say, "old school" grooming technique. I prefer just to spit in my hands and then rub in my hair. No need for a comb.
wow
Jeter, that was extremely funny. I love the hairspray lady.
Thanks for the laugh.
This is simply a snarky, snide way of riding on the coattails of Ann Coulter's "fa**ot" remark. Which --of course-- ALSO was only a "funny joke". Really despicable, not journalism, and not in the public's interest.
That's obviously not why National Review was linking the story.
The piece is about a prominent feminist's support of Edwards, and conviction that he really does care about women's rights. The headline is a tongue-in-cheek jab at Edwards that futhers the already prominent attempts at emasculating him.
In other words, the Sun, which is little more than a tabloid anyhow, took an actual story and twisted it to take yet another dig at a left-of-center candidate.
"This is hardly a smear piece against Edwards"- so this is meant to help him? While most rational people will not have a problem with this headline(considering where and why it is printed) the right wing goons will use this to scare the sh=t out of their mindless minions and once again prove that the left has no solid leaders- just a bunch of men portrayed as women and women portrayed as harpies. Just great. What next?Maybe a smear questioning Obama's blackness? Oh ya that is last weeks playbook. MG
Next week it'll be if Hillary has the cojones to be president.
You know, the people who might be affected by this headline weren't voting Edwards anyways. And Edwards will be detroyed in the long run by Hillary's Money Machine so the far righties won't get to vote against him anyways. At least that's what Dick Morris told me.
you and tommy- the physic connection... how do YOU know what people are going to do, or vote?... the people offended by the title are at least thinking critically about what the media is puddin' out there..
sorry.. psychic..
I thought the people who would be stirred up about the headline were the "trogladytes" on the right. Of course the left is far too smart to fall for such an obvious ploy. One little old headline couldn't possibly sway their opinion. I guess I wasn't aware that Edwards had a big "trogladyte" following that is about to drop him now that this is has gone public.
No, I think Edwards has at least the potential to reach the swing voters that have been swinging to Bush. I think that, should he become the candidate, "first woman president" will be this election cycle's equivalent of "flip-flop."
If they can make him look to "f4ggoty" for, say, Southern swing voters to go for him, he'll be finished.
I don't know how many swing states or voters are in the south, but I really give Republicans very little chance to keep the White House in 08 regardless of the nominee. It's clear that this country is in full swing to put change in Washington, and deservedly so after the past 8 years. I happen to think Edwards is one of the weaker Dems running, but if he can get past Clinton and Obama then he will have shown he is battle tested because getting the Democratic nomination will be tougher than winning the general election IMHO.
IF they WERE targeting Edwards voters -which you somehow know they aren't- then there might actually BE a justification (a justification in a right-wing brain, that is) for the demeaning headline.
No crud... maybe some people would say that if the headline was 'McCain to be the first waffle president', then is it STILL a compliment? I'm sure they would say no... the sun's headline was in no way a 'flattering' or 'glowing' remark for Edwards... it clearly (the title, not the article) implies that Edwards is a girly-man, and coming off the heels of Ann 'the Dali Lama is in my cross-hairs' Coulter non-gay remark, I believe the newspaper put it out intentional to be inflammatory...
"the right wing goons will use this to scare the sh=t out of their mindless minions "
Exactly. This headline feeds into the latest right-wing meme: Edwards, the "fa**ot", Edwards, the "Breck Girl", is not masculine enough to be president.
It's simply the latest item in the right-wing's ongoing minimalizing, ridiculing and demeaning of any and all opposition.
"Could Edwards Become First Woman President?"
-----
Elizabeth, perhaps. John, not at all.
Glenn Greenwald wrote a great piece the other day on a related topic, titled "The right-wing cult of contrived masculinity". It's worthwhile reading.
[link to www.salon.com]
Excellent. And, right on the money.
What was the Sun's intent with this headline? They are self-admittedly right of center politically with their editorials. However, the article is hardly critical of Edwards.
In any event, I think MMFA is over-reacting on this one, perhaps in light of Coulter's recent remark. Even if the headline were meant to be critical, sometimes the smarter response is to embrace criticism rather than fight it. Edwards could be quite successful by embracing this one and the underlying message; i.e., he's committed to women's issues more than any other candidate.
I think the point of MMFA's posting is that The Sun claimed that a "debate" was taking place about whether Edwards was going to be "the first woman president." Yet it quoted no one as making that claim nor anyone allegedly "debating" it. In other words, the "journalist" did not report the news but instead attempted to either make news itself or spin what actually WAS said by the feminist it quoted or by someone else. I agree that this is misleading.
Ok. I see your point. The author appears to be straying too much in order to make a point. Typically, people do this in order to try to give greater credibility to an opinion. Another explanation is the author didn't believe the idea to be original so didn't want to take credit for it, but didn't know how or take the time to figure out how to source it.
Just the same, I'd welcome this "debate" if I were Edwards.
I can pretty much guarentee that most men would not want that as a headline concerning them running for president. It was meant to damage not to help, to ruin his chances of success.While most would agree that being aligned with the women's movement is a very good thing to transfer that to being a women is a disserviece to men and women. Plus the added value of knocking the only woman in the race out of contenion.
Ann Coulter
Her smears and filth are reaching other levels of the right wing media. I have am idea how about Ann, and Hannity and the NY Sun get together and spout off hate all day? At least we can keep an eye on them in one place. Ann Coulter to me is more dangerous than the KKK.
****MMFA IS SEXIST****!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I've changed my mind, this shows MMFA BIAS against WOMEN because they are assuming that NY Sun was trying to INSULT or DEMEAN Edwards by saying he could be the first WOMAN president in the headlines, yet when people say clinton is the first BLACK president (and the ny sun points this out and compares their own reference to this one) it is seen as affectionate. Therefore the only reason this piece is here is because MMFA automatically assumed calling Edwards a woman is an insult.
I think you miss the point. It is pretty clear that the Sun is at fault here. They are the ones who apparently believe in the insult. Pointing that out is not sexism.
And just WTF said that Clinton's "Black" label was affectionate? I don't think it is. I think it's just plain dumb.
NOPE. George W. Bush was the first woman president!!
"Jeff Gannon", fake reporter, and GAY MALE PROSTITUTE said:
"The little PUNK'S MY BITCH, America"!!
And since Bush IS a TRAITOR bitch PUNK, I believe "Jeff".
Actually, an appropriate headline would be:
BUSH IS THE FIRST CHENEY PRESIDENT
Well Col.Roy you thought it was very funny so where are you on this issue?At best it is a case of the kettle calling the pot black.Your constant dribble on this site as a provicator really just shows a lack of sincerity of the issues.I believe that most on this site are here because of their true concerns for their country not to score points for the right or left as the case may be. Perhaps you can find some other site to bully.Please do everyone a favor and find some other playground to be petty in.Mark G
Sorry Mr Geragos, if Mitt Romney can evolve so can I.
Mitt Romney wouldn't dare evolve... or any other Republican candidate, for that matter. Any suggestion of evolution would alienate the religious right wingers they so covet.
Okay, this was funny. I have not read any other posts, the MMFA piece above or the article. To me it is just funny, having fun with the whole uproar over coulters foot deeply inserted into mouth incident.
Edwards promises to return taxes on those making over 200,000 a year back to the Clinton era levels. This increased revenue will fund his healthcare program for Americans to a system similar to what Israel and many European countries enjoy. Hilary Clinton, I beleive wishes to expand the single payer systems of Medicare-Medicaid, which, until the Republican Part D rip-off was pushed through, were actually good healthcare systems. For these reasons, we will see nothing but negative news on either of them until Barack Obama has been shoved down our throats as Kerry was over Howard Dean in 04. Sadly, the American electorate has been so dumbed down by television, that they are too easily influenced by these smear techniques. There will be no major positive coverage of Clinton or Edwards until they are no longer campaigning.
I don't think this "joke" of a headline is offensive, it's just plain stupid. It ranks way down with the sewage we saw on the "1/2 Hour Newshour". Seems the more righties try to make jokes these days, the lamer they get. The Dems are vulnerable to satire, but I have yet to see any righty humorist figure out what comedy is and actually go out and capitalize on it.
I cannot see how anyone is shoved down anyones throats.Last I heard you still have the right to vote for/listen to- who ever you want.Those of you who still have open minds and don't let the "media" choose for you can always make up your own minds.How bout we stop blaming the media for everything and start to take responcibility for our own choices and spelling mistakes.As for health care take a good look at the Canadian example and keep in mind the anectdotal waiting times (that are the exception not the rule). I think that you will find that a bigger bang for the buck can be had rather than the pay as you go system that you have. No money no health care. Bad for eveyone-no health care is unhealthy for a country. Mark G
"The exception rather than the rule". You obviously have not participated in the Canadian system, nor experienced the tax bite there.
It is not what you think it is. And who is it here that is getting worse medical attention than his/her counterpart in Canada?
I would say at least two of the 47 million uninsured citizens of our country could answer your specious question.
"Twelve-year-old Deamonte Driver died of a toothache Sunday. A routine, $80 tooth extraction might have saved him." [link to www.washingtonpost.com]
"Increasingly, the problem affects middle-class people like Ms. Readling, who said she made about $60,000 last year. As an independent contractor, like many real estate agents, Ms. Readling does not receive health benefits from an employer. She tried to buy a policy in the individual insurance market, but — having had cancer — could not obtain coverage, except at a price exceeding $27,000 a year, which was more than she could pay." [link to www.nytimes.com]
I agree that this is a reach. If Clinton was "black" meaning he understood issues of African Americans, and did something about it, doesn't this mean that Edwards would be the first president to understand women.
I can see where the right could see this as a problem, but I don't think so.
Love that headline. Well, the girlie boys at the N Y Sun ought to know. It takes one to know one.
Is the NY Sun even considered a "real" newspaper or more of a tabloid sort of like the NY Post, and things like that?
Admittedly, it's a reach. This is a tabloid come-on headline, but even the article is fluff. The 'expert' they interviewed cites as evidence that "as a husband, as a father of two daughters, he understands the reality of women's lives."
Uh, George Bush is a husband and father of two daughters. That hardly qualifies him as "First woman president".
Thanks for that link to the Salon article about the fake masculinity of the so called conservatives. Yeah, 5 deferment Dick and all of the other panty waists that couldn't bother to serve their country when called upon to do so need to feel powerful and manly. Oh, and we have our own fake colonel right here at MMFA. Pathetic.
We already have our first woman president, our nation's first cheerleader, George Bush
Green eyed envy is a bitch. Gee, Kennedyand Reagan managed to get traction and respect in spite of good looks. John Edwards is a good looking guy, a solid family man. That's IT: Edward has only had one wife and the other side has serial, thrice married adulterers for candidates. Romney has other issues. All those ugly bald and balled conservatives can only WISH for God's gifts. Maybe then they wouldn't welcome darkness: they'd curse it like enlightened folks. Limbaugh, Dowd, et al would never survive Nip 'Tuck. The camera would explode. Any Democratic candidate will always be more talented, better looking and no contest for ethics and focused on a better America.