Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Currently Hanging | The Republican Party Meets the... »

Wednesday, March 5, 2008

Really, MoDo?

posted by on March 5 at 15:05 PM

Maureen Dowd files another predictable anti-Hillary column in today’s NYT, arguing (unique angle!) that “some [unidentified] women” don’t support Hils because “They feel that women have moved past that men-are-pigs, woe-is-me, sisters-must-stick-together, pantsuits-are-powerful era” that Hillary represents. “They” (whoever they are!) call it “shoulder-pad feminism.”

Um, MoDo? I thought Hillary “isn’t a feminist.”

RSS icon Comments


Boring. Move on.

Posted by Shawn Fassett | March 5, 2008 3:17 PM

Dude, I'm sooooo bored of your sniping. You sound like an 8 year old.

Posted by Dan | March 5, 2008 3:22 PM

I have fond memories of women with shoulder pads, at least when we take them off ...

Um. Sorry.

Oh, lame post and lame column the post was about, ECB.

Move on. Seriously.

Posted by Will in Seattle | March 5, 2008 3:22 PM

Can we gather all the political posts to one -or a small few- a day, ala "In the Last 24 Hours on Line Out"? I don't think we need a new article every time someone, somewhere expresses some opinion about a candidate.

Posted by JC | March 5, 2008 3:23 PM

more blah, blah, blah

Posted by Boring | March 5, 2008 3:27 PM

i googled it. "some women" are apparently one courtney e. martin.

i'm not sure which is more lame - claiming a term used by one woman as belonging to "some women," or the second wave feminists that term is supposed to describe [in michelle malkin's column this week she calls them "gyno-saurs." say what you will about malkin, that's pretty fucking clever.]

Posted by brandon | March 5, 2008 3:30 PM


Now I'm mentally dressing ECB.

In a pantsuit!

Posted by NapoleonXIV | March 5, 2008 3:31 PM

i find the term "shoulder pad feminism" appropriately quite fucking hilarious.

Posted by josh bomb | March 5, 2008 3:33 PM

Word ECB. I feel like Dowd, with her deep-seated hatred of pantsuits, needs to be called out. I generally like the NYT op-eds, but her column has become a complete waste of space.

Posted by dave | March 5, 2008 3:33 PM


Nobody likes a sore winner, especially one that drags up these sad passive victim arguments.

For the record, I started out a Hill supporter (I still get her emails several times a day), I have switched to Obama, but truthfully I don't care which one it is as long as they can fight a winning campaign in the fall, and that includes not pissing off their base.

Cut down on the 'everybody finds fault in Hillary' posts and you won't come off looking so much like Chris Crocker defending Britney.

Posted by Daniel | March 5, 2008 3:33 PM

If I found ECB's posts boring, I wouldn't read them. But I don't. You go girl.

Posted by crazycatguy | March 5, 2008 3:34 PM

Hillary isn't a lesbian, as far as I know.

Posted by Timothy | March 5, 2008 3:39 PM

@11, you don't have to read her posts to know whether they are boring. Just read the title. Better yet, look to see who posted it.

Posted by You're boring | March 5, 2008 3:42 PM

Funny how a few years ago Hillary was seen as the most rabid example of a liberal Democrat you could imagine and today she is actually seen as the more moderate Democrat.

She's a feminist - she is not a feminist; she is part of the new era of Democrats - she is the old guard of the party; she is a flaming liberal - she is a tool of corporations

I think people like to project a lot of ideas about women, women in politics and politians generally on to Hillary.

Anyway, I am glad she won last night b/c I still think she'll be the best ass kicker to get a Democratic agenda passed.

Posted by Mrs. Y | March 5, 2008 3:43 PM

Men are pigs? Well, her husband is a pig, but Hillary may be the only woman on the planet who doesn't think so.

Posted by Natalie | March 5, 2008 3:43 PM

Oh and ECB -- Don't listen to the haters. I appreciate your posts and commentary about Hillary. It actually provides a little balance to the non- stop 'Obama is God' rhetoric seen every three minutes on this Blog.

Posted by Mrs. Y | March 5, 2008 3:48 PM

Erica, I believe you are literally, not figuratively, a troll.

Posted by Obamatron | March 5, 2008 3:48 PM


No. Isn't funny. They say the same things about every single politician in the universe.

Posted by elenchos | March 5, 2008 3:54 PM

I, for one, am so glad ECB has kept the HIllary momentum alive when her colleagues and many readers had written her (HRC) off. Her posts have given me hope, so thanks! As for Maureen Dowd, she used to be fun to read, now she just comes off as a presumptuous and bitter ole harpy.

Posted by mittenkg | March 5, 2008 3:56 PM

MoDo is just so much cooler than any other woman will ever be. Just ask her.

Posted by MadDogM13 | March 5, 2008 4:04 PM


Posted by some dude | March 5, 2008 4:12 PM

Sore "winner"?

Interesting analysis from David LaPlouffe...

Projections show the most likely outcome of yesterday's elections will be that Hillary Clinton gained 187 delegates, and Obama gained 183.

That's a net gain of 4 delegates out of more than 370 delegates available from all the states that voted.

For comparison, that's less than half Obama's net gain of 9 delegates from the District of Columbia alone. It's also less than his net gain of 8 from Nebraska, or 12 from Washington State. And it's considerably less than the net gain of 33 delegates from Georgia.

The task for the Clinton campaign yesterday was clear. In order to have a plausible path to the nomination, they needed to score huge delegate victories and cut into our lead.

They failed.

Posted by Clint | March 5, 2008 4:12 PM

We need a new catch all post.

You know, like Line Out or The Daily News but just for ECB And Other "Journalists" Rant About Columns Other Better Paid Journalists Wrote That Upset Them.

That would save time.

Posted by Will in Seattle | March 5, 2008 4:16 PM

Can't someone please just toss a bucket of water on Hillary and melt her?

Posted by NapoleonXIV | March 5, 2008 4:22 PM

"MoDo"? Really? I hope someone else made that up first, because it's pretty awful.

Posted by joykiller | March 5, 2008 4:31 PM

@25, agree. @12, nice one, does anyone read the comments?

ECB, no one uses Modo, Obama is an opponent - not your old boyfriend, thx for bringing the term 'shoulder pad feminism' to my attention though. The lesbian jokes are funny, but I could freshen it up.

Posted by left coast | March 5, 2008 4:40 PM

@24 - you almost made me spew my afternoon latte there!

There is no truth to the rumor that Hils is a Lesbian and that McCain has compromising pics of her with Salman Rushdie's former wife.

Well ... that we can admit.

Posted by Will in Seattle | March 5, 2008 4:54 PM

"men-are-pigs, woe-is-me, sisters-must-stick-together, pantsuits-are-powerful era"

So, you think these things represent feminism? I find that hard to believe.

Posted by w7ngman | March 5, 2008 4:56 PM

@28: No, Dowd (whom I'm quoting) does.

Posted by ECB | March 5, 2008 5:34 PM

Have you met her and has she said that to your face, ECB?

Just because she irritates you, doesn't mean she's writing things the way you think she is.

Posted by Will in Seattle | March 5, 2008 5:53 PM

#30: Your comment makes no sense at all. Since when do people have to meet someone in person before they're allowed to disagree with something the other person wrote? Either present some evidence that ECB misinterpreted Dowd's article, or shut up.

Posted by Marya | March 5, 2008 6:09 PM

Will, do not screw with my Padma fantasies. I'm married, please leave me with something.

Posted by left coast | March 5, 2008 6:29 PM

Erica, I'm not reading Dowd to say that Hilary is a feminist but that many of her ardent followers are - what else to call women (e.g., Northwest Women's Political Caucus) whose first line of argument for Hillary is that she's a woman - here from one of their calls to arms "'s crititical that women turn out to their precinct caucus and register their vote to make Hillary Clinton the first woman president of the United States!"

Why not just "to make Hillary Clinton the president of the United States?" Who cares if she's male or female if she's great?

I don't know Hillary, but from my vantage point, I wouldn't call her a feminist - more a "me-ist" or an opportunist - which seems to be what Dowd is saying in the second link you provide.

Maybe it's because I came along after women had to fight for everything, including the right to be able to compete with anyone for any thing based on their own merits and not on their gender, but I can't relate to the "sisters must stick together" vibe either (as much as I appreciate all that was done by others to give me that right). I'd be embarrassed to play the "sister" card - because it would mean that I knew I couldn't compete without it - and who wants that?

Posted by mks | March 5, 2008 7:34 PM

Wow, Dowd wrote a vapid column? News flash!

Please alert us when she writes a good one. It happens a few times each year...

Posted by CP | March 5, 2008 8:30 PM

ECB - I still remember all of the great articles you've written. I also commend you for sticking to your guns, and continuing to write about them. Whether or not I agree with you I'm disapponted to see so many people here can't handle it.

Posted by fearthuinn | March 5, 2008 9:51 PM


best comment of the year... wait, you're being sarcastic right?

Posted by Andy | March 5, 2008 11:31 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).