Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife


Thursday, January 10, 2008

TWO Powerful Women in Washington?!?

posted by on January 10 at 16:58 PM

Time asks (via TP) whether there’s “room in Washington for both a Speaker Pelosi and a President Hillary?”

Obviously not, because imagine the catfight they’d have if they both got their period at the same time!

RSS icon Comments


i'm sure the NYT style section would have a field day though

Posted by kinkos | January 10, 2008 4:57 PM

I would bet that they don't get their monthlies any more. But still it would be an interesting battle of the egos.

Posted by Dude | January 10, 2008 5:02 PM

Seriously. Not to mention that we'd probably have to scrap the Dept. of Defense for the dept. of Cosmopolitan amirite?

Posted by Vasya | January 10, 2008 5:04 PM

If they get 10 more, they could release a sexy calendar.

Posted by Ari Spool | January 10, 2008 5:06 PM

It's media coverage like this that makes me think electing Hillary Clinton might actually be the biggest possible change to the status quo in this country. That's the problem with the "change" rhetoric by Obama not backed by specific policy proposals. If you want to make this election about symbolism instead of policy, there's just as much a case to be made for Clinton as for Obama or Edwards.

Posted by Cascadian | January 10, 2008 5:07 PM

i'm fairly certain they're both post-menopausal. i think once women can't reproduce anymore, and therefore are no longer sexually attractive to men, they really don't have anything to argue about. right?

Posted by kim | January 10, 2008 5:09 PM

Um. I thought they were both post-menopausal? Isn't Bill Clinton like 65 or something and Hillary Clinton about the same age?

How could they have periods?

Besides, it's more likely they'd be arguing over who got the Prada dress.

Posted by Will in Seattle | January 10, 2008 5:10 PM

Going to need 12 more to put out a sexy calendar.

Posted by PA Native | January 10, 2008 5:11 PM

Good points, guys. But remember, hot flashes make women scary too!

Posted by ECB | January 10, 2008 5:11 PM

Heck, I'd do them. Either individually or, better yet, together. But I'm not much younger than they are.

Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty | January 10, 2008 5:20 PM

pelosi's powerful? btw what happened to the balls to the wall democrats we thought we were getting?

Posted by Jiberish | January 10, 2008 5:26 PM

Did they give Chris Matthews a blog?

Posted by tsm | January 10, 2008 5:37 PM

They still have hot flashes in their 60s?

I thought those usually only were for at most a decade ...

Posted by Will in Seattle | January 10, 2008 5:52 PM

weird, because usually time magazine is first rate goofy for the ladies.

Posted by superyeadon | January 10, 2008 6:02 PM

Good goddess, all these comments about periods. Get a grip.

Posted by Sachi Wilson | January 10, 2008 6:08 PM

Right you are. Let's move on to exclamation points.

Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty | January 10, 2008 6:30 PM

did you read the article? it's about pelosi possible endorsing obama.


Posted by konstantConsumer | January 10, 2008 7:44 PM

I'm kind of curious. I could have sworn there were more than a dozen female Senators, and many, many more Congresswomen, a female Secretary of State, and so on. Isn't that many more than two powerful women?

Posted by Gitai | January 10, 2008 8:09 PM



(love word play; pun-ctuation even better).

Posted by unPC | January 10, 2008 8:37 PM

Dear Ms. Erica "C" Barnett,

There are two ways I could respond to your "internet" post. One for if you are on your "period" and one for if you are not.

Please preface all your posts with this information: are you "on" your period or are you "off" your period? Thank you so much.

Your friend,

Mr. Elenchos.

Posted by elenchos | January 10, 2008 9:06 PM



Posted by Liz | January 10, 2008 9:25 PM

Yeah, Erica. Liz wants you to stop talking.

Posted by Vasya | January 10, 2008 9:38 PM


Posted by Ziggity | January 10, 2008 9:55 PM

Seriously, I think this is my first truly LOL reaction to an ECB post. Well, first in a "laugh with you" sense of the word.

Posted by oneway | January 10, 2008 10:13 PM

Pfft, you say that like men don't have a period. Don't believe me? Just attend any gay pride event ever, anywhere. Or any football game. All thats missing is the cramps (except at the football game after some chili dogs and beer).

Im waiting until after the nominations. I think after they are done you will really see some reaaallly blatant racist/sexist attacks. All the candidates, republican and democrat, seem to be holding their tongues and 527's.

Posted by brandon H | January 11, 2008 12:27 AM

Seriously. An idiot.

Can someone take away ECB's Slogging rights? She's dumbing down the Stranger and embarrassing both herself and the paper.

ECB, your knee-jerk feminist anger over every issue, no matter how innocuous, makes you sound like a fucking moron and the fact that you became a Hillary supporter based purely on your feminist rage makes it all the more evident that you are not actually interested in the real issues but that you're just a reactionary asshole.

Spare us all and post this blather on your personal blog.

Posted by You're an idiot. | January 11, 2008 12:53 AM

Dear You're an Idiot:

That childhood adage comes to mind when I read your name.

Here we have ECB writing a funny post headline in reaction to a ridiculous sexist statement. Then she goes further and invokes the catfight/meses themes.

Whatsmatter, you don't like to laugh?

You remind me of that old joke.

"How many feminists does it take to screw in a light--"

Except this time you're the screaming humorless douchebag.

Not the chicks.

Posted by unPC | January 11, 2008 7:26 AM

@26 Take your blinders off, dipshit. Articles like the one Erica's referring to make it clear that Hillary's womanness is too foreign a concept for the media to handle. It's a truth that's both unfortunate and ignored, which is even more unfortunate.

Posted by Alphonse | January 11, 2008 7:26 AM

They're both centrist Democrats, so what's the big deal? Now if one were a liberal Democrat and the other were a Republican, then we might see some Dynasty type shit going down.

Posted by Greg | January 11, 2008 8:08 AM


ok, seriously, who hacked ECB's slog account?

Posted by happy renter | January 11, 2008 8:47 AM

Interestingly, the question was raised by a very young woman blogger for Time. (Not implying anything, just pointing it out...)

Posted by duh | January 11, 2008 9:47 AM

Does any other slog poster get the hostility that ECB gets? I spend way way too much time reading it, but I can't think of any. Wonder why? Must be all the City Hall reporting, that shit is divisive.

Posted by gavin.gourley | January 11, 2008 9:56 AM

I don't get the whole cat-fight mentality some women have. Regardless, ECB's dig on the two most powerful women in American politics is so low class. Shame.

Posted by montex | January 11, 2008 10:02 AM

@33, Yeah, cause fighting with each other is something only women do. (???)

Are you back from lunch yet?

Posted by Irena | January 11, 2008 11:03 AM

wow; many people REALLY are dumb and don't know how to read things as irony or satire.

Maybe ECB needs to put in stage directions at the end of such posts: (she said, tongue firmly in cheek).
That way, the dimwitted might 'get' it...

Posted by michael strangeways | January 11, 2008 11:27 AM

It's not just this post-- it's EVERY post. (Although she WASN'T joking in this post-- she's serious.)

She's on and on and on with her fucking nonsense.

The only person on the Stranger's staff who is TRULY qualified to offer up commentary on national politics is Eli-- and Eli has fucking self-control. He doesn't subject us to 27 posts a day about the minutia of the elections, especially not with his agenda attached to it.

To make matters worse, 99.9% of what ECB posts is just bullshit. She doesn't know what she's talking about-- she's just running her mouth for the sake of running it.

It's why she'll never be more than a crappy local news writer for the Stranger.

Posted by You're an idiot. | January 11, 2008 12:34 PM

ya know, I frequently disagree with things ECB says on here, and I frequently want to choke her, but if you REALLY think her little menses joke was meant seriously and not sarcastically, I'd have to suggest you refrain from reading ECB for awhile and spend a week or two chilling out with some fine wine and watching lots of sarcastic comedy, (The Simpsons/Arrested Development/The Office) to get the hang of it.

Posted by michael strangeways | January 11, 2008 1:02 PM

Actually, just an aside, but what is up with all this "edgy humor" for guys recently about not wanting to have sex with the gf when she's having her period?

I mean, you get a red towel, you wash up after, but it's not a big deal, and it usually helps make the whole time of month shorter in duration and a lot more fun.

Or am I unusual in that attitude?

Posted by Will in Seattle | January 11, 2008 3:23 PM

Not having sex with a woman during her period is just cruel. We're ravenously lusty that time of month -- why deprive us? Why deprive yourself?

Posted by Irena | January 11, 2008 4:46 PM

Menses hetero sex?!(plugs ears)

Lalalalala Jake Gyllenhaal naked lalalalaa holiday....celebrate lalalalala falcon videos lalalalala project runway

Posted by brandon h | January 11, 2008 11:30 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).