So, the First Lady pulled out the sexism card in her defense of Harriet Miers on NBC’s Today Show.
Matt Lauer lapped it up.
Did the White House not inform Mrs. Bush that some of the most vocal criticism and questioning of the nomination comes from conservative women? Or does she buy into the Left’s conservative-women-are-self-loathing-traitors-to-their-gender line, too?
Guess this is the thanks we get for defending the First Lady in the face of real anti-woman sentiment.
With all due respect, perhaps Mrs. Bush should stick to telling horse jokes.
For a serious discussion refuting the sexism/elitism card, Chris Roach’s latest post on SCOTUS qualifications is must-read.
See also Erick’s many questions at Red State.
John Podhoretz responds on behalf of the sexist Right here.
Video at The Political Teen.
Trevor Bothwell hits the nail on the head:
This is hardly worthy of intelligent debate, but it’s pretty absurd that the president can make it clear that he based his choice of Miers on affirmative action principles, yet anyone who dares to point out any perceived lack of merit is accused of sexism.
What a joke.
The pro-Miers response to this has been to assert that intellectual credentials don’t matter or even that the lack of same is an advantage. This does appeal to a certain antielitist, or even anti-intellectual, strain in American politics. But there’s nothing sexist about disagreeing. If Laura Bush has some evidence that Miers does possess intellectual heft, she would do better to come forward with it rather than insult the critics.
This kind of argument we expect from the Barbara Boxers and the Ted Kennedys, not from a Republican White House.
It’s enough to start making me think that we need to send a clearer message to George Bush. The White House needs to rethink its relationship to reality and its so-far loyal supporters.
Dafydd at Big Lizards gallantly tries to defend Mrs. Bush for not standing up to Lauer’s insult of principled conservatives who disagree with the Miers nomination.
I admire his chivalry, but think Dafydd is being way too generous (and perhaps a bit naive) in his take on the interview. As Ed Morrissey notes, the White House dispatched Ed Gillespie to play the sexism card over the past week. This is not just some impromptu riffing. It’s part of the talking points. The First Lady hardly needed egging on from Lauer. Her glass-ceiling rhetoric about Miers is the flip side of the sexism card.
Bill Nienhuis at PunditGuy weighs in on the White House’s inattention.blog comments powered by Disqus
December 5, 2012 09:31 AM by Michelle Malkin
May 30, 2013 07:13 PM by Doug Powers
February 19, 2013 03:55 PM by Doug Powers
June 24, 2012 03:53 PM by Doug Powers
July 18, 2012 09:05 AM by Michelle Malkin