-
Let Pitchers Throw Complete Games
June 19, 2013 | 11 comments
-
Thoughts on New U.S.-Taliban Peace Talks
June 18, 2013 | 8 comments
-
Do Beyonce & Jay-Z Understand The “Complexities” of Syria?
June 18, 2013 | 2 comments
-
What’s So Moderate About Iran’s New President?
June 15, 2013 | 9 comments
-
When Did The Obama Admin Know Syria Was Using Chemical Weapons?
June 14, 2013 | 15 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Liberal writer Kirsten Powers isn’t making excuses for her side when it comes to the double standards of the left-wing intelligentsia including the Obama Administration when it comes to Rush Limbaugh and Bill Maher.
She did so earlier this week (as noted by Quin Hillyer) and has done so again. Needless to say, Powers isn’t endearing herself to her ideological brethren. Enter Keith Olbermann:
The most desperate attempt to avoid the reality of liberal misogyny was spearheaded by Keith Olbermann, who crawled out of his cave to accuse me of “defending Rush Limbaugh” because I pointed out liberal piggishness. On his Current TV show last night, the former sportscaster informed his viewer to ignore me because I was just a “house-tamed Fox News liberal.” After he also tweeted his attacks - which were echoed by other liberals trying to distort what I said - his (presumably “progressive”) followers let me know that I was a “wind-up toy” and a “bobblehead” and “just another brainless plastic doll Fox puts on camera to appease the horned up 60-year old white dudes at home.” All the typical insults that male political analysts and columnists get, I’m sure.
Don’t forget: liberals are the feminists, it’s the GOP who hates women.
Powers also lambastes David Axelrod for criticizing Mitt Romney for not condemning Rush Limbaugh vigorously enough while agreeing to appear on Maher’s show. Axelrod said, “If you don’t have the strength to stand up to the most strident voices in your party, how are you going to stand up to Ahmadinejad?”
Well, given how the Obama Administration has spent most of the past three years giving Israel a harder time over building houses in Jerusalem than it has to Iran for building a nuclear weapon that’s chutzpah.
In any case, Power’s column is well worth our attention.
View all comments (31) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Aaron Goldstein
http://spectator.org/blog/2012/03/09/kirsten-powers-gets-it-right-a
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Revenge of the Fruitcakes
- Way Beyond the Lemonade Stand
- Walk the Line
The Spectacle Blog
Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder
Robert Stacy McCain | 6.18.13
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
JJ| 3.9.12 @ 9:41AM
Hey Obama, when are you going to stand up to Putin. The world is laughing at us for your folly.
Powers is breaking ranks which is heresy in the Progressive Community, just ask Juan Williams. Powers needs to see that this is not her father's Democratic Party. The nihilists have taken it over and are bent on destroying civilization as we know it.
Vern Crisler| 3.9.12 @ 9:43AM
I think Kirstin is a little naive to think that the far Left will treat her fairly or interpret her arguments honestly. That's not what they are about. Their ideal is socialism, not classical liberal civilization. They regard honest and fair debate as merely class-related subterfuge.
The moment Kirstin realizes that is the moment she will become a conservative.
W| 3.9.12 @ 9:48AM
Powers is an old-fashioned classic liberal journalist who is honest. Today's "liberals" are mostly left wing partisans with no regard for facts, and do not even call themselves liberals. They are "progressives."
Al Adab| 3.9.12 @ 10:17AM
Powers seems to be one of those honest analylists to whom one can talk and with whom one can debate without having her simply spew the party line/ What will happen is that the left will turn on her as they did Juan Williams once she questions their statist premise.
W| 3.9.12 @ 11:09AM
Al
I agree. Fox News is becoming the French Foreign Legion for honest liberal journalists to find work.
Al Adab| 3.9.12 @ 12:11PM
I don't know, The Foreign Legion never won a battle.
jomo2009| 3.9.12 @ 5:50PM
Powers has always been a loyal Democrat, but she's never been a Kool-Aid drinker.
squalis| 3.9.12 @ 9:55AM
As a self professed lib, I wonder if Ms. Powers is rethinking the phrase "tolerant left."
squalis| 3.9.12 @ 9:56AM
Do you think she and Juan Williams should start a group therapy program for dispossessed leftists?
Oldefarte| 3.9.12 @ 10:14AM
If anyone is ignorant of Axelrod's/Obama's/Olbermann's socialistic agenda and their lambasting of any/all who do not toe the line politically, I'd suggest a thorough reading of Paul Kangor's outstanding editorial on the front cover of TAS today!!!!!!!
Occam's Tool| 3.9.12 @ 10:49AM
Maybe Ms. Powers will be more educable than Mr. Williams.
Simon Templar| 3.9.12 @ 10:49AM
The article you should be titled, "I got it wrong again."
Are you a closet liberal pretending to be conservative or just plain simple minded?
Look, they are in dangerous waters and this whole manufactured, grand manipultive piece of propaganda is backfiring to a large extent with your associate's Lord's boycott and intelligent response.
Even O'Reilly gets that and has clearly promoted the reality that this was completely manufactured and a clever ploy to distract from Obama's record and continued failures. O'Reilly is now asking questions about who she really is, who put her up to this, and who is actually behind her and it. Rush sponsors are now begging to come back.
Powers is doing a classic liberal progressive ploy where she appears so fair handed and goes after her own male progressives for their anti-feminist remarks. They did this in the sixties with the Vietnam vets and the male radicals who told them to get off the stage after hearing their anti-male ranting and quite often when they were building the feminist movement.
The object here is to get the focus off of Fluke, the manufacturedness of all this, and religitimize her as a victim and legitimize her comments and testimony as legitimate, bolster the feminist perspective and narrative, and take the issue and focus away from Obama and focus it on Maher and Olbermann who when all is said and done will have their ratings go up and will actually benefit from the negative publicity. Why do you think Olbermann has "apologized." Did he have a road to Damascus experience? Are you that dumb to actually fall for this bullshit?
Did you happen to notice that Powers did NOT say that Fluke was wrong in anyway about her demands or that she was a manufactured ploy?
The idea is to control and regain control of the narrative, it started to slip out of their hands. The idea is to keep the story alive as well so we are not focusing on anything else, including the Breitbart's breaking story of Bam's association and love for the Harvard racialist professor.
Which AG, you have largely ignored.
We do not need her to point out the hypocricy of the Left, we were doing that just fine ourselves. Gee, she had one of those road to damascus experiences as well..? Uh, where was this newfounded insight and revelations over the last three years when the slut, cunt, and whore was flying from their mouths on Palin?
I really am not sure how to make this any clearer. NEVER, NEVER TRUST LIBERAL PROGRESSIVES!
Imus, is essentially a damn liberal. What did this ingrate jackass do this past week? Of all the people on this planet to attack Rush after he apologized and call the man an insincere pig.
What did you hear out of Juan Williams? The Williams who was destroyed by his own for stepping out of line and is picked up off the floor by conservatives and given a job.
The bottom line here is you think this is NOT a political manuever on the part of all these liberals talking heads? It seems AG you have a very shallow understanding of how politics works in a post modern era. You seem to think that what you see is only thing going on here and there is no sleight of hand, no artifices, stratagems, no ploys.
What you are trying to do is shore up your credibility and ego about your stance and your actions taken during this whole ridiculous ploy that you largely and unwittingly helped carry water for and participate in.
Stick to the obituaries and sports.
Aaron Goldstein| 3.9.12 @ 12:42PM
I don't think you actually read my articles or blog posts.
If that was the case then you would know I haven't "largely ignored" the Obama-Derrick Bell video.
http://spectator.org/blog/2012.....ike-to-see
If you actually had also exercised due diligence and read this post word for word then you would know I highlighted a quote from Powers which noted how Keith Olbermann made a point of demeaning her for having the temerity to criticize fellow liberals. You brought up Olbermann's "apology", not me. I would have only mentioned it if I thought it was worth anything.
I am well aware that Democrats had a political strategy when they invited Fluke to testify. But I disagree with O'Reilly when he claims the whole thing was manufactured. It suggests the Democrats knew Rush was going to use that infamous four letter word against Fluke beforehand. That gives the Democrats too much credit by half.
As for Powers, yes she can daft as was the case when Megyn Kelly took her down a few notches over the New Black Panther case a year or so ago. But Powers isn't Joy Behar or Kathy Griffin. She's generally more moderate in both her ideology and her temperament.
At the end of the day, I call it like I see it. I don't like it when conservatives behave badly and I don't like it when liberals behave badly and I will call both out on it. If you don't like that then too damn bad.
Besides I have no need to shore up either my ego or my credibility. In your case, however, you have plenty of the former but none of the latter.
Simon Templar| 3.9.12 @ 1:51PM
I am certain you do not read mine, as you never address my arguments directly.
I said you largely ignored. Gee, how many articles and at what length have you written about Rush's misbehav'n and how much have you written about the Breitbart story?
Your comment on me mentioning Olbermann and you not mentioning him and her statement about him demeaning her for her critique...well, frankly it makes no sense. Was this a contest in who could mention him first? So what? My bringing it up is to jar you into considering what the hell is going on here. Why would he apologize at this point in the game? Think, AG. Do you think there just might be a hidden agenda here and a reason that is not transparent? Just how does it fit into the whole picture here, AG?
O'Reilly nor anyone else is suggesting that they knew what Rush was going to do. Your point is ludicrous and off the point. This is not what is meant by being manufactured. You do not think this was manufactured? The testimony, the tease, the fake outrage, the attempt to keep this alive and turn it around for Obama? Gee, AG what was that political strategy? It was to solicit a reaction.
As they count on conservatives to be reactionary.
Whatever that reaction would have been and was with or without slut references, analogies, political humor, strong objection, or subsequent outrage, he and all of us would have been categorized, labeled, and accused of hating women, against contraception, and the whole shebang.
Yeah, she is more moderate, she is a chip off the old block. Yeah, what you see is what you get.
When you were a child did anyone ever teach you that you should not believe everything people say?
Did you know that grown ups can sometimes be very deceptive and say things for ulterior motives?
Did you know that talking heads, journalist, and media types can actually be activist as well and attempt to make the news rather than just report it?
Let's talk about fairness and credibility. In Miss powers case what do we have? I am suppose to automatically assume that she is now being fair and is credible because you and her say so?
She makes a living like most liberal "journalist" promoting Liberalism. Fairness, truth, objectivity, accuracy, honesty is not in their lexicon.
She has defended Obama, this administration's policies, worked to get him elected and is now working to get him reelected. She has vehemently defended the indefendable time and time again without blinking an eye. I have sat there and watched it for years. Just to make things clear I do not object to her analysis in this situation, I object to her motivations and am suspect of her sincerity. Do not want you off point, again.
Give it a rest. You played your part well. You confronted the "bad" behavior and have done your duty.
Ya calls it as you sees it! Great. You do not see much. Yes, if I do not like it is too bad. But that is not going to stop me from confronting it or commenting about it.
Ego and credibility. Yes, ego, we have both. That is for sure. Credibility is another matter.
You really should not assume because you have been invited to write here that that automatically converts to credibility.
Aaron Goldstein| 3.9.12 @ 2:44PM
Sullen Simon,
So if I write three articles about Rush I have to write three articles about the Breitbart video?
If I have something else to add then I'll write something. Whatever the case, the only person who gets to decide what I write is me.
As for my credibility, if NRO, Power Line and Real Clear Politics see fit to link to my articles then I'm doing just fine.
But by all means, feel free to comment. In the unlikely event you have anything intelligent to say I will be the first let you know.
Harpagon| 3.9.12 @ 2:06PM
Obama has given Israel a harder time for building homes in the West Bank (not Jerusalem) than he has given Iran for building nuclear weapons? Really?
I'm not aware of any sanctions, let alone "sanctions that bite" or embargoes, imposed by Obama on Israel, nor any weapon export bans that he enforces against it. Nor has he threatened to bomb Israel if it doesn't comply with his wishes, or said that building settlements in the Occupied Territories would be a "red line" for the US.
And last time I checked, Iran does not receive a single cent per year from the US Treasury, unlike Israel, which receives well over $3.1 bn per year from it, i.e. $500 per every Israeli, and stands as by far the largest recipient of US aid, aid which Obama has pledged to significantly increase, pledging to give Israel over $30 bn over a decade. And last time I checked, Iran was not allowed to buy so much as an old A-3 plane from AMARC, let alone F-35 fighters, in the US.
Oh, and last time I checked, Obama, to date, has not yet attended any conferences organized by the Iranian regime's apologists in the US (and there are some). By contrast, a few days ago, Obama was attending what conference?
"In your case, however, you have plenty of the former but none of the latter."
Look in the mirror, Mr Dual Loyalty.
Simon Templar| 3.9.12 @ 10:55AM
Powers will remain a committed Leftist, will always be one, and has no intentions of doing anything else but bask in the glow of shucking and jiving some more gullible conservatives and effectively manipulating them.
Bob Grant| 3.9.12 @ 11:00AM
A Goldstein,
The bottom line is Kirsten Powers is an independent minded liberal who is beholden to no one. She calls 'em like she sees 'em.
Keep in mind, however, she IS very liberal so let's keep the drooling and panting to a minimum, Aaron.
Aaron Goldstein| 3.9.12 @ 12:16PM
Drawing attention to Powers' column is hardly panting or drooling. I am well aware of how liberal she is especially where it concerns Iran.
I don't expect readers to agree with every word of what Powers writes. Nevertheless, I think what she has written here is noteworthy.
Bob Grant| 3.9.12 @ 3:38PM
All I'm saying is don't be too mesmerized by her "fairness".
Simon Templar| 3.9.12 @ 11:43AM
AG, I wrote this in response to Tucker's article today but thought it might be of use here as well.
The problem here is you do not know what true vulgarity is. Like simple minded dualistic thinkers, you can not see the difference between using a "bad word" in an attempt to make a point or accurately describe someone and the actual vulgarity of the behavior itself in question and the accuracy of that accusation itself.
I will tell you what real vulgarity looks like and is...
It is organizing a Slutwalk and proudly calling yourself a slut, using the word as a badge of honor, celebrating it. It is doing this and then turning around to others and telling them that you can not use this word ever, in any context, telling them they have no right to a contrary opinion or values other than what you dictate, that they only have the right to make judgments on anything, and then using that word as an insult to those you despise and seek to control and destroy for no other reason than they are conservatives and conservative women.
That is vulgarity.
Then there is also another kind of vulgarity that is wrapped in stupidity. That is accepting this double standard and actually carrying water for it.
-Simon Templar
Al Adab| 3.9.12 @ 12:46PM
Many thanks to the Amspec webmasters who got the site back to normal after several weeks of security problems. THANK YOU.
Resist We Much! | 3.9.12 @ 2:42PM
The next time that any Prog starts screaming that Sandra Bell is a "private citizen" so it is diiiifffffferent, here ya go:
She appeared at the “Catholic Students for Women’s Health” press conference on 9 February 2012 at the National Press Club where she expressed support for Obama's contraception mandate.
She waived any "private citizen" claim she might have had long before she "testified" before Maerose Prizzi's kaffee klatsch.
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/304345-1#
Resist We Much! | 3.9.12 @ 3:08PM
Fluke Was Not A "Private Citizen"
http://predicthistunpredictpas.....tizen.html
Oldefarte| 3.9.12 @ 4:24PM
Aaron, respectfully I'll disagree with your statement of '....I am well aware that Democrats had a political strategy when they invited Fluke to testify. But I disagree with O'Reilly when he claims the whole thing was manufactured. It suggests the Democrats knew Rush was going to use that infamous four letter word against Fluke beforehand. That gives the Democrats too much credit by half....' I do think that Democrats constantly plot, manufacture, conspire etc [as indicated by Paul K's excellent cover editorial regarding Axelrod in today's TAS. Most everything they do is such, since they now are in total COMMUNITY ORGANIZING mold. As you said, they had no idea that Limbaugh would react as such, but they did know that some notable conservatives would do so. Also this whole confrontation over birth control is/was a planned setup instigated by Democrats to take the olitical discussion away from the economy and onto this moral issue [and the Republicans took their intended bait hook, line and sinker STUPIDLY]. Conservatives and Republicans have to learn to understand that that is what Saul Alinsky and Community Organizing is all about. It about political scheming, plotting, planning and winning; and if conservatives and Republicans wish to accompolish the latter term, they had better start understanding the QUEENSBURY RULES OF ORDER WITHIN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY!!!!!!!!
Aaron Goldstein| 3.9.12 @ 4:41PM
It's all the more reason for conservatives to target the person's ideas, rather than the person. Rush picked the wrong target. He made Fluke the issue instead of making government mandated and subsidized contraception the issue. Big mistake. Rush basically handed the Left the weapons they are now using to beat him down.
The Left knocked Rush down but they can't stop him from getting back up.
Resist We Much! | 3.9.12 @ 5:57PM
"Rush basically handed the Left the weapons they are now using to beat him down."
Rush has new sponsors and listeners.
Meanwhile, Louis CK has been forced to cancel his Correspondents' dinner appearance and the Democrats dropped Maher from a fundraiser.
I wonder what job Progs will do FOR us next???
Bob| 3.12.12 @ 1:13AM
They are not beating him down. They are spreading the story everywhere that they are defeating Rush. You can't avoid hearing about it anytime you hear a liberal talk about anything. Like RWM said, Rush has new sponsors. This "beatdown" is nothing but a deception like the entire Fluke saga has been.
Bob| 3.12.12 @ 1:11AM
Even a broken clock gets it right twice a day.
The Obama Timeline | 3.16.12 @ 9:37PM
While Axelrod scolds Limbaugh, it is worth pointing out that in a 2009 discussion on NPR about the Obama family’s plans for a new dog, Axelrod said that Obama had narrowed the choices down and “Miss California was in the top three.” Axelrod was crudely referring to pageant contestant Carrie Prejean, who earned the wrath of the left for daring to state that marriage was intended to be between a man and a woman. Axelrod believes referring to a woman as a “dog” is funny and clever—and justified because the target is a conservative.
The Obama Timeline | 3.16.12 @ 9:37PM
While Axelrod scolds Limbaugh, it is worth pointing out that in a 2009 discussion on NPR about the Obama family’s plans for a new dog, Axelrod said that Obama had narrowed the choices down and “Miss California was in the top three.” Axelrod was crudely referring to pageant contestant Carrie Prejean, who earned the wrath of the left for daring to state that marriage was intended to be between a man and a woman. Axelrod believes referring to a woman as a “dog” is funny and clever—and justified because the target is a conservative.