Brown frames the piece—how else?—by a Middle-Eastern take on the “stuck in the kitchen” analogy:

The lede: “It’s time for Barack Obama to let Hillary Clinton take off her burqa.”

Followed by: A bunch of valid points from Tina Brown Brown about Clinton’s lack of visibility in the first six months of the Obama administration, and ending with:

The kicker: “You could say that Obama is lucky to have such a great foreign-policy wife. Those who voted for Hillary wonder how long she’ll be content with an office wifehood of the Saudi variety.”

While I appreciate Brown sticking up for HRC, I do wish her rhetorical stylings were a bit less offensive, and a lot less confusing. Hillary Clinton is Secretary of State. But more importantly, she is a woman! And thus her place in the Obama administration must be framed as some sort of polyamorous domestic dispute that recalls the traditional subjugation of Islamic women. Wait, what were Tina Brown’s great points again? I got distracted by all the mixed race and gender metaphors.

But when we called the 800 number, a very alluring woman’s voice intoned (click through for audio): “Do you have any hidden desires? Well, if you feel like getting nasty then you came to the right place.”

Sure didn’t sound like Clinton. And it definitely wasn’t Jones.

The White House “said it later corrected the number, which had been mistyped.”

IF SHE DID RUN, HE WOULD CRUSH HER, a new poll finds [PDF]. “A new national [Public Policy Polling] poll finds that nominating Palin could be a death wish for the party, with Barack Obama leading Palin 55-35 in a hypothetical contest. The key reason Palin would lose to Obama by so much is that even though she might be the top choice for a certain segment of voters within her party, there’s also a number of Republicans who say they would vote for Obama if their party nominated Palin.” [via ThunderPig].

ALASKANS STILL LOVE HER: Palin enjoys a high approval rating in her state:

Very positive 40.5
Somewhat positive 20.8 percent
Somewhat negative 12.5 percent
Very negative 20.2 percent
Don’t know/Didn’t answer 6 percent

Her staff still sucks, though.

WHY IS GRETA V.S. SARAH PALIN’S OFFICIAL JOURNO? Greta Van Susteren has bombarded the populace with interviews with Palins big and small. The Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza knows why: Her husband, John Coale, is a friend of the governor:

Coale, a well-known Washington lawyer and the husband of Fox News Channel’s Greta Van Susteren, drew national media attention when he endorsed Sen. John McCain’s presidential bid in protest of the way in which Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, who he backed in the primary, was treated. Coale, in an interview with the Fix, described himself simply as a “friend” of the Alaska governor but acknowledged that he suggested she start a leadership PAC and helped her navigate through some of the questions surrounding her family that lingered after the campaign. Others familiar with Palin’s political team insist that Coale has far more power than he is letting on—essentially helping to run Sarah PAC. Coale demurred on that front, noting only that he talks to Palin regularly and that she is a “fascinating person” who is “definitely not what the right thinks or the left thinks.”

GRETA ON WHY SHE’S A NEUTRAL PALIN REPORTER:

[via ThinkProgress]

PALIN HEADLINE OF THE DAY, from Politico’s Ben Smith: “Palin Clashes With Feds on Wolves”

MADONNA is to Hillary Clinton as Britney Spears is to Sarah Palin: “Britney is not Madonna,” writes  Spears tour reviewer Jed Gottlieb. “She just ain’t. Madonna is Hillary Clinton. She’s whip smart and survives, even thrives by adapting. And Lord knows she wants it more than anyone. Britney is Sarah Palin. Baby drama headlines. Podunk back story and a massive industry machine behind her. She’s a manufactured star aimed at the lowest common denominator.”

Photo by Kurisu

Alan Scherstuhl at the Village Voice has unearthed the audiobook recording of Bill O’Reilly’s lost 1998 novel, Those Who Trespass. For the uninitiated, Scherstuhl provides some background on the thriller:

1998 novel about an O’Reilly-esque TV journalist who is trained by an Irish Republican Army terrorist to kill the people who deserve it the most: the broadcast news bastards who interfered with the O’Reilly character’s career. It’s personal on the political level, too—his victims includes a powerful “bitch” named Hillary and a fat “slob” named Martin Moore.

Before the clips, a bit of context.

The murderer, Shannon Michaels, is pursued by an O’Reilly-esque cop, Tommy O’Malley. These two Irish-Americans share their author’s tough-talk, lust for power, and (alleged!) belief that the best way to seduce a woman is to seize her breasts, preferably as she showers.

The Village Voice has pulled the best clips from O’Reilly’s self-narrated novel, from “Say baby, put down that pipe and get my pipe up” to “I would like you to unhook your bra and let it slide down your arms. You can keep your shirt on.”

Below is my personal favorite: “She obediently performed oral sex on him.”

As with all cultural phenomenons worth remembering, somebody has already converted the audioclips into aslow jam remix.

Photo from Wikipedia Commons

My God. What could it all mean?

Google regularly offers up alternate search terms if they’re similar to your phrase, but a more popular search. Strangely enough, “iron my shirt” became a popular Google search term after a heckler called out the phrase over and over again at a New Hampshire Hillary Clinton rally in January of last year. Relive the moment:

Clinton responded by declaring that “the remnants of sexism are alive and well.” Later, it was revealed that the wrinkled shirt hecklers were two “radio geeks trying to create a radio stunt,” one of whom identified himself to the newsmedia as Hugh Jas.

The Iron-My-Shirt guys (actually Nick Gemelli and Adolfo Gonzalez Jr.) may not have been out for real political protest, but look at where we are, one year later: Hillary Clinton is not the President of the United States, and Google is a little bit more sexist. Harmless prank or vast anti-woman conspiracy? You be the judge.

Screencap via Tom McMahon

BE LIKE BRISTOL: Because they are sexist and/or simply completely inane, U.S. News and World Report asked readers who they’d rather have run their kids’ daycare center: Michelle Obama, Sarah Palin, Hillary Clinton, or Nancy Pelosi. Guess who’s winning?

BECAUSE, WHY NOT: Question of the day: “Has Bristol Palin weighed in on the Octomom?”

FIRST DUDE WINTER SPORTS CORNER: Todd Palin’s snow machine of choice: Revealed! Dude drives a He “two stroke engine Arctic Cat snowmobile.” What can that baby do? Dump “the same number of some pollutants into the environment as driving a Chevy Malibu 28 times around the earth at the equator.” Wicked.

HONOR BRISTOL: Choice Matters sayeth: “The temptation is to be glib, to say “duh! You think after getting pregnant and having the baby, while a teenager in high school…” but that would be an easy shot and a meaningless one.” Instead, send her a fucking t-shirt. Click here to view Choice Matters’ choices, including the “Oops . . . Plan B” Spaghetti Tank.

SARAH PALIN: HERO. Obama is first. Jesus is second. Sarah Palin came in 21st. Hey, she beat Bill Gates.

BLAME/COMMEND The Miss America Foundation for getting Sarah Palin through college—all four of them!

IN DEFENSE OF THE MEDIA: Matt Lauer “never called Palin a moron.”

PALIN 2012 WATCH: Since we all know Palin will clinch the Republican nomination anyway, let’s start speculating on running-mates. How about this guy? Sure, whatever.

DRINK THE SAND (SARAH PALIN IS THE SAND): “The people who criticize Sarah Palin, occasionally have valid arguments, but they’re missing the point. If perhaps some of Sarah Palin is sand, or muddied water, she’s at least something and she knows it; the Republican Party is practically nothing and it doesn’t.” [Via]

What do the First Lady’s toned arms truly represent, for the future of America? How will J. Crew be remembered in presidential history? Do Joe Biden’s teeth gleam when he makes love to Jill?

. . . And other burning questions—revealed!—in this edition of Sexist Beatdown, wherein Tiger Beatdown blogger Sady of NYC and yours truly of Washington D.C. discuss Vogue’s latest covergirl, Michelle Obama:

SADY: I cannot believe that I bought a copy of Vogue, first of all. I have not done this in years. Actual quote from Anna Wintour: “when people stop shopping, other people lose their jobs.” BUY THIS DRESS OR THE PROLE GETS IT, is what Anna Wintour is saying to you.

AMANDA: coincidentally, there’s been a lot of talk about Anna Wintour losing her own job.

SADY: haha, so you REALLY need to buy that dress.

AMANDA: Yeah man. Ok first of all—Michelle is the second First Lady to grace the cover of Vogue. Hillary was the first, and then they skipped Laura! I hope Laura got Good Housekeeping or something at least.

SADY: yes, and only the fourth black lady, which is really shocking to me.

AMANDA: I know, that was truly amazing. I do not follow fashion magazines too closely, but four?? That’s crazy

SADY: Yes, well, if it had been Palin it would have been “Guns & Ammo” so I’m happy that it didn’t turn out that way. But I really think that like, race, and gender, and Michelle Obama being as smart and as open as she is have sent people into a tizzy. Like, the concept of this woman has driven people out of their minds, everybody needs to write something about what she means and who she is. Including maybe me!

AMANDA: Yes, and all of this has something to do with how cut Michelle Obama’s arms are.

SADY: I KNOW. Arms are the new erogenous zone! Some Irish lady wrote! I mean, seriously, I can’t help thinking how weird it is – and maybe the fashion magazine aspect of this has something to do with it – that everybody needs to process her as A BODY. and sometimes discussion of who she is gets cut out of that altogether. like, the fascination with her arms is almost fetishy… yeah, she looks like she works out. super. but THE ARMS have come to dominate our national discourse.

AMANDA: well, to be fair, some of the discussion did touch on whether the backdrop was flattering to her skin tone.

SADY: oh, good! i’m glad we are getting to the deeper issues at hand.

AMANDA: I think Michelle Obama is a really interesting figure because she is such a nontraditional first lady in so many ways but really hews to tradition in others. She’s clear about being a mom to Sasha and Malia first, and she’s I think reluctantly embraced the fashion icon role, too, in a way that other independent first ladies (Hillary) didn’t, really. Though Hillary did say yes to Vogue, too.

SADY: True enough, but not during the Presidential race! It’s weird how we encourage women to be All About Teh Fashions and then view fashion as somehow trivial.

AMANDA: I know. I think the arms are sort of an interesting thing to focus on, because the discussion around them represents (ARMS REPRESENT SOMETHING NOW) both seeing her as a “strong woman” and still holding her to a physical standard of beauty

SADY: Yeah, exactly. There’s all of this discussion of her being tall – yet svelte! and opinionated – yet a mom first! I think some of it is well-intentioned, like they are trying to take her seriously, and thereby demonstrate that they CAN take the first first lady of color seriously, but then it gets into this weird thing where it’s like, “have we mentioned she has pretty dresses? She has suuuuch pretty dresses. and is pretty.” It’s weirdly overeager, like everyone wants to define the Michelle conversation and come out looking good. Oh, holy crap, that was a long speech of mine.

AMANDA: That’s an interesting point, actually. I’ve heard a couple people say, you know, “Michelle Obama? I don’t get what the whole fuss is, I don’t think she’s that stunning.” Or, “Michelle Obama’s dress the other day was not my thing at all.” And people will just jump on them for voicing that opinion, it’s not really acceptable. But why is the “pretty pretty pretty” discussion acceptable?

SADY: exactly! it’s kind of like making a Barbie out of her. I think people get weirdly tripped up around expressing approval of women, like, well, isn’t the nicest thing you can do to compliment her shoes? or something?

AMANDA: yeah, and also, I think there’s a bit of a compensation going on here, too. she’s married to a guy who people just went crazy about—his politics, yes, but his looks, too.

SADY: Yeah, exactly, and I think that – here is the thing where I Get Serious – we need to be careful around that, because people of color have always been portrayed as somehow hypersexual. like: Obama Dildo? editorials about ladies having sex dreams about Obama? that is creeeeepy, and racially charged… and michelle becomes part of that too. like, the “at last” dance was really charged, but then afterwards people were like “I BET THEY GOT BUSY AND NOW MICHELLE HAS A BABY IN HER TUMMY.” seriously, can you imagine people speculating about laura bush’s sex life?

AMANDA: Yeah, people often voice their speculations about the Obamas doing it. And part of it, I think, is that they’re younger, and they seem very happy with each other.

SADY: True true.

AMANDA: But on the other hand, I mean, we all know that Jill and Joe are probably doing it on Observatory Circle. And I have heard NOTHING about that.

SADY: Yeah, I think because you would start to wonder if his teeth were gleaming, it gets into a weird area.

AMANDA: I just did actually imagine them having sex, and that was a weird, foreign image that I definitely have never heard hinted at before. Even though Joe Biden makes borderline comments about his wife all the time!
SADY: I did too, and now need to purge that image from my brain. Oh God. But, you know: the Obamas are young, and they obviously love each other, and they’re both attractive people, but the weird prurient interest in whether they’re doing it? That pushes so many buttons, for me.

SADY: Here is a quick change: Michelle Obama! In Vogue! Has a centerfold! Wearing J. Crew! I think it is totally hilarious that the First Lady is wearing the only outfit in Vogue that I could actually afford.

AMANDA: That is funny. She’s really become a J. Crew model. She really likes J. Crew, I guess! Which seems a little suspiciously brand-y to me but I guess maybe she knows it fits.

SADY: Tiger: Yeah, true enough. And there’s talk about her wearing “American” clothes that are “affordable” in the mag. I think she’s trying to make an economic statement.
Why not American Apparel, Michelle? Dov Charney needs your support!

AMANDA: I know. It must be a weird shopping trip where you have to think of the impact of every piece of clothing you buy. like, my kids live in the White House and go to private school and we an afford it, so they obviously would be wearing something nice. but not TOO NICE!

SADY: right? It would be very intense to be Michelle Obama. Because most first ladies are probably like, “well, you know, people are going to pay attention for a while, but then later you could be Chester A. Arthur, which is to say: no one will give a crap.” not Michelle! she KNOWS people are going to remember this! so the pictures are going to be around FOR A WHILE. and everyone right now wants to know what they mean.

AMANDA: this is freaking me out. she has to dress for centuries of fashion critics. who knows what toned arms will represent in 200 years??

SADY: right, and throughout history, her message will remain clear: i really, really liked this cardigan.

* Spend Valentine’s Day at “several cute DC, Arlington elderly homes!” helping the D.C. Young Republicans administer manicures to the elderly in their “Mani’s for the Grannies” initiative. Sexist says, the grannies may be cute, the mani’s may be cute, but the elderly homes? Don’t kid yourselves.

* Zack at The New Gay finally figures out why Law & Order: Special Victims Unit is so terrible. The “little-girl-lost” themes “exploit the broadest female stereotypes” while simultaneously interferring with L&O’s classic stereotypical cop-show formula:

Every episode opens with someone stumbling across a body as they go about their daily grind. Two detectives show up and make a wisecrack before the opening credits. Then they chase after a couple red herrings. Once arrested, the correct suspect appears to be evading prosecution due to a legal loophole. But then one of Jack McCoy’s interchangeable dark-haired assistants (excepting Serena Southerly) finds an overlooked detail that breaks the case.

* Hillary Clinton says she will work “expeditiously” to address policies within the State Department that don’t afford same-sex partners the same benefits and protections as heterosexual partners, including evacuation assistance in the event of an emergency. “This is an issue of real concern to me,” Clinton said in a Town Hall meeting for State employees Wednesday. “And even though, as you pointed out, all of our personnel share the same service requirements, the partners in same-sex relationships are not offered the same training, the same benefits, and the same protections that other family members receive when you serve abroad.”

* Wear your ex-masturbator status on your sleeve. “Some say masturbation is not a sin, some say that it is,” reads the advert. “But is it really okay in the eyes of God?” Check out this video from the Passion for Christ Movement for “an inside look of what goes down after church,” and, presumably, people start getting real:

photo by hweiling

Who does Governor Paterson think he is, anyway, appointing this new Senator by apparently legal means and failing to satiate the nation’s clear desire for circus-like appointment scenarios? SIgh, okay, well, tell us a little bit about yourself, Senator Gillibrand! How will you fill Hillary’s shoes? What are your positions on women’s issues? Do you wear pantsuits?

Well, it looks like her Congressional Web site is like, really fucking slow for some reason. More later.

UPDATE: There are rumors on the Internets that Gillibrand supports gay marriage. Unreal!

“It is time that we take back the term ‘feminism’ and restore its dignity and honor . . . maybe Ms. and the former national women’s movement will return in the sequel as Superwomen once again,” wrote one complainer. “This seems designed to mock people who supported Hillary Clinton during the Democratic Primary,” wrote another.

When did “feminist” become code word for Hillary Clinton? Is it possible that these people simply never want to have a feminist president? Don’t we want all of our presidents to identify as feminists (except Sarah Palin, who will never be president and does not understand the meaning of words)?

I want a female president, too. But there’s a difference between a female president and a feminist president. We’ve got one. It doesn’t mean we’re going to stop working for the other one.

* Tim Dickinson for Rolling Stone on why Prop 8 failed. (Hint: It wasn’t Mormon or black voters, but it might have been you).

* The Gay Recluse reports on the shielded statues in Union Station (photo above), indicates that behind the shield are uncircumcised Roman penises, calls it “the biggest scandal in the history of hot gay statues!”

* WaPo says Barry and Hills need to work on their “rapport,” but noted this cute press conference tidbit: “Leaving the news conference in Chicago yesterday where he introduced his national security team, President-elect Barack Obama strolled out of the room arm in arm with his choice for secretary of state and onetime rival, Hillary Rodham Clinton.” Oooooooh!

* Mark your calendars: Forum on gay marriage in D.C. slated for Dec. 11.

* Barrack buys Michelle First Bling!

I have known Hillary Clinton as a friend, a colleague, a source of counsel, and as a campaign opponent. She possesses an extraordinary intelligence and toughness, and a remarkable work ethic. I am proud that she will be our next Secretary of State. She is an American of tremendous stature who will have my complete confidence; who knows many of the world’s leaders; who will command respect in every capitol; and who will clearly have the ability to advance our interests around the world.

Hillary’s appointment is a sign to friend and foe of the seriousness of my commitment to renew American diplomacy and restore our alliances. There is much to do – from preventing the spread of nuclear weapons to Iran and North Korea, to seeking a lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians, to strengthening international institutions. I have no doubt that Hillary Clinton is the right person to lead our State Department, and to work with me in tackling this ambitious foreign policy agenda.

Obama appointed two other women to his national security team: My home state of Arizona’s Governor Janet Napolitano will be Secretary of Homeland Security, and Susan Rice will serve as UN Ambassador.

Obviously, this is no good. But after Long faults the group of men, the unsympathetic bartender, and the cops, she turns to an unsuspecting target of blame for violence against women: Barack Obama. Long details why Obama may be to blame for her friend’s battered face:

I think we cannot dismiss the election’s place in all this. The world watched as Hillary Clinton and Sara Palin were eviscerated by the main stream media. Calling women C**** was tolerated. Demeaning and disrespecting women was deemed OK. A young potent male was victorious over an older women. It was a symbolic victory on many deep psychological levels. I am afraid last night was just the beginning and that there will be more crimes against women. Times have changed and not for the better. I can smell it in the air.

Another blogger chimed in, calling the post-election U.S. “Open Season on Women” and tapping her post on the incident with a “Thanks Barack”:

[Obama] has used misogyny to stir up hatred of women in the media and on the blogs that supported him. Now that the genie is out of the bottle, it won’t soon be put back. We are going to be dealing with this for a long time to come.

Hey, I want a lady to be president as much as anybody. But I’ll take a real victory for women over a symbolic one any day. I’ve yet to see the evidence of whatever misogynist genie Barack Obama and Joe Biden have conjured up in their campaign, but I’m willing to bet it will satisfy more lady wishes than a ticket that opposed abortion, forced women to pay for their own rape kits, put women’s health in sarcastic finger quotes and, you know, actually called somebody a cunt. Thanks a lot, Barack Obama. Thanks a lot.

The American workplace’s storied glass ceiling is in pretty bad shape. Female workers are on the fast track to conquering the upper echelons of all sectors of industry, including the nation’s highest office. Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton invoked the ceiling in her June concession speech: “Although we weren’t able to shatter that highest, hardest glass ceiling this time, thanks to you, it’s got about 18 million cracks in it,” Clinton said, adding, “the light is shining through like never before, filling us all with the hope and the sure knowledge that the path will be a little easier next time.” With Clinton’s defeat, the glass-crushing spread across the political aisle. As Republican vice presidential candidate and self-described “feminist” Sarah Palin confirms, “Women certainly today have every opportunity to succeed.”

But what about that unsung other half of our nation’s workforce: men? As more and more women enter the workplace and climb to its highest ranks, they do so to the detriment of a group that has comfortably occupied high-level positions in our nation’s capital for centuries. At risk of extinction are D.C.’s manliest institutions: its unions, newspapers, and government agencies. In 2008, what workplaces may truly call themselves manly?

The Sexist is pleased to announce D.C.’s Manliest Workplace Competition. Beginning next week, The Sexist will run 64 D.C. workplaces in eight industries through a highly unsophisticated algorithm to assess each organization’s manliness. In order to determine manliness, the Sexist will take the top 10 positions in each organization, ascertain which positions are staffed by men, then assign a point value to each male staffer. A man in the highest-ranking position (i.e., president, CEO, publisher) will earn 10 points; one in the 10th-most-powerful spot will receive one point. The manliest workplace—one that employs all men, all the time, in the most powerful and well-paid positions—can score as high as 55 on the Manly Index. The least manly workplace—one that employs no men, none of the time, in any position—will receive a zero.

The Manly Index
0-10: Non-manly
11-30: Mannish
31-50: Manly
50-55: Manliest

Note: The Sexist reserves right to base assumptions on hasty once-over of workplace’s org chart. If a workplace’s chart does not have clearly ranked positions, the Sexist will arbitrarily assign rank. If a workplace employs fewer than 10 people in total, the Sexist will improvise.

Example: Washington City Paper

Publisher Amy Austin (Female, 0 points)
Editor Erik Wemple (Male, 9 points)
Ad Sales Director David J. Walker (Male, 8 points)
New Media Director Joshua Lieb (Male, 7 points)
Business Devel. Manager Sheila Alexander-Reid (Female, 0 points)
Information Technology Director Jim Gumm (Male, 6 points)
Managing Editor Andrew Beaujon (Male, 5 points)
Classified Sales Manager Heather McAndrews (Female, 0 points)
Assistant Managing Editor Jule Banville (Female, 0 points)
Senior Writer Jason Cherkis (Male, 1 point)

Note: The Washington City Paper scores a 36 on the Manly Index, indicating that the paper is barely even manly.

The Sexist recognizes the need for affirmative action in the pursuit of manliness. Historically non-manly organizations face several obstacles to becoming manly. These workplaces deal in traditionally non-manly pursuits, such as domestic violence protection and book lending. Additionally, they lack a male base, making recruiting of even manlier employees challenging. In order to level the playing field, the Sexist will add a full point to the manly index of workplaces that traditionally employ women. This progressive affirmative action policy will help lift historically non-manly organizations from the depths of femininity, while ensuring the Sexist Cinderella-story material throughout contest coverage.

Remember, this is a numbers game. No matter how macho the corporate culture at your environmental nonprofit, if it can’t show the men, it will fall hard and fast.

Factors the Manliest Workplace Tournament will not take into consideration (among others): Presidential Fitness Award honorees employed; history of sexual harassment suits filed against workplace; importance of tool belt to employee uniform; homosocial ass-slapping traditions. While these factors certainly add to the “heart” of a manly workplace, the Manliest Workplace competition looks only at the true test of an organization’s manliness: How many men the workplace employs, and how high on the org chart it employs them. (Additional manly factors may be considered in the event of a tie).

Think you know manly from mannish? Fill out the bracket with your picks for D.C.’s manliest workplaces. Find a paper bracket on page 46 of this week’s newspaper, or complete our handy on-line bracket.

Send your paper brackets to:

Amanda Hess
Washington City Paper
2390 Champlain St. NW
Washington, DC 20009

The winner wins something!

It begins innocently enough: “When we’re at war with the A-rabs, we do not need a damn A-rab president,” the woman explains. Then, the dudes drive up in the tractor holding a dog, smoking cigarettes, “woo”-ing, and generally carousing, and it all goes to Hell. Wait until the end for the resounding Clinton endorsement (via).