The little lady is back
By Wes Pruden
Published: Monday, Nov. 19, 2012, 8:59 p.m.
The helpless little lady, who depends on a man to defend her honor, her ego and her perks, was thought to have been driven out of town by the feminists. But she's back.
President Obama stepped up manfully to defend the honor of Susan Rice, the ambassador to the United Nations who eagerly joined the spinning of the enormous fib that the terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was about a home-made video.
He didn't say much about the specifics of the lie she told, but warned skeptics of the administration's cockamamie excuse for the Libyan calamity to stay away from her. If certain U.S. senators want to go after somebody, he told a press conference, “they should go after me, and I'm happy to have that discussion with them. But for them to go after the U.N. ambassador, who had nothing to do with Benghazi and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received, and to besmirch her reputation, is outrageous.”
Such a patronizing defense of Miss Rice would, back in the day, elicit only snorts of scorn and resentment from the likes of Bella Abzug or Gloria Steinem. But that was then, and we've got a new now.
At the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, Nancy Pelosi sounded like a little lady herself. Miss Pelosi had convened the Democrat women's caucus. Pelosi was not stepping down as the leader of the Democrat minority, as many of her colleagues had expected.
When Luke Russert of NBC News asked how she would respond to certain of her colleagues who say that at 72 she should step aside because she's too old, the little ladies of the caucus, flanking her on stage, hissed and booed. “Let's for a moment honor (that) as a legitimate question,” she told the inquiring reporter, “although it's quite offensive that you don't realize that, I guess.”
Poor piggish clod. He got it backward. He doesn't know that 72 is the new 27, as any offended feminist could have told him. The ex-speaker, summoning her inner cougar, argued that “everything I have done in my almost decade now of leadership is to elect younger and newer people to the Congress.”
But this was smokescreen and subterfuge, all to distract attention from the scandal at hand, the administration's bungling of the tragedy in Libya. John McCain got it right, that Mr. Obama is guilty of either cover-up or incompetence. Instead of offering to punch Sens. McCain and Lindsey Graham in the nose on behalf of Susan Rice, the president could explain why he sent her to the U.N. armed only with a lie or with “intelligence” he knew was bogus.
The president's native eloquence has gotten him out of jams with ladies all his life, and he has not yet learned that the buck (and the bunk) stops with him. He has been encouraged to think he is immune from reality by his Chicago pals, his rich Hollywood friends and donors, party hacks, and by the scribbler class, which wants only to caress and coddle — and shut up anyone with a question. But reality is not a lady, unimpressed by election returns, and ultimately demands a full accounting of swindle and deceit.
Wes Pruden is editor emeritus of and columnist for The Washington Times.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Garden Q&A: Firecracker vine OK for trellis?
- Davis embraces new opportunity with Pirates
- NHL notebook: Bruins’ Lucic fined $5,000 for spearing
- Mail for IRS delivered to Squirrel Hill home
- Riverhounds squander 2-goal lead, settle for draw
- NFL notebook: Pryor will be cut if he’s not traded
- ‘Patriots’ back Nevada rancher; Reid labels them ‘domestic terrorists’
- State Police: People injured in Parkway crash resulting from police chase
- Frye: Commission discusses ‘second opening day effect’
- Architecture photos show difference between drama, fact
- Instagram builds Oakmont barber’s rep for innovative cuts, ‘hair tattooing’