faboo mama

There has to be a term for those women, the ones who when they see you flirting with someone immediately start flirting with that person too. Loser? Insecure prat? Pain the in ass? Leech? Sure I’ve noticed it before, but rarely paid it any mind. But now there is one particular person doing it and it’s just mind blowing. I actually would not have noticed, but in the course of a week, 3 different people who do not interact with her pointed it out to me.

So, in the interest of “science” and our sad need for amusement, 5 particular guys were chosen for me to flirt with. Bets were taken on how long it would take this woman to glom on to them.  Now, you have to keep in mind one thing: this person made it abundantly clear that these 5 dudes were not her type in any way. We started the “experiment” in late March. The findings were astonishing: With the exception of Dude #3, it took her at least 3 days to start flirting with the guy. Dude #3 took ONE  day.

What I find most fascinating is that she only does it me. Other women can flirt and she doesn’t react at all. It’s like we’re in this strange weird contest no one told me about. It makes interactions difficult only because I am forced to hold my tongue and not publiclly mock her desperate need for attention. And y’all know how I can get when it comes to a public mocking.

Everyone knows I flirt, but most often when speaking to guys, I am genuinely interested in the topic and not just the person.  If you see me asking a dude how was his day, or mentioning something from a previous conversation, it’s just talk. It’s called being friendly. It’s not a competition for some random dude’s attention. And if you see yourself in this, just stop.

One more thing to add to the list of crazy the Clinton’s are doing: Clinton cited Karl Rove as a reason to stay in the race. Not like bringing him up like he’s the boogeyman, but…

“Just today I found some curious support for that position when one of the TV networks released an analysis done by - of all people - Karl Rove, saying that I was the stronger candidate,” said Clinton. “Somebody got a hold of his analysis and there it is.”

Yikes.

*****

That’s desperation…that makes this morning’s stupid memo from the Clinton’s campaign this seem brilliant. See, the Clinton’s released a memo that said that Sen. Obama better not declare victory in Iowa tomorrow night. Only problem is that declaring victory was never the plan. In fact, for the past week Obama has been shutting down all talk of declaring victory in Iowa and this morning news all over the place held that the Obama campaign was not going to Iowa for a victory dance.

But “facts” and “reality” have a funny way of avoiding the Clinton’s like they were Republicans or something. 3 hours after all the news reports and blog reports of Obama NOT declaring victory were posted, the Clinton’s released a intellectually deficient memo demanding Obama not declare victory in Iowa. The more cynical among us believe the Clinton’s did that so that win Obama, as planned, does not declare victory in Iowa they can puff up their chests for their deluded supporters and say, “We did that.”

Idiots.

******

I’ve been reading a lot about all the sexism Sen. Clinton has endured and her supporters are laying it directly on the feet of Obama in some fucktarded twist of logic. Ironically, many of these women make incredibly racist remarks regarding Obama, but I guess grrrl power supersedes bigotry in this case. It’s impossible to talk about the sexism from the media and ignorant assholes that Clinton has received without mentioning the racism that Obama has received not just from the GOP and the media, but more importantly from the Clinton’s and their supposed Democrat supporters. One quote from a white woman supporting Clinton blew it off, as “there’s more of us (women) than them (black people), so why make us mad?” You know, that’s their mindset right? If anything, this election has vindicated my view on old school, white, intellectual feminists. I never thought much of them before and as I’ve mentioned, I know that when they talk about women, they’re not including me. Still, considering how much I’ve been dismissed because of that view, it’s nice to proven right. But I’m not going to get into that.

We can see the double standards at work here. I’ve mentioned how Clinton plays that annoying girl on the schoolyard who hits a boy because she knows that boys shouldn’t hit girls, yet whines the boys want to ignore her. Hillary Clinton gave a talk at a women’s group back in April and no one batted an eye. Yet, we know that Obama couldn’t be seen speaking to the NAACP or at Tavis Smiley’s Strokefest State of the Black Union, because of his skin color. Clinton talks about women all the time in her speeches; she mentions old women who want to vote for her so they can see a female president before they die or moms bringing their daughters to see her because she could be president. Yet, I’ve seen or read many of Obama’s speeches and we don’t get stories of old black men telling Obama they’re voting for him because they want to see a black president before they die, we don’t get stories of moms bringing their sons to see him because he could be president. And if he did tell those stories, do you think the bigots on news sites and blogs would let that slide? Do you think the media would let that slide? Booman put into words exactly what I’ve been trying to say the past 5 months:

My overall view is that Hillary Clinton succeeded in convincing the American people that she was the presumptive frontrunner, which means that people were able to picture a woman president without much resistance. That frontrunner status was so ingrained that I think it actually hurt her campaign, as people rejected a coronation. Meanwhile, the black community displayed a lot of resistance to the idea of a black president. This was evidenced by the slowness with which they rallied around Obama. Prior to his victory in the overwhelmingly white state of Iowa, the polls showed Clinton running even or ahead among blacks in South Carolina. In other words, Obama had a harder time getting people to accept the idea of a black president than Clinton had getting people to accept the idea of a female president.

The Clintons have consistently tried to convince people that a black man is unelectable (whether they sincerely believe it or not), while the Obama campaign has never to my knowledge tried to convince people that a woman is unelectable. The Clinton campaign has used a million and one excuses for their losses, including that certain states have too many black people in them. The Obama campaign did not make the converse argument to explain why they lost any states until West Virginia.

emphasis mine

Remember this the next time people tell you that voting against Clinton is sexist. I would say include “voting against Obama is racist”, but the only people I see saying that are Clinton supporters, so I’m going to assume it’s a talking point of the Clinton’s campaign.

NARAL endorsed Sen. Obama today and in bizarro world that made EMILYs List mad.  They went and played the Evan Bayh card:

“I think it is tremendously disrespectful to Sen. Clinton — who held up the nomination of a FDA commissioner in order to force approval of Plan B and who spoke so eloquently during the Supreme Court nomination about the importance of protecting Roe vs. Wade — to not give her the courtesy to finish the final three weeks of the primary process,” said Emily’s List president Ellen Malcolm. “It certainly must be disconcerting for elected leaders who stand up for reproductive rights and expect the choice community will stand with them.”

You got that? Malcom, president of EMILYs List, is mad that NARAL chose to give an endorsement as things are winding down.

<blank stare>

Are you kidding me?

Maybe Ms. Malcom forgot why EMILYs List is around. Their stated goal is to help underfunded and unknown female pro-choice politicians get elected. Besides being female and pro-choice, exactly how was Clinton underfunded and unknown? Did NARAL put out a statement shaming EMILYs List for not living up to their mission statement?

It’s bullshit like this that makes me glad that I stopped donating to EMILYs List.

I got an email:

Women’s History Month Celebration

A program celebrating the California State Legislative
Month of Recognition
Thursday, March 20, 2008
6:30pm – 8:30pm
Honoring:
Sandra Evers-Manley, Hon. Judy Chu, Alexandra Gallardo-Rooker and Carolyn Webb de Macias

To RSVP Contact Bobbie Anderson
(213) 744-2111

For more information please click here!

Today, Harmony–a new living area, carried by Discovery to the International Space Station is to be attached. Not only was this the beginning of an historic spacewalk, but it was the first time two female commanders met in space.

The shuttle launched from Cape Canaveral on Tuesday and linked up with the space station Thursday. It was the first time two female commanders met in space: Retired Air Force Col. Pamela Melroy is commander of Discovery, while Peggy Whitson is the station’s skipper.
(LAT).

That’s pretty neat. Col. Melroy has an impressive resume, and in addition to be a test pilot, also hopes to be one of the next astronauts on the moon when NASA does in next lunar landing. Peggy Whitson PhD. also has a kickass resume if the number of initials in it is any indication. But check out her Wikipedia bio and you can see all the Mission patches she’s accrued. Her first space mission, she stayed aboard the ISS. Cool!

Congratulations ladies and great job being wonderful role models to millions of little girls around the world.

Among all my various reasons why the troll that Progressives love in a complete nincompoop, this is one kinda bundles it up:

But in DeGeneres’ case, along with the strong support from fans and many dog lovers, she also endured some criticism and mockery, especially from fellow comic Bill Maher.

Maher decided to respond on behalf of an entire gender: The opposite one.

“At this moment when the entire nation is saying, ‘Hmm, can we have a woman president? Maybe they’re too emotional,’ I don’t think this is helping,” Maher said on his talk show.

Got that? Ellen DeGeneres cries on TV, therefore women [in general] are too emotional to be president. That’s Maher Logic. This, is so typical of media gnats like this. One person from one group does something and the entire group is given a label. Oh, except for white males. Just because one starts “preemptive wars” for no good reason, is a serial killer, or is a walking bag of fromunda doesn’t mean they all are…right?

New Rule: Sexist assholes can no longer pretend to actually know shit.