She so cozied up to Bully Boy Bush over Afghanistan that she couldn't have been any closer to him if she'd shoved both her hands down his pants and give him a handy jay in the midst of a State of the Union Address.
Now she's providing cover for Barack Obama which proves Dorothy Parker's old saying, you can lead a horticulture but you cannot make her think.
The leader of the (now laughable) Feminist Majority Foundation and the whatever* behind Ms. magazine (equally laughable) used both tattered outlets to endorse Barack's continued war on Afghanistan. Her statement included:
The Feminist Majority Foundation supports President Obama’s decision to delay the drawdown of U.S. troops from Afghanistan. This vital decision—which leaves only 9,800 troops in Afghanistan through most of 2016 and 5,500 troops thereafter—provides an opportunity for Afghan security forces to strengthen their ability to defeat the Taliban and the growing threat of ISIS within the country. This decision also helps to ensure the safety of Afghan women, who have been continuously targeted by the Taliban and ISIS.
“Afghan women and girls have made, and continue to make, tremendous gains. President Obama’s decision to leave support troops in Afghanistan will hopefully allow these women to sustain and increase these gains in the long term,” said Feminist Majority Foundation President Eleanor Smeal. “The recent situation in Kunduz shows that threats to the security of the Afghan people, especially Afghan women, are real. This is no time to leave Afghanistan completely. President Obama has made a difficult, but necessary, decision.”
Oh, stop lying, you tacky street walker.
Smeal provides her own personal STD and thus far there's no cure for it.
Women and girls in Afghanistan did not reach utopia in the 14 years of never-ending war the US imposed on the country.
Remember why the war started?
Yes, because misguided Smeal and others cheered it on.
And abandoned Afghan women.
That is what was revealed, let's be honest. I believe it was 2003 when I was meeting with various Afghan women -- including the former beauty queen -- who were explaining how Smeal and others (yeah, Gloria Steinem as well, sadly) had abandoned them.
There was never going to be peace from bombs and no sane feminist would ever suggest that was even a possibility.
But Smeal and sanity have never been neighbors.
So now Smeal's back to cheering on war.
And as a feminist who did not support war on Afghanistan (or Iraq), let me loudly rebuke her.
She does not speak for every American feminist.
If you read Arabic social media, you know Smeal and others gave feminism a bad name in the
Arab world as they embraced the Afghanistan War and got in bed with Bully Boy Bush.
Smeal drags feminism through the mud again now by embracing war.
You sort of get the feeling she can only have a clitoral orgasm if a bomb falls on some civilian and maims or kills them.
It's a passionate response for Smeal -- one that allows her to sidestep logic and thought.
Fourteen years of war on Afghanistan have accomplished nothing.
But Ellie Smeal embraces more war because . . .
It makes her feel like a natural woman?
She's an embarrassment and she is not the voice of feminism.
The ghost of Molly Yard frowns down upon her.
What she has done is not acceptable.
A drone for the backrooms of the Democratic Party, she's been installed in posts that mislead the world into thinking she somehow speaks for feminism.
She speaks for non-thought.
"We Heart ___!" Anita Little and other morons moan near daily at Ms.
Or they exclaim they've found your new BFF!
Not first principles.
Ms. magazine was already a joke but Ellie's just turned it into a dirty joke.
Off Our Backs is no more, yes.
But that feminist magazine went out saying something.
It devoted an entire issue to opposing war.
I think their strongest statement since the start of the Afghanistan and Iraq Wars was the Robin Morgan profile on Jane Fonda.
I know Jane, I like her (sadly, I used to say I loved her but I can't say that any more because she's so damn apathetic to the wars around her -- a far cry from the promise she publicly made in January of 2007).
But that was the message from Ms?
If you missed that article, Jane decried the Iraq War and explained she was going to speak out (as part of a tour with George Galloway) but then she decided that Cindy Sheehan was a more powerful voice.
Is that how it works?
Ms. or Jane? Or Robin Morgan?
Anyone got an answer?
Because that was disgusting.
That was: 'I could go around speaking out but there's someone else who can.'
I'm sorry, the country, the world, only needs one voice speaking out?
Well, hell, let me go home.
Let me stop all these years of speaking out and being online.
Fun fact, I now have diabetes II.
I pushed myself to the limit.
I've done everything I can since February 2003 to oppose the Iraq War. I've spoken on campuses, spoken to any other group that would have me.
I've traveled to every state but Alaska, I've met with every member of Congress that would see me -- Democrat or Republican.
I've called out friends.
I've lost some friends.
And the trade off?
I've got a meter to measure my blood sugar . . .
that's useless because it only goes up to 600 and I regularly spike at 750.
But it sure is nice that Jane -- who has always self-presented as anti-war and an activist (and, Jane, I was at all those boring lectures you and Tom used to sponsor -- the ones you'd fall asleep at and he'd attack you for that, remember?) -- it sure is nice that Jane feels she doesn't need to speak out against war because someone else is.
And that's 'feminism' to Ms. magazine.
I'm sure it is to some others as well.
But to me war is not a feminist value.
And there are a lot more feminists who agree with me than ever will agree with Eleanor Smeal.
She's embraced war.
That's her choice.
She should now have to pay the cost for misusing the Feminist Majority Foundation and Ms. magazine,.
I have totally f**ked up my health with an insane schedule protesting the Iraq War for years now -- on the road every week, speaking event after speaking event, writing here every day, doing anything I could to try to stop this ongoing, illegal war.
I have to live with the products of my choices. And I'm fine with that. It is what it is and I will never doubt that there was something more I could have done or tried but didn't.
But just as I have to live with these products/trade offs/consequences of my actions, so does Smeal
In other news Justin Raimondo (Antiwar.com) writes:
What did we learn from the Democratic presidential debates? We learned that Hillary Clinton hates Edward Snowden, loves the Patriot Act, and considers “the Iranians” among her biggest enemies. In short, we learned that she may very well be Lindsey Graham in drag.
I strongly object to that.
On the grounds that Lindsey in full drag would be much cuter than Hillary could ever hope to be.
The e-mail address for this site is email@example.com.