This Week in Anyone But Romney
Looks like Gingrich is surging and it is time for his cup of coffee in the big leagues:
Herman Cain, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich are in a dead heat as the top choices for Iowans likely to attend the Jan. 3 Republican presidential caucuses.A Bloomberg News poll shows Cain at 20 percent, Paul at 19 percent, Romney at 18 percent and Gingrich at 17 percent among the likely attendees with the caucuses that start the nominating contests seven weeks away.
I wonder what Newt gaffe will inevitably send him down to the minors.
At this point, Mitt Romney is like the ugly chick person at the bar, totally willing to put out and do anything, winking and flirting as hard as he/she can with the GOP primary voters while yelling “I’m so wasted! I’m so wasted!”, but there are still a few hours left before closing time, so the voters are still weighing their options.
It’s a pathetic spectacle, really.
*** Update ***
Changed “chick” to person so I am no longer Public Enemy #1 wanted for the crime of cravenly sexist metaphors. I was actually thinking of someone I once knew when I wrote it, and didn’t think about all the loaded shit that comes with what I was writing. My apologies. I’m a work in progress.
Fixed for accuracy.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:01 pm
Ask Romney. I’d be shocked if he wasn’t leading the behind-the-scenes charge to torpedo Cain before Cain got any real fund raising started. If Gingrich does anything with campaign cash except pay off his Tiffany’s bill, I imagine we’ll see scandals start exploding by Turkey Day.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:01 pm
All of them, Katie.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:04 pm
Jesus H. Christ, John, this should get you sent down to the minors. Use your head before posting. No, the other one.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:05 pm
Cole, I like you a lot, brother, but that’s a pretty crappy and sexist metaphor. Yeah, I know what you’re trying to say, and I agree with the sentiment, but you’re better than that.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:05 pm
Pawlenty pulling out early seems so funny now….wait, what are we talking about?
November 15th, 2011 at 12:07 pm
“Romney is like the ugly chick at the bar”
Come on, John. That hurts.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:08 pm
@Cole
but sheez not willin to become a WEC.
that would cinch the deal.
:)
November 15th, 2011 at 12:09 pm
Remember when he stuck his foot in his mouth by pointing out that the American people were not the biggest fans of the Ryan Plan and that they were no more receptive to attempts to end their Social Security and Medicare benefits than they were to socialized health care? It’ll be something like that. He’ll slip up and say something perfectly true and rational, and that’ll be the end of it.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:09 pm
@Comrade Colette Collaboratrice: I tried to change it to David Brooks…..
November 15th, 2011 at 12:10 pm
My money’s on a NEW cheatin’ heart type thing. Because the old ones have been forgiven, or something.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:11 pm
Wow, sexist metaphor is sexist. Tunch should have stopped you from posting that.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:11 pm
Fixed.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:11 pm
Does anyone here actually know:
1. Whether Newt has any money?
2. Whether Newt has any organization?
Or will I have to check out blogs that actually carry information?
Also, there must have been a better metaphor available, John.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:12 pm
@Cole
why is that the one thing that Willard wont do?
he should convert.
otherwise he is going to lose.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:12 pm
Cole – I love you man.
The sexist metaphor hurts.
Just sayin’...
November 15th, 2011 at 12:12 pm
@WereBear: So, you’re saying that Newt loves America even more than he did in the 90s?
November 15th, 2011 at 12:12 pm
@David in NY: at least Cole has enough nads to speak truth to power.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:13 pm
I’m going to go with something like “After General Lee won the War of Northern Aggression…” from the “history” “professor”.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:15 pm
@schrodinger’s cat: why?
its the truth.
why doesnt Romney convert?
do he actually believe in the Angel Moroni and the lost golden tablets?
Mormonism might be the only thing Romney truly believes.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:15 pm
Is that metaphor really sexist? I just see it as a stereotype that anyone who has spent a few evenings in a bar would recognize.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:16 pm
@Comrade Colette Collaboratrice: I agree. Much of what John writes is pure gold, but not this.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:17 pm
@David in NY: Well, he’s claimed that his fundraising has dramatically increased, but we won’t know for real until the FEC reports are filed after the end of the quarter. In other words, after the Iowa caucuses.
As for organization, not much that anyone can see.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:17 pm
reposting from last nite, because Newtmentum is mentioned and because it sticks in my craw just that much:
Fuck Newtmentum. You’re telling me I’m going to have to listen to this bag of flab and wind and all the media fluffing for the next few weeks or however long it lasts? I thought we were done with Newt a long time ago, he’d been a footnote, and now this? I had to suffer through this fucking asshole in the 90’s.
Just fucking shoot me.
Well at least I’ll enjoy witnessing the implosion which should be a sight to behold.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:18 pm
Newt has more skeletons in his closet than Jeffrey Dahmer. The only reason he’s seen as relevant is the IOKIYAR pass.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:18 pm
@Jude: its the truth.
But why wont Romney flip on mormonism?
all he needs to do is go Baptist, and heez a lock for the nom.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:19 pm
Didn’t SNL already use the ugly person in a bar joke?
November 15th, 2011 at 12:20 pm
@Willard: both wrong.
Willard will apparently say anything…..except….i reject mormonism infavor of REAL xianity.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:21 pm
So, the amazing thing to me is The Village continues to ignore Ron Paul, even though he seems to be polling better now that earlier.
I mean, I realize that Paul’s fanbase of people who look like they got tossed out of a Star Trek convention for being too twee is pretty offputting, and that his unpopular stand on torture (“I’m against it”) has probably ruined his chances to win over any of the bloodthirsty “Christians” of the Rethug base, but still, he’s doing better.
The problem of course is that The Village is fixated on Newt, who is, after all, an old inside the beltway favorite, mainly because he’s great fodder for eye catching storylines that provide column inches and column inches of very easy to produce pseudo-content that will not in any way interfere with plans for cocktail weenies and appletinis this evening at Sally’s salon.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:21 pm
For all the people screaming sexism, have you ever been to a dive bar after midnight? Seriously.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:21 pm
That to me is a pretty accurate description of Herman Cain. Is it racist?
November 15th, 2011 at 12:23 pm
@John Cole: Cain would be all over it. Just saying.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:23 pm
@KG:
Just change “chick” to “dude” and it’s pretty much what I did all the way through college.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:24 pm
John,
Based on this pitiful post I think you are a sad spectacle.
Worst metaphor ever.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:25 pm
@John Cole: Well for what it is worth John I thought it was hilarious and I am a woman. I suppose it is the benefit of 14 years in the Royal Navy.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:25 pm
@KG:
Nah. It’s a cultural stereotype that anyone who’s been to a bar has seen in action. I’m not pleased that this culture values women so disproportionately for our looks, but there it is and because that is the case, the case of the less attractive girl at the bar (generally half in the bag) all but screaming her sexual availability to gain attention is a sad fact of life. There are dozens of stereotypes of this sort (many of them deriving from bar culture), some involve women, some involve men . . . and like most stereotypes they are based in real life.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:26 pm
I heard a bit from Cain’s wife when she went on, who else, Greta Van Susteran’s show saying Herman Cain would have to be a completely different person than the one she knows to sexually harass women. Cause men always let their wives know when they sexually harass.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:26 pm
@khead: And you’re dude enough to admit it.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:27 pm
@John Cole: Well, I suppose it is kind of sexist.
But I have to say I am surprised at all of the hand-wringing. One of the reasons I love this blog is the occasional in-your-face, crass post or comment. It’s like these people have never read the blog before, jeez.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:27 pm
See, here’s your problem: all those evangelical voters don’t drink, so by definition they never drink enough that any of these clowns looks pretty enough to try to climb in bed with.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:27 pm
@Larry Bartlett: Jesus christ, lighten up.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:28 pm
@John Cole: Yeah, I have. And I have also been the recipient of many many unwanted sexual come ons because I mean, my (ex-)girlfriend and I couldn’t have been there drinking together we were just ugly chicks waiting for some dude.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:29 pm
@BGinCHI:
I love this improvement. Well done. Does the Applebee’s salad bar serve alcohol? I guess it does in Bobo’s fantasy world.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:29 pm
@harlana:
Exactly how I feel. The historical memory of this country extends about 10 seconds into the past.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:30 pm
@low-tech cyclist: “all those evangelical voters don’t drink”
Always bring two baptist friends fishing with you, cause if you bring just one, he will drink all your beer.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:31 pm
@Litlebritdifrnt:
I though it was funny too, but I love the Bobo version.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:33 pm
It was a sexist metaphor, but it was also … strangely accurate. The stereotype of a homely, unloved girl trying desperately to pick a guy to take her home perfectly captures the sense of mounting frustration and rejection that Romney conveys to me. He’s the obvious choice and he’s the closest thing to a patrician in the whole race, and he’s reduced to flirting with ignorant hicks in the hopes that they’ll overlook how unappealing they think he is.
And the metaphor wouldn’t work if it were a homely, drunk guy hitting on every woman in the bar, because women (sensibly) recoil from that type of come on. Men, OTOH, will eventually select a woman they don’t find attractive for a cheap one-night stand if all other options fail, and that’s what Romney needs right now—for Republican voters to settle for him. For that same reason, if he were the drunk homely guy, the power imbalance would be all wrong, since the stereotypical drunk douchebag is too stuck on himself to ever imagine that the girl “settled” for him.
In away, thinking about Romney this way makes him almost piteable. After every thing he’s done to get this far, it’s going to come down to whether he can get lower class yaboos to actually like him.
Of course, it’s also possible that I have the same latent sexist tendencies as Cole and that’s why I’m reading too much into this admittedly sexist metaphor. It could also be a reaction to all the codeine, as I’ve been fighting with bronchitis all weekend long and last night the doctor finally gave me a bottle of the magic happy syrup.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:34 pm
jesus you people suck. It was funny.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:34 pm
you’d think the people wringing their hands so hard would be unable to furiously type up their righteous indignation. the internet is weird.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:34 pm
@dmsilev: He’s gonna buy America a diamond ring!
From Tiffany’s.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:35 pm
I know we’re not at Shakesville here or anything but do you really think this post is appropriate?
Quoting belafon from above, would this be appropriate? :
I see were trotting some of my all time favorites
“Lighten up, its just a joke”
“The stereotype has some truth and is therefore totally ok!”, eg black people like watermellon! hilarious!
November 15th, 2011 at 12:35 pm
Wow.
I’m a lurker here, but visit several times a day.I can’t believe Cole this unquestionably sexist metaphor, and then dug himself a deeper hole by ignoring the concern of his readers, many of whom are readers. No, you can’t have the same joke and substitute “man.”
I rather feel sorry for the women here who don’t think it’s a problem because “it’s true” and disgusted with the men who think so. Cole, you owe readers an apology. Thank the FSM there are blogs that don’t tolerate this kind of behavior, at least in comments sections—Pharyngula, for one. Every time you use a stereotype, insert “Jew”, “Black,” minority of your choice and see if you think the recipient would think it was funny.
And yeah, I’m making a lot of “a joke” because that doesn’t excuse a damned thing. I would think the left would be a little better than the right in terms of how they regard women, even subconsciously.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:35 pm
I always thought I just really, really sucked at winking and flirting.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:36 pm
Wow, so many sensitive peeps here. Has nobody here seen/hit on/been the drunk fat chick at the bar looking to get some near closing time?
November 15th, 2011 at 12:37 pm
@John Cole: John, if you’d only said ugly person, it would have been fine.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:37 pm
@Larry Bartlett:
honestly, i think the term ‘ugly chick black man’ just makes no sense.
seriously, who the fuck are you again? get outta here.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:39 pm
@Punchy:
Yes, I’ve also seen Jews counting money and found no urge to guffaw.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:40 pm
@MoZeu: everyone’s judged on their looks, even men. there’s all sorts of reports floating out there that suggest that beautiful people get paid more than normal looking people than ugly people. it’s the way of the world, something from our lizard brains that promotes the desire to reproduce.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:40 pm
@chopper: I was copying someone’s blockquote and the strikethrough didn’t come along for the ride. But you’re right. I should leave. This place stinks.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:41 pm
“i’m a lurker and i never ever post here, but i check the blog every so often and i think i speak for everyone when i say i’m pissed off!”
November 15th, 2011 at 12:41 pm
No wonder “Bridesmaids” was such a big hit around here.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:43 pm
@Larry Bartlett:
i once saw a homely looking orthodox guy at a unsta-unsta bar looking desperate as hell for a date. was i allowed to laugh, or am i a self-hating jew?
November 15th, 2011 at 12:43 pm
@Samara Morgan: And if he can buy that, he can buy anything. Maybe that’s why Mittens feels so free to change his position all the time.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:43 pm
@Larry Bartlett:
/tar Larry Bartlett
/cast polymorh
/cast pyroblast
/cast Flag of Ownership
November 15th, 2011 at 12:45 pm
@Villago Delenda Est:
That’s Trekist. I’m outraged. I demand an apology!!
November 15th, 2011 at 12:49 pm
Let’s see: ugly woman is worthless and desperate, all others hope to do better but might take her if absolutely nothing else is available. Sure, this has absolutely no implications about the worth/value of ugly women, women in general, or men’s right to some sort of hole or other.
Having personally been in many a dive bar after midnight, I’d say that the most standard stereotype is the ugly, angry man who feels entitled to sex, particularly with a women much more in line with societally-approved hotness than he is. – waits for the same people who supported the ‘ugly chick’ metaphor to get angry about tarring all men with the same brush -
November 15th, 2011 at 12:49 pm
The Department of Redundancy Department would like to have a word with you over copyright infringement.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:50 pm
I’d go with the crowd here. The metaphor you’ve picked for Mitt Romney is so not PC.
With my Asian cultural background, I would compare Mitt Romney to a groom in a traditional arranged marriage: he’s the son of your parent’s best friends, and the two of you were promised to each other when you were toddlers. But now, when it’s time for you to marry him, you take your first adult’s look at the man he’s become and all you see is a smarmy, unprincipled git: DO NOT WANT!
@Samara Morgan:
You’ve got to be kidding. If Mitt converts to non-Mormon Christianity now, just to win Teabaggers over, who the hell is going to believe it’s a sincere act of faith? Who would be so stupid as to be swayed in his favor by such a conversion? His Republican rivals would quickly paint it as just another Mitt flip-flop; except much more heinous, because Mitt would be showing that he would flip even his religion to win votes.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:50 pm
@WereBear: (#55)
Precisely. Change just one noun and one pronoun and John Cole’s metaphor/joke is no less effective or evocative. Because I suspect a good number of commenters here have been “in dive bars after midnight” (I certainly have), and have seen “pathetic spectacles” from men and women both.
BGinChi’s alteration above (#1) makes this point succinctly.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:51 pm
Look, you can have my Kubler-Ross analogy free of charge. Take and run free, little grasshopper.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:51 pm
Frankly, with Paul up in that polls too, I’m anxious to see the Paultard reaction. They are hilarious as it is now- imagine the heights of excess if Paul became the flavor-of-the-month after the excitement for Cain and then Gingrich blows over. Maybe they’ll even riot in Tampa at the 2012 GOP convention!
November 15th, 2011 at 12:53 pm
@Amir Khalid:
Ha! I read that as ‘Mitt-flop’. I think that has a certain ring to it.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:53 pm
@Amir Khalid: Not bad at all. It would be great if the Republicans just decided to stay single…
November 15th, 2011 at 12:54 pm
@andy: I want the blimp back! I saw it in ‘08, I talked it about here, some deranged girl accused me of being a Paultard. Honey, if you could make someone support your campaign by flying a blimp over their city it would be a fucking great campaign strategy! Instead of, you know, what it was.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:56 pm
@duck-billed placelot:
I’M SO ANGRY!! I DEMAND AN APOLOGY!
November 15th, 2011 at 12:56 pm
@Amir Khalid: There are arranged marriages in Malaysia? I did not know, I thought that was an Indian thing.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:56 pm
I thought it was funny. And accurate.
Ugly men do not get picked up in bars no matter how willing and drunk and desperate they are, because women’s sexuality just doesn’t work that way. We are never so horny that we ignore everything in favor of a willing cock.
Ugly women, on the other hand, might get picked up – by drunken, desperate men, because men’s sexuality is considerably less discriminating.
The old saying “He would fnck a woodpile if he thought there was a snake under it,” refers to men, not women.
NOTE: This observation refers to straight men and straight women. I don’t know enough about the dynamics of LGBT sexuality to know if it’s also true in the those communities.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:57 pm
Why, yes, you can substitute “man” and it still works (and is still funny). Just go down to your local gay watering hole any night of the week.
November 15th, 2011 at 12:59 pm
The point of the metaphor (God, I’m going to regret this when the codeine wears off) is in the power imbalance. If there were enough pretty women present (i.e. one or more serious GOP candidates without Romney’s baggage), they would have already gone home with the targeted suitor (the GOP voters). Romney is in the position of being the least homely girl (in comparison to the other GOP candidates) but he still has some fairly unsightly blemishes (flip-flopper, Bain Capital, Mormonism) that keep him from closing the deal with the prospective suitor. So he keeps doing increasingly humiliating things to announce his ready availability should anyone want to take him home, no questions asked (compare “Wooo, I’m so drunk!” with “I will double Guantanamo Bay!”)
That type of degradation in pursuit of sex/election doesn’t make sense if he’s a guy because no ugly guy in the history of the world has ever gotten laid by walking up to an unattached female and slurring “Wooo, I’m so drunk! I hope you don’t take me home with you and take advantage me!”(1)
And injecting ethnicity into this makes no sense because the metaphor broadly compares political campaigns with dating conventions and specifically compares Romney’s with the homely girl whose dating strategy is (1) come off as easy as possible not matter what it does to your self-respect, and (2) outlast all the other girls. Comparing Romney to a “drunk black guy trying to pick up women” doesn’t make any sense. Comparing him to a “drunk Jew trying to pick up women by counting money in front of them (or whatever the hell that post was about) makes no kind of sense.
(1)Which, btw, a female friend of my acquaintance said those exact words to me as we were leaving a party. And while she was a dear friend, she was 17 years my senior and in that light suddenly resembled Molly Sugden and I suddenly felt like a startled Mr. Humphries. I took her home—her home—gave her a tall glass of water and a BC powder, thanked her for a lovely evening, and left.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:00 pm
@khead: When I do the wink, they seem to think it is some kind of nervous tic.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:03 pm
I don’t know. I can see why people are offended, but the sentence gave me a mental image of Romney in a dress and wig, yelling, “I’m so wasted! I’m so wasted!” that I can’t get upset about it because I’m giggling too much.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:04 pm
I’ve had the impression since oh 2007 when I heard of Romney, that he was shaped or traumatized long before this by the perception that his Father lost the Presidential nomination because of being Mormon. I listened to those almost cloned pundits in no insight over and over repeating that George Romney lost the GOP nomination because of being Mormon. Most of those pundits were too young to have been covering the elder Romney’s campaign and I was not impressed with their insight on other matters. I knew they were reading the racial issue wrong (about 20 years out of date) and other things as well. I wondered if they knew what they were taking about. What if Romney Sr. lost the nomination for a combination of other reasons like maybe someone else seemed more like what was needed at the time to the voters. Pundits like quick sound bights they don’t have to rethink even after 20 years. However if Romney Sr THOUGHT that was why or conventional thinkers told Jr. that his whole life, that might explain why he acts so paranoid about the issue and so so anxious to please the evangelicals. He just acts so insecure about that “so so important” demographic and as a result he’s thrown away support he could have had from other demographics IMO. Watching him these last few years have left me very anti Romney in a way I wasn’t before. I usually don’t think that charges of pandering or inconsistancy have much truth to them, but this time yeah. He can’t be trusted and I’m no longer willing to think he is the sane one. It’s conventional wisdom that the evangelical’s won’t vote for a Mormon. I wonder if that is really even true for some other Mormon. Romney has apparently had to listen to this accepted truth for decades.
Bush Jr supposedly decided to run for President right after his dad lost re-election to prove something to dad and/or the voters. I suspect Romney Jr. has some simular issues about his dad’s failed run. He is so obscessed with that particular office and hasn’t even looked around and said maybe he should do something else for awhile. That also means his actual accomplishments are receding back in time and he hasn’t done anything in quite awhile.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:06 pm
TunguPhule,
I am floored by your utter brilliance in debating my point. I typed in the wrong word. But hey … that’s more important that the issue, isn’t it?
November 15th, 2011 at 1:06 pm
She was ugly, but was she fat? Come on Cole, tell us the truth.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:07 pm
John Cole:
Thanks for the update. Reasonable enough.
Now that particular crime can be scratched off the broadsheet that lists all the other offenses for which you remain Public Enemy #1. But is that mugshot up-to-date?
November 15th, 2011 at 1:07 pm
Hey, chopper …
I didn’t say I spoke for everyone, asshole. Now go play with your little boy friends who think jokes about ugly women are funny.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:08 pm
@seanindc:
You left off /violin at the end, though…
November 15th, 2011 at 1:09 pm
@duck-billed placelot: Your stereotype is certainly apt (have seen it a bit myself). I think John’s was also grounded in reality (that I have also witnessed).
November 15th, 2011 at 1:09 pm
More linguistic nitpicking
November 15th, 2011 at 1:10 pm
@CaseyL: Gay men are horndawgs, especially drunk. I can’t speak for any of the other letters.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:10 pm
now i’m horribly offended on behalf of drunk, ugly people. you know, cole, alcoholism is a disease. it’s serious. and picking up someone at a bar who’s clearly wasted is wrong.
here’s how you should have written it:
see? waaaay funnier. i’m still laughing.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:11 pm
Damn, Cole, bowing down to political correctness? Lost a lot of respect for you, man.
Tell them offended chicks to to STFU and get in the kitchen and fix you a ham sammich.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:11 pm
@SueinNM:
little boyfriends? is that a gay slur?
November 15th, 2011 at 1:15 pm
@Citizen Alan: All of that seems perfectly obvious to me Citizen Alan and I have never had codeine. Indeed, like you, I found the ethnic substitution stuff mostly puzzling. It says basically nothing about race at all to substitute “black man” for “ugly drunk chick.” All it does is make the “joke” basically meaningless. And substituting “man” or “person” for chick, as John has now done, completely elides the dynamic John is trying to express for precisely the reasons you point.
If one wants to argue that the joke was sexist, more power to them. I honestly couldn’t care less if nobody ever expressed a metaphor using drunk women for the rest of recorded time. But several of these complaints seem to start from a basic misunderstanding of what the metaphor was even meant to convey. How odd.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:15 pm
Oh. And God forbid forbid any mere lurker should ever offer an opinion in the Holy BJ comments section. After all, they must be insincere or lying, whereas the “regulars” know all.
Maybe it never occurred to some of you, but there are REAL lurkers, like me, who don’t think everything they say is golden, like some of you. Believe me, lurkers far outnumber regular commenters. We actually comment when we have something to say. But oh, no. That’s forbidden here. The Holy Precincts must not be invaded by lowly lurkers,and all said comments must be here just to troll.
And no, I’m not planning to comment again. Thank FSM the men I know, including my husband of 27 years, actually are interested in hearing another opinion, even of the female persuasion.
Have fun in your sandbox.
Fat, old broad
November 15th, 2011 at 1:15 pm
This happens. I’ve seen it. It’s also as good a description of the Romney campaign I’ve read in a while.
I’d recommend that anyone offended by this post stay away from any and all drinking establishments frequented by college-age people, what with reality having a clear gender bias and all.
How many of you delicate flowers would be offended if the story involved jacked-up, drunk meatheads? I’m guessing that one would slide.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:16 pm
@GVG:
OK, admittedly, I was only 11 at the time, but I’d like to think I was a bit more politically aware than other 11 year olds, but I can’t recall Romney’s Mormonism to have been that big a deal in ‘68. I think what killed him was the “I was brainwashed” comment on the Vietnam War. That and Tricky Dick was well positioned for the nomination thanks to the groundwork he laid with the party powers that be between ‘64 and ‘68…particularly that he supported Goldwater’s run in solid ways and was able to cash in his favor chips in ‘68 when he needed them.
Keep in mind that rabid evangelicals didn’t exist in ‘68 the way they do now, pushing a socially regressive agenda and fighting the demons of the 60’s. Mormons would have been seen as a bit strange, but basically OK. All clean cut and family oriented and all. The minor theological baggage wasn’t nearly as important as that they were “solid Americans”. The fact that they didn’t drink Coca-Cola or coffee with their apple pie wasn’t that big a deal.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:16 pm
@Amir Khalid: “Who would be so stupid as to be swayed in his favor by such a conversion? ”
We are talking about GOP primary voters here. They have told polltakers they think Michele Bachmann is the person who should have the nuclear launch codes. They have told polltakers that Rick Perry is the statesman who should lead our country. They think the 9-9-9 plan would lower their taxes.
I think they would buy it.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:16 pm
@SueinNM:
see, now you’re speaking my language.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:18 pm
Do the not-Romney people know that his dad was born in Mexico? His great-grandparents had moved to Mexico to avoid US laws so you could even say he’s from a family of Mexican outlaws.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:19 pm
@Nicole:
Same here. That overrode all other reactions.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:19 pm
Don’t give in to the ugly chicks’ lobby John. I knew exactly what you meant.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:20 pm
@jrg:
trust me, in the GOP primary there’s going to be plenty of room for the ‘jacked-up drunk meatheads’ metaphor.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:20 pm
But now that he’s fixed it I’m trying to figure out what “gravenly” means.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:22 pm
@jrg:
A friend back-in-the-day decided his bar-hopping philosophy would be “ugly, early.” This, I suspect, spared him a lot of hangovers but had other regrettable consequences.
Maybe I’ll track him down and find out if he’s a Romney man.
Somehow this discussion reminds me of being offended at the very concept of closing time: what, we can’t keep drinking? Last time I closed a bar was in the previous millenium.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:22 pm
@schrodinger’s cat:
There are, or have been, arranged marriages in just about every society, all over the world, including the West. They are far less common now than they used to be, of course. Among the elites it was often about cementing political or business alliances between the families. But even for ordinary folk, it was often your parents’ responsibility to choose your spouse for you, because there were family interests to consider, and because young people deemed old enough to marry were nonetheless deemed not mature enough to choose their own spouse. Dreams From My Father mentions a letter that Barack Obama’s Kenyan grandfather wrote to his American one to express concern about Barack Sr and Anne’s marriage, making this very point.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:23 pm
What Citizen Alan said. Is it sexist to acknowledge that there are differences in male and female dating/hookup habits?
@handsmile:
No doubt. In fact, I’ve seen considerably more pathetic spectacles from men in bars. But they’re generally pathetic in a a different way, and one which doesn’t make much sense in the metaphor JC is using.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:24 pm
So, anything that protrays females in any sort of negative light, regardless of the point of the portrayal or its validity, is “sexist”?
Mike
November 15th, 2011 at 1:26 pm
@Larv:
All the laddies cat call and wolf whistle
So-called gentlemen and ladies
Dog fight like rose and thistle
November 15th, 2011 at 1:27 pm
@chopper (#93): No, it isn’t a gay slur. She meant it as in “go play with the other little boys in the sandbox.”. It is a particular type of ad hominem that is used by “feminists” (used extremely loosely) to discount the opinions of men they don’t feel like arguing with logically. By using a diminutive form, they hope to shame the target into feeling Less Than. It is the same rhetorical device as calling women “gals” or black men “boy.”
November 15th, 2011 at 1:29 pm
@AxelFoley:
Cole’s response should have been more along these lines:
You don’t think, you know, we care about our open commentary. You think this ‘Political Correctness’, we’re just going to let it grow? Well, suck on this, ok.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:29 pm
Frankly, I thought the original was fine BECAUSE it could apply to either sex (with slight variations). The guy equivalent would be the ugly/boring dude who is getting trashed and throwing around cash while talking about how lonely they are and how much their job pays.
Anyways, I suppose since Mitt is a guy the male equivalent would have been more appropriate but I got the gist of it and wasn’t insulted. I am also a man, so think of me what you will but I have met that girl that John describes on multiple occasions.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:29 pm
@SueinNM: You should comment more. You certainly have the style down.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:33 pm
@Paul in KY: Yeah, there are women who flirt to little avail late at night at bars, sure. And some of them even make thinly veiled references to non-consensual sex in order to entice sexual partners (“I’m so drunk, I won’t even resist!”). To find it funny that women who don’t fit narrow restrictions of beauty also have painfully self-erasing conceptions of sexuality…It doesn’t even reach the ‘Women be shoppin’ level of gender based humor, does it? ‘Ugly chicks be possessin’ sexual desire and confused conceptions of fulfillment and connection!’ Hilarious!
November 15th, 2011 at 1:35 pm
@GVG:
That just gave me chills. ANOTHER Republican douche-bag president driven primarily by freaking Daddy Issues?!?
November 15th, 2011 at 1:37 pm
@Thoughtcrime: what happened to our fearless leader?! =)
anyway, count me as female and un-offended. does anyone really believe John is a sexist? we got bigger fish to fry.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:38 pm
@SueinNM: I think this is more than just a stereotype, because he isn’t saying all women are like this, or even that all UGLY women are like this… he’s just describing a specific situation that is similar to the one that Romney faces while trying to woo the GOP.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:38 pm
yeah, I knew you were PeeCee toast when I saw that.
btw, I think you mean cravenly.
You may be a clueless creaky old sexist dinosaur but that is no reason for you to not study your vocabulary words. The test is on Friday.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:38 pm
@harlana:
only little idiots like suzie-q would draw a conclusion like that from a single off the cuff statement.
ETA: ah, I see we’ve got a suzie-q “lurker” clone on this thread. Good stuff.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:41 pm
@duck-billed placelot: The original joke (IMO) made no mention of any ‘non consensuality’ comments by the drunk lady. In fact, she’s very consensual (that’s part of the joke). So, I don’t really get the point you are making here.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:41 pm
@eemom: I did mean cravenly.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:41 pm
Trigger warning! Trigger warning!
November 15th, 2011 at 1:43 pm
@Paul in KY: John’s original had the woman yelling, ‘I’m so wasted! I’m so wasted!’ Do you really think that carries no cultural baggage about sexual consent?
November 15th, 2011 at 1:45 pm
@duck-billed placelot: It means “I’m so drunk I’m uninhibited and will consent enthusiastically even though I wouldn’t normally,” doesn’t it? It’s drunken willingness, not drunken rapeability.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:48 pm
I think that image is too loud and aggressive. Willard is quite calm, content and sure of himself. He has never, to me, looked like he was breaking a sweat. He much have paid more attention to Perry than I or the national media have. Maybe he (quaintly) thought talk of secession would be a deal-breaker.
I do think Willlard is fascinating to watch though, so willing to flip-flop and contort himself, make a fool out of himself and do everything short of converting to Baptist to get that nomination, quite willing to be humiliated as long as he’s confident they’ll come back to him. He’s not the drunk at the end of the bar, he’s Herman Glimscher knowing that eventually Sally Rogers will have to settle for him (Yes I am old, yes I consider myself to be a nerd). He’s Richard Nixon driving Pat on a date with the other guy, somehow knowing it won’t work out and he’ll wear down her resistance. If we had been reading Nixonland over these months, I’m sure we would see other parallels between these two. But it seems to me Nixon was more consistent on issues. Could be wrong.
Also, I”ve been thinking of the parallels between Willard and his pappy and the Bush clan, thinking that Willard was Dumbya (relentless ambition and daddy issues) and old George was old George. But as I think about, Willard is more like GHWB, who had his own Daddy issues with Prescott (?), who was also IIRC a mensch compared to his weaselly, desperate, shape-shifting, get-prize-at-any-cost empty suit of a son.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:49 pm
@eemom: oh yeh, that’s me, whoever that is! i was here when you were crawling around in your diapers, young lady! ;)
scuse me for not joining the pile on just because i want to be liked by some commenters of more tender persuasion, considering i don’t give a damn
November 15th, 2011 at 1:53 pm
I think the technical term for it is called “being Newt Gingrich.”
November 15th, 2011 at 1:54 pm
@duck-billed placelot: I took that as her declaring there would be no moral qualms from her about having some adult fun, but now I can see that you are talking about a guy hoping she passes out.
I don’t roll that way, so I didn’t think of that tactic.
Do understand your point now.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:57 pm
@FlipYrWhig: I think it’s a dead/undead cat in a box kind of a statement, really (no pun intended). Willing/rapeable: depends on whether there are any rapists present. But generally, I would say that ‘too drunk to consent, protest, and/or escape’ is a well established concept. I mean, if you were to meet a strange person in a bar and go home with him/her, after multiple statements of ‘I’m so wasted’, wouldn’t you be extra careful about what they were actually interested in doing? Because of the whole being wasted thing?
November 15th, 2011 at 1:57 pm
@ Many above:
No comically (and for the pure effective use of metaphor) it would not have worked. Part of John’s job is to play a bit on the edge and type things that make us shake our heads.
Let John make his points by typing what he wants, and if you find it not to your liking click elsewhere.
November 15th, 2011 at 1:59 pm
@Paul in KY: Thanks. I think a lot of nice men don’t see the rape angle because they’re not, well, rapists, but it’s cool that you’re not defensive about it/able to see my point.
November 15th, 2011 at 2:01 pm
@SueinNM:
The line was not about women. No matter their whatevers. It was about desperation.
It is about a slice of life that many have seen/participated in all too often. And yes if he had been talking about women it would have been way over the top and sexist. He was talking about a real, if unpleasant, slice of life and using that as a metaphor. And substituting man or person in there does change the situation to make the metaphor much less truthful. Should the metaphor be truthful? The world would be a better place if it was not, but we are stuck with the world we have. Changing the language will not change the situation, which is the real problem. Yelling about the use of the metaphor does not make the situation go away. Being PC means we don’t talk about issues, it doesn’t mean we fix them.
November 15th, 2011 at 2:02 pm
@Nicole: Nicole, FTW.
November 15th, 2011 at 2:03 pm
@duck-billed placelot: Glad everything is cool :-)
November 15th, 2011 at 2:05 pm
Every discussion on this blog eventually devolves into the coconut argument from the first scene of MP and the Holy Grail.
Every. one.
November 15th, 2011 at 2:05 pm
@Violet:
I think you just coined a new term. Save it for the general election if Mitt does get picked up.
November 15th, 2011 at 2:07 pm
Jesus Fncking Christ: now y’all are arguing consent issues in a freaking METAPHOR?
John, as a proudly female person who thought the original version was funnier than hell, I apologize for the utter humorlessness of the PC Humor Police.
November 15th, 2011 at 2:13 pm
@Keith G:
John has a JOB?
We ARE talking about John “like flies to wanton boys are commenters to John Cole, he kills them for his sport” Cole here, right?
November 15th, 2011 at 2:13 pm
@duck-billed placelot: I would, yes, because I learned that impaired consent was not consent. But the imaginary horny, desperate woman in the analogy/parable is hoping that she meets someone less cautious than that.
November 15th, 2011 at 2:14 pm
a href=”#comment-2879549”>Jim, Foolish Literalist:
I suppose it does take a real mensch to profit from the Nazi ware machine.
November 15th, 2011 at 2:16 pm
@Thoughtcrime:
ROFL
November 15th, 2011 at 2:17 pm
Betcha didn’t have this kind of reaction to that kind of post back when you and your readership were Republicans, huh? :D
November 15th, 2011 at 2:17 pm
@John Cole: people were hardly “screaming” sexism. they largely affirmed your point, recognized your intention and critiqued (lovingly) your choice of language.
plus, they underscored that the language was sexist, not you.
take pleasure in the community you have here. no need to get defensive.
November 15th, 2011 at 2:17 pm
Newt’s rise to renewed, if temporary, glory heartens me. It’s less than two months until primary/caucus season starts and the entire GOP is still running around like beheaded chickens. I underestimated just how much Republicans hate Mittens, though I maintain it’s more for his weaselity than his Mormonity. And I still think most of them will show up at the polls to vote for Romney, because they hate the Negro Usurper just that much…but now I’m starting to believe that some of them will stay home.
This is just like us in 2008, except that, you know, both Clinton and Obama supporters were highly enthused about the possibility of their respective candidates becoming president, and the only Republicans who are really hot for their guy right now are Paulbots.
November 15th, 2011 at 2:17 pm
Well, it looks like Mittens is going to have to “Putout” even more now b/c that dastardly Obama is sucking Independents away from him according to PPP:
November 15th, 2011 at 2:17 pm
I’ve been at many a dive bars at closing time.
I thought it was funny and a fitting metaphor.
Back in my college days, my friends of the sorority variety had a joke; “What is the mating call of the sorority girl? ‘I’m so wasted’”. It was probably an old joke even at that point.
November 15th, 2011 at 2:18 pm
@invisible_hand: “plus, they underscored that the language was sexist, not you.”
But what was sexist about it?
Mike
November 15th, 2011 at 2:23 pm
Those whining about John’s metaphor: Please stop with the pearl-clutching. It’s an ugly metaphor but I can assure you, after 20 years of playing in bars and clubs, it is a true one.
November 15th, 2011 at 2:30 pm
@eemom: Are you trying to coin an eemom’s Law?
November 15th, 2011 at 2:31 pm
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: Whoa therewhile GHWB has his problems-IranContra- he was undenuably a hardcore old school wasp, a man who knew wheodies were burire the bed not becuase he schmoozed it out of someone but because he put them there- you think a risk averse waffler like Romney is a fighter pilot in the Pacific WW2? The best GHWB description I’ve ever heard was that he was everything Dubya wished he could be- star athlete, war hero, competent foriegn policy hand, etc.
November 15th, 2011 at 3:03 pm
@duck-billed placelot: +1
November 15th, 2011 at 3:05 pm
“It’s a pathetic spectacle”- is this a reference to the 2008 Democratic Primary process, or was that a beautiful exercise in democracy just because that was for Democrats? How do you spell hypocrite again?
November 15th, 2011 at 3:25 pm
Oh my fucking god – some of you people are insane. Yeah, I said “YOU PEOPLE”.
Can we still say “it ain’t over till the fat lady sings”?
I don’t think saying “ugly chick at the bar” is a sexist metaphor. Any more than saying “white men can’t jump” is racist.
So stupid.
November 15th, 2011 at 3:37 pm
@A Conservative Teacher: I’m going to have to score that a -1 out of 10.
November 15th, 2011 at 3:39 pm
@Lee:
“They’re all foxes at closing time.”
November 15th, 2011 at 3:51 pm
@A Conservative Teacher:
Please, for the entertainment of all, describe for us the ways in which the Democratic primaries of 2007/8 were ‘a pathetic spectacle’. While you’re at it, don’t forget to bullet point all the ways in which these Republican Primaries do not provide ‘a pathetic spectacle’ by comparison.
Should be easy, yeah? Otherwise you wouldn’t have made the comparison in the first place.
November 15th, 2011 at 3:53 pm
Why is it sexist to say “ugly chick”? Jesus Christ, what PC lunacy. Ugly dude, ugly chick, who fucking cares? Seriously, “chick” is a 4 letter word now? And the story Cole was trying to tell doesn’t work with a man. A woman drunk at a bar, trying to score, ok, I understand that. A man drunk at a bar, trying to score, is escorted out the establishment face first.
November 15th, 2011 at 4:14 pm
Wow. I didn’t think Cole was denigrating “women”, I thought he was talking about “desperate women at the bars at closing time”, which is a pretty small subset of that group, if you look at any particular point in time.
Seriously, is there anyone who made it through college without seeing this behavior? I think there was even a Harry Chapin song about it.
November 15th, 2011 at 4:25 pm
@Amir Khalid: here is an interesting thought.
Since Mitt was a mormon missionary in france when his peers were serving in Viet Nam, could he even get into KSA?
The Sauds dont allow missionaries into the country.
so if he changed to Baptist or w/e Bush was, he could go visit our nominal allies, the Saud monarchs, right?
November 15th, 2011 at 4:28 pm
@WaterGirl: moral scolds on parade as usual. been around here long?
and the poor guy apolo’d!
hahahaha
November 15th, 2011 at 4:30 pm
@jake the snake: I thought that was the father-in-law, Walker?
@Socraticsilence:
Up until 1980, I’d agree with that. Not a saint, but a decent human being and an old-school WASP Republican (though as I type that—didn’t he embrace some pretty ugly racial politics to run for the Senate from TX?). When he saw the road to the presidency lay through embracing “VooDoo economics”, flip-flopping on abortion, Wille Horton, card-carrying member of the ACLU, “kicked a little ass”, and being at best a silent witness to Iran-Contra. John McCain really was a war-hero. Forty years ago and before he had anything to do with politics.
November 15th, 2011 at 4:38 pm
@Amir Khalid:
lol, the WECs love converts.
look at Rifka Bari.
they practically canonized her.
November 15th, 2011 at 4:43 pm
I’ve had the impression since oh 2007 when I heard of Romney, that he was shaped or traumatized long before this by the perception that his Father lost the Presidential nomination because of being Mormon.
Romney, Sr. lost the npmination for inartful flip-flopping on Vietnam (“I was brainwashed!” he said, explaining his previous support for the war).
November 15th, 2011 at 4:58 pm
I’m so wasted! I’m so wasted
No No No. You clearly don’t hang out in bars frequented by young women of the sorority persuasion. The proper line is
I can’t believe I had so much to drink
November 15th, 2011 at 4:58 pm
@duck-billed placelot:
This is the key part. The Romney metaphor may be apt, even comically so, and I get why Cole used it. But the bar scenario underlying it is actually sad more than funny.
November 15th, 2011 at 5:02 pm
@WaterGirl:
Do you mean “A Better Place To Be”? That was in a bar, but the “plot” was different—the guy goes into the bar to drown his sorrows over the loss of a beautiful one-night-stand chick who ran out on him and ends up going home with the “ugly” female bartender after telling her the story.
“’Cause I’m just going nowhere, and anywhere’s a better place to be.”
November 15th, 2011 at 5:27 pm
@WaterGirl:
I was going to comment along the same lines. I was going to say it wasn’t even a metaphor really. A cliche maybe.
November 15th, 2011 at 5:28 pm
You will never get me to surrender the term “hippy chick”, when it is apropo. never never never, hopefully.
November 15th, 2011 at 5:35 pm
The strike out makes the whole thing even funnier… sorry. 23 yrs clean and sober – bars at closing have a rather sad aspect, but has anyone ever noticed that satire and humor tend to use those images? That is a large part of their power – the offended laugh. You know, like Swiftian child BBQs?
This image covers a hell of a lot more ground than just Oppressed Women if you stop to think about all the players involved but kneejerk offense will out…
Having a stick up your ass can actually make you an amusing puppet.
November 15th, 2011 at 6:09 pm
@The Moar You Know: pearl clutching is a sexist image!
November 15th, 2011 at 6:36 pm
Yikes, can’t believe how ridiculous people are. The joke is not sexist. It does not work by making it gender neutral. Quit trying to pretend that men and women are the same. We are not. Recognizing this does not intrude upon the fact that we “equal”. But the idea of the ugly desperate chick at the bar at the end of the night, acting like this to get laid, is uniquely, the realm of the female. Why? Because for the most part women are the ones that are pursued. In this type of setting they basically determine whether or not the guy gets lucky. Save for a few really good looking dudes, every guy is the desperate ugly chick, having to work whatever angle they can think of to get a woman. If all they are looking for is a hook-up, even a moderately attractive woman needs to do little more than be pleasant when approached to be successful in this venture. I doubt any ugly guy has ever managed to get laid by the means described in the joke, but lots of women have, which is why the joke rings true. The desperation of both the men and woman may be the same, but the dynamic is completely different This doesn’t reach the level of sexism as decried by many. Furthermore, screaming sexism or racism about things that aren’t, simply desensitizes us, and damages our ability to fight real injustices caused by racism and sexism. Boy who cried Wolf anyone? or is that story sexist as well because girls are just as good shepherds as boys?
November 15th, 2011 at 7:32 pm