i take it the 72% of the press is the media which Berlusconi doesn't own, or isn't for sale at the moment. the 28% he owns is essentially one big solicitation for hookers, i guess. also, i want to hear what Beppe Grillo says about this.
@lo-mantang: Did you know, though, that Berlusconi passed a law a few years ago saying that over-70s can't be jailed? What age was he when the law passed? 70. God I hate him.
Brian Wiliams just talked about this on the news. It was a mistake on the part of the translator. The question was actually about Obama. Clinton and the person asking the question shook hands at the end. All's well....
Clinton is right that the society needs to speak up, but did she mean the Congolese society or society at large? I hope she meant the latter, because I think we all, the world over, should be standing up for these women, our sisters. How could this be happening? It is a grave injustice, a horrible nightmare and an unimaginable fear that these women must be facing every single moment of their lives. Couldn't the UN do more? Couldn't we all in the US, England, and other developed countries take major action against this atrocity? Couldn't more be done?
Whoever asked the question should have had the decency to rephrase it neutrally -- ie, "Do you know what Former President Clinton thinks of this policy?"
Why is one of the most powerful people in one of the most powerful countries in the world reduced to just her husband's wife?
For the same reason that rape is used as a weapon of war. For the same reason that men feel they have a right to use violence against any woman that is not willing and ready whenever he expects them to be. For the same reason that women can do the same work as men and make a fraction of what men make. For the same reason I cannot ride the train without exercising extra caution so that no one thinks I'm vulnerable and tries anything, and feel the need to carry pepper spray when I go out at night and never go anywhere without my phone, just in case. For the same reason countless women are raped every day, and the rapists never prosecuted.
And the question still stands: why?
@heatherdazy: But why was it justified? Bill isn't part of the adminstration anymore. He's a great guy, but from a ruling standpoint, his opinion means nothing.
I don't really think this is the same as someone undercutting a powerful woman's agency by asking what her husband thinks. This is the case of someone asking Hillary Clinton about Bill Clinton, who is a former president and an all around well-known (and well-liked) figure all over the world. I hope I'm making sense here. Even though Bill is only a private citizen now and is no longer in government, people still want to know what he thinks about things, you know? It seems like a pretty reasonable question to me, I doubt this is the first time Hillary has been asked about Bill's take on various international issues.
@Jezebabe: Except it is inappropriate and does undermine her position, intended or not. He's not president anymore, she's Secretary of State. She informs policy directly, he does not.
The person may have been asking as a "fan" but it has the same result. Undermining the person in a position of authority who is a woman by asking what her husband thinks, which is entirely irrelevant.
I know what you mean, but there's some deep sexism at work here.
@Jezebabe: I can understand people being interested in what Bill thinks of certain things, especially since his involvement in the North Korea situation, but it doesn't really matter because he's not in a position to DO anything about them. And given the climate in the Congo, I think it absolutely DOES have to do with Hillary being a woman, where in a European country, for example, it might not be a factor.
Also, it seems plain rude to skip "What do you, the Secretary of State, think about this?" and go straight to, "What does your husband think about this?" Hillary's right, and I applaud her for responding the way she did.
@bookling: To say if someone asked the question in a European country it would be okay but it is not in Congo is ridiculous. I know Congo has serious problems but are you trying to imply that countries in Europe have no sexism at all? therefore you would not be concerned? Your statement is ethnocentrist at best.
@sshacker: I think you misunderstand the statement - she's saying that Clinton's gender is a factor in the Congo whereas it would be less of a factor, or not a factor, in Europe.
@sshacker: That's not what I'm trying to say at all. I'm just pointing out that in a place like Congo, where Clinton is there to address the rape epidemic, her sex is much more likely to be an issue than in a more developed (or less war-town) country. In a place where rape is as common a problem as it is in Congo right now, women are far more likely to be treated like objects or spoils of war, and a powerful female like Hillary Clinton is less likely to be respected.
To be fair, and I am not denying that she was marginalized by the comment, but her husband was a much-loved president and continues to be very involved in diplomacy around the world. So, I don't know that it was as much an effort to malign her as it was a response to her husband's super star status.
Around the rape epidemic.....it seems that the basic need to exert power in otherwise uncontrollable situations is so incredibly potent. It's always been the case that marginalized groups have suffered at the hands of people (men, mostly) so desperate to control something in their environment. It still continues to baffle me, however, that such violent acts seems to come so easily. I suppose one would be required to view women as worthless animals. It makes my stomach turn.
@Penny: I'd be more willing to take that reasoning if the person had asked, say, how Mr. Clinton is doing or about his trip to North Korea. The fact that she was asked Bill Clinton's thoughts on what was really a very specific policy matter ("World Bank concerns about a multibillion-dollar Chinese loan offer to the Democratic Republic of Congo," to quote the article), made the whole thing seem more off-putting than it would be if it just was because Bill Clinton is world famous, too.
@Penny: I think when you have this level of violence (at this point, generational), that starts very young, it becomes increasingly more difficult for people to empathize with other people at all, male or female. They cease being anything other than objects you can rape or kill.
I don't even think women are viewed as animals as they are...things. Things to be used at the discretion of someone else. In whatever way they choose. Which is nauseating and horrifying.
um, Spitzer is for certain a sleazeball, but I think his comment was meant in a funny, self-deprecating kind of way, not in a "please feel sorry for me" kind of way.
RE: Jesse "I want my name back!" Jackson, Jr. Admitting you're a rat may not be the way to "get" your name back. Yay on you for whistle-blowing the corruption, but admitting to the snitchin' is political suicide.
@Crabby Cakes wants some Dance Biscuits.: sadly, he probably didnt have another choice. not to get all racial about this, but it is pretty commonly known that black politicians are held to a much higher standard and much more cooperation is demanded of them...for whatever reasons. that said, had he not snitched, he may have experienced other consequences that may have put his job at risk too. he was likely screwed either way.
@anonymiss: Yeah, but it sounds like he snitched in retaliation to Blagojevich holding up his wifes appointment to a state board, not cause he was held up to a higher standard. Again, not that I think he shouldn't have blown the whistle, I just don't know how you recover from it politically.
@Crabby Cakes wants some Dance Biscuits.: Not that I read the article, but if someone holds up an appointment and says 'you know you could grease the wheels.' the first thing you should do is 'snitch'.
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/09/09
08/10/09
08/10/09
08/10/09
08/11/09
08/10/09
For the same reason that rape is used as a weapon of war. For the same reason that men feel they have a right to use violence against any woman that is not willing and ready whenever he expects them to be. For the same reason that women can do the same work as men and make a fraction of what men make. For the same reason I cannot ride the train without exercising extra caution so that no one thinks I'm vulnerable and tries anything, and feel the need to carry pepper spray when I go out at night and never go anywhere without my phone, just in case. For the same reason countless women are raped every day, and the rapists never prosecuted.
And the question still stands: why?
08/10/09
08/11/09
08/10/09
08/10/09
The person may have been asking as a "fan" but it has the same result. Undermining the person in a position of authority who is a woman by asking what her husband thinks, which is entirely irrelevant.
I know what you mean, but there's some deep sexism at work here.
08/10/09
Also, it seems plain rude to skip "What do you, the Secretary of State, think about this?" and go straight to, "What does your husband think about this?" Hillary's right, and I applaud her for responding the way she did.
08/10/09
08/10/09
08/10/09
08/10/09
Around the rape epidemic.....it seems that the basic need to exert power in otherwise uncontrollable situations is so incredibly potent. It's always been the case that marginalized groups have suffered at the hands of people (men, mostly) so desperate to control something in their environment. It still continues to baffle me, however, that such violent acts seems to come so easily. I suppose one would be required to view women as worthless animals. It makes my stomach turn.
08/10/09
08/10/09
08/10/09
I don't even think women are viewed as animals as they are...things. Things to be used at the discretion of someone else. In whatever way they choose. Which is nauseating and horrifying.
08/10/09
12/16/08
12/17/08
12/16/08
12/16/08
12/16/08
12/16/08
12/16/08
12/16/08
12/16/08