Oddly enough, not a recipe (that I’ll leave to Jeff G, if he is so moved), but how Camille Paglia and one of her Salon readers view Hillary Clinton’s campaign staff:
I would like to get your feedback on the subject of those who end up in Hillary’s orbit. Can you conceive of a strong, leader-type male ever working under her? An alpha, if you will. And if the answer is no, then why do you think that is?
The men you always see under her are to a person passive-aggressive, sadistic, mean, little, petty beta-male pieces of work who would not naturally succeed in a common male-type hierarchy. By that I mean an environment that values straightforward achievement rather than the darker political arts…
***
Chris Richard
Agoura Hills, Calif.
Paglia responds:
I agree that the male staff who Hillary attracts are slick, geeky weasels or rancid, asexual cream puffs…
Glenn Reynolds finds this “mean,” which is true, even if the underlying claim is accurate.
It would not be surprising if the claim was true — albeit expressed more politely — and equally true of Obama’s campaign staff.
Consider, for example the 2004 presidential election exit poll data. In particular, the responses to the question of the “most important quality” of the candidates to their voters. Pres. Bush won big with those for whom the most important quality was religious faith (91%), strong leader (87%), clear stands on issues (79%) and honest/trustworthy (70%). Sen. John F. Kerry won big with voters for whom the most important quality was “will bring change” (95%), intelligent (91%), and cares about people (75%). The same general pattern holds among the white male vote in 2004, significant here when discussing Clinton’s white male advisors — Mark Penn, Harold Ickes, Howard Wolfson, etc.
It is not a particularly great leap to hypothesize that the hardcore Democrats who work on presidential campaigns — or are candidates themselves — might share the general profile of Democratic voters — a profile that seems a bit less “alpha” (as Paglia’s reader would put it) than the general GOP voter profile.
(h/t Memeorandum.)
Update: Insta-lanche! With a warning that makes you go “Heh. Indeed.”
That seems accurate but kinda unfair. I don’t think it’s a lot likely she could find a Republican who’d work for her.
Paging Sid Blumenthal to the white courtesy phone. Paging Sid Blumenthal…
Glenn Reynolds fins this “mean,â€Â
What, is he angling for a position?
She does not seem to attract a Nelsonian ‘Band of Brothers’ type to her. More of a Dilbertian ‘Pointy Haired Boss’ type.
BTW – has anyone taken a look at the type of advisors that John McCain has about him? Might be an interesting post to look at the type and background and personality of the advisors of Sens. Clinton, McCain, and Obama.
I’m thinking she attracts more of the type that get to guard the harem, if you catch my drift.
No, the eunchs were more effectual at their jobs than the PHB. All the PHB can do is be nasty, the eunchs had scimitars and such, thus having a real edge to their nastiness.
In fact, comparing a eunch to a PHB is an insult to eunchs everywhere.
I wonder what that says about the psychology of the inner circle of the Dems.
That they are more interested in the type of power you get from manipulation and subversion than from standing on principle?
That they were the pencil-necked lit-crit geeks who resented the fact that they didn’t get the chix?
That they are spineless mama’s boys who want Mother Clinton to tell them how to run their lives? (If I had a dime for every guy I dated who didn’t dare make a decision or express an opinion in my presence…)
“equally true of Obama’s campaign staff”
Except one refers to them as “propheteroles”.
Personally, I’m glad rancid creampuffs are asexual.
I’m thinking she attracts more of the type that get to guard the harem, if you catch my drift.
Oh. I just had a very bad vision. You are a very nasty person Kelly. Now be a dear and get me the brain-bleach. Please?
Whew! For a moment, I was afraid I was being asked to consider this work of art yet again!
“rancid creampuffs are asexual”
BECAUSE OF THE DIVISIVENESS!
Lissen, bucko, there’s only room for one man in the Hillbillary campaign, and SHE’S IT~!
One of GW Bush’s attributes is loyalty. If you’re his guy, even if you’re wrong, he’ll stick up for you. It’s hurt him, especially with Rumsfeld.
Hillary will never stick up for the people on her staff. On the contrary, she expects them to take the bullet for her mistakes. As a result, she ends up with people on her staff that are whipped.
If you work for Hillary she won’t give you any respect. And she doesn’t want to see you bring your own.
Passive-aggressive, sadistic petty little beta males, asexual creampuffs..
Sidney Blumenthal, anyone? Wow. Even if your descriptors didn’t apply to anyone else in her camp, Blumenthal deserves them all.
If the Democrats get all prissy and squealy just from discussing this topic, this funny yet stunningly accurate picture will send them into apoplectic stupor, and then therapy.
When even a liberal Repub like Arnold is calling them ‘girlie-men’ at the 2004 RNC during a speech, that is something. The term ‘girlie-men’ applies to BOTH MALE AND FEMALE Democrats, and hence is a term with great philosophical depth.
Think I’ll go see Camille at Harvard tomorrow night.
Instalanche (again)
I think I finally understand why the Homocrats hate Bush so much :
He married a hot chick!!!!
Which is also why they hate McCain now…….
Tood has a point. It makes sense then that there’s such a bias toward the more handsomer one among the face-for-radio peoples at NPR. Baracky is a lot something these people are very very hungry to identify with is all, cause they don’t feel pretty.
Hillary Clinton’s rancid, asexual cream puffs
I thought this was going to be about her cleavage.
The men you always see under her are to a person passive-aggressive, sadistic, mean, little, petty beta-male pieces of work who would not naturally succeed in a common male-type hierarchy.
Well, that doesn’t describe Bill, and I’m sure he’s been under her at least once.
He’s more of a passive-aggressive, sadistic, alpha-male type.
Actually Bill seemed like he needed approval way bad all the time. It wasn’t particularly manly I didn’t think.
Actually Bill seemed like he needed approval way bad all the time. It wasn’t particularly manly I didn’t think.
True, but there’s no contradiction between that and being an alpha-male. He had a definite need to be the top dog. I think that’s why he favored omega-females so much.
I was intrigued by this bit: “cares about people (75%)”. That was in reference to John Kerry. Who in his right mind could possibly imagine that John Kerry cares about people? I count myself among those who do not believe that the American people are stupid. So, the question is, how did the actual poll question get perverted into this travesty? And if you try to argue that it’s the fault of the people for misunderstanding the media, then there is a special place in Hell reserved just for you.
Actually, I think Hill is ending up with more blue collar people.. with Obama getting more of these types…
Anyway, what I’m getting at… the Obama people are more like the a-holes that have been attacking people like us for last eight years… and now they’re turning on the Hillary supporters in the same ways… maybe we should reach out to the Hillary people rather than reposting this stuff as if it were true… Now that they’re being treated like crap by elitist leftists.. Ahem, maybe we can find a common ground..
already done, thomas. I voted for her. twice. ;D
I don’t think that’s a fair assessment. First off, few men can be “Alpha” males, since few men can be “leaders” or socially dominant in their group. “Beta” males would include, off the top of my head, Joe Montana, Bill Walsh, Albert Einstein, and Mitt Romney. “Alpha” males would include Mike Ditka, Jack Welch, and Bill Clinton. Charisma and social dominance count, but not always in good ways. Sometimes you need a whole lotta “workman” like guys getting it done. Joe Montana never bowled everyone over with his charisma, and was not the team’s leader, but everyone counted on him to get it done.
This is the usual feminist clap-trap looking for the most socially dominant male and lying down next to him. If they’re drunk college girls, they go for Mystery. If they’re Paglia, they go for Obama-the-messiah. It’s pathetic.
No campaign is going to have “the leader” be anything other than the candidate, period. Expecting Mark Penn to be the socially dominant guy is like expecting Lee Atwater or Karl Rove to be dominant over their Bush candidates. Both got it done, neither was the kind of guy who’d be bursting with charisma. I’ve seen Karl Rove on TV. Smart he is. Charismatic? Dominant? Nope. That’s Obama or Billy Clinton.
Implicit btw is Paglia’s belief that any man who works for a woman is somehow unworthy and asexual. Not desireable by any woman. It’s interesting how blatantly obvious feminists are with their biases now.
Count Bill’s affairs/liaisons/quickies. Count Hillary’s “I forgive you; you owe me.” Equal? And she probably still wonders why she is held in such low esteem.
Actually the way this was phrased was mean but being mean doesn’t make it any less true. Team Hillary is composed of some of the best second rate hacks in the democratic party. Which, I think, speaks volumes about the people in charge.
#12
I did not know Andy Griffith had tits.
Camille Paglia was the most Anti-McCain person back in 2000 at least from Salon. She really feared the guy would become President.
Don’t know what her position is on Obama though.
Entertaining? you bet. relevant? hmmmm? she’s very out-there. Come to think of it, Jeff and her have a lot in common. But she’s much less conservative and she can hook the reader into what she’s saying with a wide range of interests and facts. And she’s flagrantly lesbian.
And what about John Edwards?
Hold on a sec, last year at a local Oktoberfest I found myself squashed up against the stage between a Bavarian cream puff and an absolutely gorgeous piece of black forest cake. And say what you will about Hillary supporters, but my chocolate friend and I know that cream puffs, at least the Bavarian kind, are all hands.
[…] Dems 2008: Hillary Clinton’s rancid, asexual cream puffs [Karl] Comment by SarahW on 4/9 @ 4:49 pm # […]
#32,33
He’s a lesbian, too.
#
@SarahW on 4/9 @ 4:49 pm
“equally true of Obama’s campaign staffâ€Â
Except one refers to them as “propheterolesâ€Â.
Brilliant!!
Most self-respecting men wouldn’t want to work for Hillary not because she’s a woman, but because she’s a lying crap-weasel.
“Most self-respecting men wouldn’t want to work for Hillary not because she’s a woman, but because she’s a lying crap-weasel.”
Absolutely. I would be honored to work for Rice, Hutchinson, Karen Hughes, etc.
Even someone like Pelosi or Feinstein might actually be a nice person on a one-to-one level.