Luke is not his father, he will never be a serious reporter picking on females. I like to see him asking the same stupid questions to the opposite party, he is not a reporter, he is young punk
Honestly, I saw this on the RMS last night on MSNBC and, if anything, it was Nancy’s response that I found offensive. This was a question posed by Luke Russert, it should be assumed going in that it’s legitimate. But aside of that, it’s Nancy’s overall tone of confrontation of ANYTHING that falls withing five miles of the normal territory of sexism that’s offensive. If anything, this was an ageist question, not a sexist one. Which she acknowledged herself, when referencing the other older leadership who were males.
Bottom line here is: she was the Speaker of the House, and the Dems lost control of the House on her watch. I completely agree that we need to get younger and more dialed into the current political landscape out there. More women voted in this election than men, more non-whites voted that whites. This is the closest thing we get to a level playing field, politically speaking, we’ve ever had. NOW is the time to be capitalizing on this and get the best people we have in this generation of representatives to carry this momentum forward, regardless of gender, race, religious affiliation or gender identity. I don’t give a rip if the entire leadership is female, male, white, non-white, gay, straight, catholic, Jewish, Muslim or whatever.
Symbolism matters in politics, it does. But Leader Pelosi’s constant insistence to turn anything into a sexist attack is an old school approach to equality that does nobody any good, especially those of us Democrats out there who would like to hold on to the House a little bit longer next time.
Luke is not his father, he will never be a serious reporter picking on females. I like to see him asking the same stupid questions to the opposite party, he is not a reporter, he is young punk
Honestly, I saw this on the RMS last night on MSNBC and, if anything, it was Nancy’s response that I found offensive. This was a question posed by Luke Russert, it should be assumed going in that it’s legitimate. But aside of that, it’s Nancy’s overall tone of confrontation of ANYTHING that falls withing five miles of the normal territory of sexism that’s offensive. If anything, this was an ageist question, not a sexist one. Which she acknowledged herself, when referencing the other older leadership who were males.
Bottom line here is: she was the Speaker of the House, and the Dems lost control of the House on her watch. I completely agree that we need to get younger and more dialed into the current political landscape out there. More women voted in this election than men, more non-whites voted that whites. This is the closest thing we get to a level playing field, politically speaking, we’ve ever had. NOW is the time to be capitalizing on this and get the best people we have in this generation of representatives to carry this momentum forward, regardless of gender, race, religious affiliation or gender identity. I don’t give a rip if the entire leadership is female, male, white, non-white, gay, straight, catholic, Jewish, Muslim or whatever.
Symbolism matters in politics, it does. But Leader Pelosi’s constant insistence to turn anything into a sexist attack is an old school approach to equality that does nobody any good, especially those of us Democrats out there who would like to hold on to the House a little bit longer next time.