The more things change...

     Admittedly, I'm hyper-sensitive where women are concerned.  I fret over everything from their safety to equality to manners where the fairer sex is concerned.  That's what happens when your formative years are spent in a house full of sisters and your adult life is a wife, a mother-in-law, nieces and, still, those sisters (all of whom probably sometimes feel smothered by my over-protection.)  I cringe at the way some men still talk around women.  I change the channel or leave the theater when a screen depicts violence against women (in any form.)  And, I'll admit, I'm often offended by gratuitous nudity in entertainment.  But don't revoke my man card just yet - I'm still pretty much the proud neanderthal I profess to be...but I'm also a gentleman.
     My chivalrous nature (I hear "Indiana Jones" music playing in the background when I refer to myself as  "chivalrous") is probably the reason two stories caught my eye this morning.  First, from a Fox affiliate somewhere in Connecticut.  On Wednesday a technician, a producer - maybe even some intern - made a very poor decision when choosing file footage to accompany a story about the celebration of National Women's Day being held at the state capitol.

     "....discussing women's accomplishments here in Connecticut..." but the video seems to have less to do with accomplishments and more to do with what the good Lord (or some surgeon) hath given.  To their credit, they tweeted out an apology, promising that they would "continue to recognize the great contributions of women in CT and around the world."   I'll give them a pass but I still have to ask - they had this file footage why?  What was the subject matter of the story for which this footage was gathered??

     "are we destined to be ruled, by a bunch of old white men..."

     I'll give the folks @ Fox in CT a pass....the "breast video" seems to be more about poor judgement and less about insulting women.  However, a nameless goober at a CPAC  event yesterday gets no pass.
Read the story here...
     I think the headline writer at the Huffington Post blew it.  Begala's comeback hardly qualifies as "epic." ("know you are!  what am I??")  I can think of many more clever retorts.  And I'm not going to blame everyone in the room for the comments made by one jackass.  Immature.  Sexist. Stupid.  In 2013 we're still equating a woman's appearance with her ability to do a job?   If I'm remembering correctly, didn't Mitch McConnell speak at these CPAC proceedings?  Did this infidel suggest a face-lift for Mitch? (after all, his neck is still moving 20 minutes after he's finished talking.)  How about John McCain - I bet he would've won in 2008 were it not for all those Vietnam scars!  
     Don't get me wrong - I'm NO Paul Begala fan.  As I said, his response wasn't exactly of the "ooooooooh,,,that's gonna leave a mark!" variety.  At first I thought he should've let the heckling be - you can't hear it on the video after all so we wouldn't be aware of it had it not been repeated.  Then this thought crossed my mind - was he just shrewd enough in the repeating of it so that those watching would know that this group of folks who declared (after getting their posteriors kicked last November) they would overhaul their image, lose their "old white guy" vision of America and be more sensitive to minorities, women and immigrants really hasn't crawled one progressive inch?  Is Paul Begala that smart?  (he is a politician after all, and even the stupid ones are pretty sly.)
     Here's what would really piss off the "old white guys" - A 2016 presidential ballot that has Condoleeza Rice on one side and Hillary Clinton on the other.  For me, THAT would be the first ballot I've seen in several elections that included two viable options   I'd be happy as punch (and I'm an old white guy!!!!!!!!)