In a column that should surprise no one on the left, National Review writer Michael Walsh penned a misogynistic column on February 15 lamenting the potential benefits of overturning the 19th Amendment. In the article, he said:
Mario, while the repeal of the 19th Amendment might be something devoutly to be wished — The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. — you’re obviously thinking of the 18th Amendment, which was repealed by the 21st. Nevertheless, you’re on to something I’ve been advocating for years now. And that is the repeal of all four of the so-called “Progressive Era” amendments, including the 16th, 17th, 18th and 19th, which were passed between 1911 and 1920.
He spends the remainder of the article lambasting the Constitution's "liberal bias" through allowing President Obama to be elected through the fact that women are allowed to vote. In a particularly egregious moment, he said, "And women’s suffrage . . . well, let’s just observe that without it Barack Obama could never have become president. Time for the ladies to take one for the team."
To hedge his bets, Walsh ends the article with a lame attempt at making the article a tongue-in-cheek affair - something Al Franken refers to in his book Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them as "kidding on the square." If you haven't heard the phrase before, it essentially means that you're kidding when you say something (but not really). Franken put it best in his book when he said:
Later, at the after-party given by Bloomberg News, I went up to Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy secretary of Defense and the architect of the Bush preemption doctrine. “Hi, Dr. Wolfowitz. Hey, the Clinton military did a great job in Iraq, didn’t it?”
He looked at me for a couple seconds, then said, “Fuck you.”
Which I thought was funny. I think he was “kidding on the square,” a phrase I hope will catch on. It means kidding, but also really meaning it. People do it all the time. “Kidding on the square.” If this book does two things, I want it to get “kidding on the square” into the lexicon, and I want it to get Bush out of the White House.
The second layer of slime apparent here - the one on display next to Walsh's blatant sexism - is his lame attempt at generating publicity for his book. He linked to it in toward the end of his article sliding the link in as he described how Democrats benefited from the creation of Prohibition and the formation of organized crime (since only Democratic politicians were corrupt during the Prohibition era, of course).
- We have yet another stunning example of the conservative war on women.
- And this example isn't just a misogynist - he's also an opportunist!