Dismiss Notice

STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.

Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.

Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!

Vp debates

Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by rsp1, Oct 5, 2004.

  1. AAA

    AAA Senior member

    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    What a ridiculous and offensive generalization.  Glad to see the dogmatists on the forum are still posting.
     


  2. PeterMetro

    PeterMetro Senior member

    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2002
    Location:
    New York
    It was admitedly a generalization. I'm happy to read a rebuttal. But I honestly cannot think of an effective and effectual woman repubican in national office. The only people that I can think of are people like Elizabeth Dole and Katherine Harris, who no one will confuse with Carol Mosely Braun and Dianne Feinstein.

    Not trying to offend anyone - again, happy to hear examples to the contrary.
     


  3. Ambulance Chaser

    Ambulance Chaser Senior member

    Messages:
    9,885
    Likes Received:
    1,001
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2002
    Location:
    Washington, D.C.
    I'll give you two:

    Condi Rice -- arguably W.'s most influential foreign policy adviser

    Sandra Day O'Connor -- arguably the most politically powerful woman in America
     


  4. PeterMetro

    PeterMetro Senior member

    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2002
    Location:
    New York
    Neither of whom were elected, but I'll concede the point.
     


  5. DandySF

    DandySF Senior member

    Messages:
    853
    Likes Received:
    34
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    I was especially interested in their ties.  At first glance they appeared to be the same red tie.  However, Cheney's red tie had a slightly orange quality to it.  Edwards' tie, more attractive to my eyes,  had some sort of subtle texture ( jacquard?) and the color was a red with some hint of blue in it.  Their knots were also different.  Cheney's was a Windsor knot which went well with his jowly face.  Edward's knot seemed proportionate to his long face.  

    I stayed to watch the follow up commentary with Tom Brokaw, a Paul Stuart fan.  Tom had a stunning combo of dark pinstripes, a black/blue tie with narrow vertical flecks, and a paisley pocket square with brown and black.  It was inspired and adventuresome.  In fact, I found the ensemble mesmerizing, even if it's not what I'd want a VP to wear.
     


  6. bosthist

    bosthist Active Member

    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    One really doesn't want to hear "politically powerful" in conjunction with a Supreme Court justice and I don't think it describes Sandra Day O'Connor in any case. O'Connor certainly is potentially the most influential woman in Washington if you look to the long term effects of Supreme Court decisions. But politically powerful? I don't think anyone goes about their business worrying about what Sandra Day O'Connor might think about their actions, much less any potential repurcussions emanating from her. And the question posed asked for "effective" women in office. Given her track record, I don't believe Condi Rice qualifies. Then again I'm not really sure what Hillary Clinton has done either. By the way, has anyone noticed female politicians exhibiting any of the sameness of dress epitomized by the male politician uniform of dark blue suit/white shirt/red tie?
     


  7. aybojs

    aybojs Senior member

    Messages:
    957
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2002
    I also find the generalization offensive and inaccurate. First off, first lady is nothing more than a show position, and as such, the spouse, since she is not the one running for office, shouldn't really be attempting to abuse the limelight to dictate national policy; it's unavoidable to some degree, but it comes across as arrogant and self-absorbed for someone to think that her maritial connections alone qualify her to be such an authority.

    I would have the exact same opinion of Bill Clinton were he to act similarly if Hillary were to run for office, and I have the same opinion about Nancy Reagan's war on drugs agenda as I do about Teresa's attempts to hijack Kerry's candidacy into her own soapbox. I strongly disagree with Pelosi, Clinton, Feinstein, etc, but since they were directly elected (likewise if they were appointed) on their own merits, their public opinions and policy making stances actually have an aura of legitimacy. My, and I suspect other conservatives', unfavorable opinions of them are based more on their far left views rather than their gender. I don't see any centrist female Democrats evoking such strong reactions.

    In addition to that behavior, it's hard to like Teresa because she comes across as out of touch (being obscenely wealthy, but primarily because of marriage and not her own work), petulant (telling off a reporter isn't a big deal, unless you do it right after giving a speech on how badly civility is lacking in public discourse), and lacking self control. Laura Bush still speaks her mind and has her own personality, but she's much more subtle and controlled about it. In my opinion, it's easier to relate to her than to someone like Kerry's wife.

    Second, I am curious as to what grounds you would dismiss female Republicans like Elizabeth Dole, who was also a former Secretary of Labor and of Transportation, as ineffectual. I will also cite Kay Bailey Hutchinson, Christine Todd Whitman, and Olympia Snowe as other recent examples, all of whom were elected. Please don't dismiss them on some arbitrary grounds without actually justifying your reasons for doing so this time.

    Finally, while it is obvious that more women identify themselves on the Democratic side of the fence, that doesn't give the left a free pass to overlook its own attitude towards women. I read a lot of political forums and editorials and see just as much misogynist vitriol directed at Condi Rice as I do with Hillary Clinton. But since more women are Democrats, it's somehow OK to ignore the former while making gross stereotypes based on the latter.
     


  8. montecristo#4

    montecristo#4 Senior member

    Messages:
    12,263
    Likes Received:
    18
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2004
    Location:
    Reagan Country (Massachusetts)
    (vero_group @ 06 Oct. 2004, 10:50)
    Teresa seems genuine, obviously has pizazz and is sophisticated. Â
    Uh huh.
    Republicans generally don't like their women uppity (read: independent, strong willed). Â For some reason, they hold out a special vitriol for women like Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton - even though there are plenty of men who hold similar, if not identical, political positions. Â So when someone like Teresa Heinz Kerry comes along, who is clearly smart and doesn't take sh*t from anyone, they are particularly offended. Â Archaic thinking, if you ask me.
    This has got to be the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Women have gone farther in the Republican party than the Democratic. For that matter, so have minorities.
     


  9. Steve B.

    Steve B. Go Spurs Go

    Messages:
    10,284
    Likes Received:
    125
    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2002
    Location:
    San Antonio
    I actually think Cheney and Bush's frumpy dress is hurting them...

    Sadly, so many elections are decided on appearances rather than principles.
     


  10. GreyFlannelMan

    GreyFlannelMan Senior member

    Messages:
    824
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2004
    Location:
    NYC
    I read an interesting article yesterday or the day before critiquing John Kerry's choice of clothing on the campaign trail.  The article noted that Kerry generally wears a blazer, shirt without a tie and khakis.  The article stated that focus group testing has shown that Republicans more than Democrats favor the blazer/khaki combo and Kerry is trying to appeal to those instincts.
     


  11. PeterMetro

    PeterMetro Senior member

    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2002
    Location:
    New York
    ayboys makes some excellent points, especially regarding Elizabeth Dole. I forgot about her time as Transportation Secretary - she made important strides in auto safety, the Dole light being chief among them.

    I still, however, disagree that women have come farther in the Republican party than in the Democratic. It's true that the current administration has appointed several women to prominent positions. However, this is much different than being elected, and the women in these positions are ineffectual at best. Christine Todd Whitman is a great example - she was appointed as Administrator of the EPA, but after taking positions on issues like limitations of greenhouse gas emissions and the Kyoto accords, she was forced to resign. It seems clear that she was appointed to toe the party line, and was removed when she did not. This is symptomatic of virtually every woman in this administration - from Condi Rice to Elaine Chao. There are some that would argue that this is gender-neutral (it happens to anyone who disagrees with the party line), and there's some validity to that. But there are examples of men who have taken contrary positions (Colin Powell for one) and remained in their positions.

    With that said, I'm certain that the Democrats are guilty, to a certain extent, of the same actions. But the fact remains that 21% of the Democratic senators are women (versus 12% of Republican senators), no Republican woman has ever led the party (as Nancy Pelosi does now), nor has any Republican woman ever been nominated for President or VP (as Geraldine Ferraro was). The Democrats elected four women senators before the Republican party elected one.

    My original post certainly touched a nerve (it was meant to be inflammatory - beauty of the internet, right?). But many of you made some good points. I've said my piece.
     


  12. AAA

    AAA Senior member

    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    It sure is easy to be a bigot on the Internet, isn't it?
     


  13. PeterMetro

    PeterMetro Senior member

    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2002
    Location:
    New York
    Or to post ad hominem attacks with no basis: don't conflate partisanship with bigotry.
     


  14. AAA

    AAA Senior member

    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Edited to remove flame.
     


  15. imageWIS

    imageWIS Senior member

    Messages:
    20,008
    Likes Received:
    97
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    Location:
    New York City / Buenos Aires
    (AAA @ 06 Oct. 2004, 3:02) It sure is easy to be a bigot on the Internet, isn't it?
    Or to post ad hominem attacks with no basis: don't conflate partisanship with bigotry.
    Hey, hey, hey now. This is America. We can confuse what ever topic with another topic (or persons, events) that we deem fit. If not how else did Saddam Hussein attack us on 9/11? Jon.
     


Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by