













































































































<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Campbell Brown, Sexist Pig</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/12/03/campbell-brown-sexist-pig/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/12/03/campbell-brown-sexist-pig/</link>
	<description>Political News, Progressive Commentary, Liberal Opinions and Common Sense Conversation...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 13:14:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hart Williams</title>
		<link>http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/12/03/campbell-brown-sexist-pig/comment-page-1/#comment-26999</link>
		<dc:creator>Hart Williams</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Dec 2008 12:58:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=4094#comment-26999</guid>
		<description>Thank you, Anthony. 

Since I wrote this, I&#039;ve noticed that Brown&#039;s new show has been put in the CNN slot opposite Bill O&#039;Reilly (Faux Nooz™) and Keith Olbermann (MSNBC). She&#039;s got to scream for attention, and it&#039;s looking like she&#039;s decided that if she can polarize male and female viewers, she can force Bill-o The Clown and Keith the Good into splitting the male viewership. 

Which means screaming about &quot;sexism&quot; at the top of her lungs. 

... Except that nothing about Campbell Brown suggests &quot;feminism&quot; in any legitimate sense. She&#039;s married to a conservative Republican &quot;strategist&quot; and Faux Nooz contributor, and was screeching in the last week of the campaign that &quot;OBAMA LIED!&quot; about taking public financing, which was a pure GOP talking point, and not at all in line with the facts. But that didn&#039;t matter to her. Any more than screaming &quot;SEXIST!&quot; at any opportunity is about feminism. Methinks it&#039;s about &quot;Campbell Brownism.&quot; 

In what, two days, she takes offense on behalf of Hillary Clinton AND Janet Napolitano, without giving &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;either &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&quot;offender&quot; the chance to explain, or &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;caring&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; whether Hillary or Janet were &quot;offended&quot;?

Some people will do &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;anything&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; for ratings or attention. They are called either &quot;demagogues&quot; or &quot;Ted Nugent&quot; or, it appears, &quot;Campbell Brown.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you, Anthony. </p>
<p>Since I wrote this, I&#8217;ve noticed that Brown&#8217;s new show has been put in the CNN slot opposite Bill O&#8217;Reilly (Faux Nooz™) and Keith Olbermann (MSNBC). She&#8217;s got to scream for attention, and it&#8217;s looking like she&#8217;s decided that if she can polarize male and female viewers, she can force Bill-o The Clown and Keith the Good into splitting the male viewership. </p>
<p>Which means screaming about &#8220;sexism&#8221; at the top of her lungs. </p>
<p>&#8230; Except that nothing about Campbell Brown suggests &#8220;feminism&#8221; in any legitimate sense. She&#8217;s married to a conservative Republican &#8220;strategist&#8221; and Faux Nooz contributor, and was screeching in the last week of the campaign that &#8220;OBAMA LIED!&#8221; about taking public financing, which was a pure GOP talking point, and not at all in line with the facts. But that didn&#8217;t matter to her. Any more than screaming &#8220;SEXIST!&#8221; at any opportunity is about feminism. Methinks it&#8217;s about &#8220;Campbell Brownism.&#8221; </p>
<p>In what, two days, she takes offense on behalf of Hillary Clinton AND Janet Napolitano, without giving <em><strong>either </strong></em>&#8220;offender&#8221; the chance to explain, or <em><strong>caring</strong></em> whether Hillary or Janet were &#8220;offended&#8221;?</p>
<p>Some people will do <em><strong>anything</strong></em> for ratings or attention. They are called either &#8220;demagogues&#8221; or &#8220;Ted Nugent&#8221; or, it appears, &#8220;Campbell Brown.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anthony Miggiani</title>
		<link>http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/12/03/campbell-brown-sexist-pig/comment-page-1/#comment-26909</link>
		<dc:creator>Anthony Miggiani</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Dec 2008 01:40:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=4094#comment-26909</guid>
		<description>This is an email I sent to her today after watching Campbell going on regarding Hillary Clinton:MS!. Campbell. Your 2 minute harangue about that H.Clinton poster was an abhorrent exhibition of hysterical femdom YES BIAS/YES BULL (S - OF COURSE). What you so eagerly claim that the gent is grabbing Hillary&#039;s breast is a figment of your biased imagination. TAKE ANOTHER LOOK! That is an angular photo. The gent is simply grabbing Hillary&#039;s upper arm. The photo angle is deceiving. Hillaries blazer clearly shows her left dressed breast unmolested next to her right breast, albeit, again, at a deceiving angel. You should ease up on your obvious feminism bull. That&#039;s why Hillary made light of it, while you almost flipped your top(s) in feminism outrage!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is an email I sent to her today after watching Campbell going on regarding Hillary Clinton:MS!. Campbell. Your 2 minute harangue about that H.Clinton poster was an abhorrent exhibition of hysterical femdom YES BIAS/YES BULL (S &#8211; OF COURSE). What you so eagerly claim that the gent is grabbing Hillary&#8217;s breast is a figment of your biased imagination. TAKE ANOTHER LOOK! That is an angular photo. The gent is simply grabbing Hillary&#8217;s upper arm. The photo angle is deceiving. Hillaries blazer clearly shows her left dressed breast unmolested next to her right breast, albeit, again, at a deceiving angel. You should ease up on your obvious feminism bull. That&#8217;s why Hillary made light of it, while you almost flipped your top(s) in feminism outrage!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

