In a perfect world, LaShawn would be on board the space shuttle right now and Eileen Collins, mission commander, would explain that the only reason LaShawn isn't going out for the fourth space walk without a space suit is that women do, in fact, have the necessary sensibilities.

But that won't happen, because LaShawn lacks the necessary sensibilities and intelligence it would take to be on the space shuttle in the first place.

This ranks right up there with the Soviet engineers who thought that female urine would disolve the space toilet, and therefore were against women being on Mir.

On the other hand, not one single one of the women I used to work with at the bank had the sensibilities to be trusted with even the lowest elected office because they were a bunch of socialistic gun-haters.

If LaShawn would've said "most women" instead of "women generally", would that be accurate, or still irritating?

He should've just stuck with criticizing Rice for being moderate.

While everyone is welcome to their opinion, I don't necessarily appreciate the "just cuz" view. She's moderate, she is pro-choice, okay, but the emotional "she's female" simply casts aspersions on the rest of the sex.

I'm not touching the race reference. ;)

I usually agree with LaShawn, but this time I don't. Big deal. It's okay, though, as she's "loving the hate". LOL!

I'll give you that Harvey. There are many men though too who do not have the sensibilities to hold elected office, let alone procreate, but she isn't generalizing them. I agree, she should have stuck with Rice being moderate, but then again, she doesn't care what I think.

I cna understand if she has a problem with Rice, I admit I'm not sold on her either. My reservations are based on Rice's positions not on her sex. The generalization was just over the top and probably meant to generate the traffic and buzz that it did.

Hum. My comment didn't post... I was just reminded of an ancient saying: "Teach a man and you have taught a man...but... Teach a woman and you teach a nation."
I submit, that all we have which is noble and true in this world, would not be if not for the innate wisdom, resourcefulness, beauty and sacrifice of women, doing the best they can with what they've been given. Including serving well - the responsibilities to lead and make the tough choices when necessary!

I would agree wholeheartedly with Barber's statement if only she had acknowledged that men, generally, don't have the sensibilities to run the country, either.
How many men do we trust as President and how often have we found that we'd misplaced that trust? Out of the 43 human beings, all men, that have held the office have fallen short? How many have distinguished themselves? The first list is much longer than the second.
So, I won't join in the LaShawn bashing, I'll just be mildly disappointed that she didn't carry the thought to it's logical conclusion.

That is precisely the point Peter, she didn't carry the thought to its logical conclusion. In fact, she gives no reasonings at all. I have offered plenty on why women could run the country. She offered not a one. I am not bashing her. In fact, I usually read her. I am bashing the blatant and not well thought out statement, and the apparent ego she displayed in later posts.

Oh, honey, I believed you hit every nail on her coffin.

Well done!

Oddybobo, even though we tend to sit on different sides of the "political fence", based on your argument put forth here, I would certainly consider voting for you. You most certainly demonstrate the "sensibilities" needed to be president. As for LaShawn, I can only stomach her site in small doses... Good Lord. She's one confused and misinformed sistah!

Very well said. When I read the aforementioned sentence on LaShawn's blog my thought was, "what an incredibly stupid thing to say! Reason number 4,526 why I do not read her every day." And now I know why I stop by your blog daily -- bravo.

Hmm. Emotional response, check.
Kneejerk reaction, check.

Maybe she's right (as a general rule).

Oddybobo -- You've definitely had the most entertaining yet well-directed rebuttal to her self-absorbness.

I rebutted LB's post to, although in my case I focused on the "ungodly" section related to intelligent design. I passed right over the Condi section because, really, some things are just too silly.

For other entertainment, go check out LB's list of "professional" services. Despite the intellectual build-up, she's basically offering typing services as one of the hot shot cornerstones of business. It's good, honest work but quite a large step, or five, down from her high-brow self-advertisements.

I've said it before and I'll say it again; her opinion is apparently based on the fact that SHE is not equipped for the job. It requires immense mental and emotional toughness, a very thick skin. That is something she is (obviously) wholly lacking. And if she thinks that's a solely female characteristic, she either needs to get out more often, or quit projecting. I've seen and known plenty of men whom I've wanted to slap and say "toughen up," just as much as women.

Brilliant job, Oddy; I wonder if she'll come by here and tell you to quick picking on her as she did with others. ;-)

To be truthful, no one really has the sensibilities to run this country - so in a way, LaShawn is correct. Not in the way she intended, I suppose.

Where's Calvin Coolidge or a reasonable female counterpart when you need him/her?

I guess the New Deal added a Constitutional Amendment banning sensibility and we missed it.

Outstanding post...simply brilliant and well told off if you ask me!

I'm glad bloggers are realizing that in linking a flame you simply send traffic their way.

Hmmm, I think you've inspired some thoughts for a possible post.

Thanks for getting me to move from RSS reading back to the web again.

Wow! Great job. That is the best thing I've seen all day.

I'm sick of the big bloggers thinking they are all that with the elitist crap. If they say something ignorant they should have to live up to it just like us small blogs do.

I left a two-sentence comment on La Shawn's blog about her remarks -- I was totally polite, no swearing or insults -- and she deleted it. Then she banned me!

Is she going off her rocker? That's not sound behavior.

I think there are few, men or women, that have the right stuff to run our country....despite whether they have a penis or boobs. Everyone's made great points, especially pointing out that we have been dissapointed in the past with some of our male presidents.

The problem is, just like in the past where we put color on everyone, we are now putting sex on everyone (and not the kind we want :-) ) We are not looking at the qualifications, characteristics and experience...we are judging by our own pre-conceived notions of a general sex.

I know a couple of women (using the phrase "know" loosely) that could be president. I know plenty that could not. But ya know what? I know a couple of men that could be president...and I know plenty that could not.

Great job girl!

s m i l e. . .