So according to Maureen Dowd, we're seeing a rising tide of vicious bullying this political season - the kind you might see in high school, when "teenage tormentors" would "spread rumors that you were pregnant."
Oh how I hated that.
For Dowd, these new "Republican Mean Girls
," are angry, aggressive women who are angry and aggressive. And mean.
Why not just call them bitches?
Anyway, to the irony. Here Mo laments the evils of smearing women - right before doing essentially the same thing. In a way, she becomes that cliched head cheerleader who always supports the loutish jock. "You better leave him alone, or I'll say you banged the gym teacher under the grandstands!"
Funny thing is - I did. I always did.
But Dowd's biggest blind spot? She writes this column only a week after Meg Whitman was called a whore - and - after the California NOW chief said "whore" was an apt description.
But none of that made her column.
So, how is calling a lady a whore not seen as mean, but Sharon Angle asking Harry Reid to "man up," is? I'd ask for an explanation, but that might be too mean.
It's also just too funny seeing Dowd go after Angle for being aggressive in a debate. It's what you do in a debate, sister.
But maybe Mo thinks Reid can't defend himself, or that a debate is just no place for chicks.
And so women's worst enemy are always women. And the media eggs this girl-on-girl action on - but only in one direction, of course. See Meghan McCain, yet again - being asked her opinion on a Republican lady:
Yep: when you're looking for a chick to bang on a conservative chick, you can always count on double M. She criticizes O'Donnell for being inexperienced - and I, for one, totally back Meg on this. She may be the foremost authority.
And if you disagree with me, you're a racist homophobic tyrannophobe.