The Leadership Lid

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Krohn @ 10/08/2008 11:58:46 PM

    "Not all Democrats agree with Mr. Frank that such policies are off-limits to criticism. Last week Rep. Artur Davis of Alabama said in a statement: 'Like a lot of my Democratic colleagues I was too slow to appreciate the recklessness of Fannie and Freddie. I defended their efforts to encourage affordable homeownership, when in retrospect, I should have heeded the concerns raised by their regulator in 2004. Frankly, I wish my Democratic colleagues would admit when it comes to Fannie and Freddie, we were wrong.'

    "Mr. Davis is a member of the Congressional Black Caucus."

    'Rank snobbery'

    Camille Paglia, who supports Sen. Barack Obama, has nothing but scorn for the way the media has treated Sarah Palin.

    "The mountain of rubbish poured out about Palin over the past month would rival Everest. What a disgrace for our jabbering army of liberal journalists and commentators, too many of whom behaved like snippy jackasses," Miss Paglia writes at www.salon.com.

    "The bourgeois conventionalism and rank snobbery of these alleged humanitarians stank up the place. As for Palin's brutally edited interviews with Charlie Gibson and that viper, Katie Couric, don't we all know that the best bits ended up on the cutting-room floor? Something has gone seriously wrong with Democratic ideology, which seems to have become a candied set of holier-than-thou bromides attached like tutti-frutti to a quivering green Jell-O mold of adolescent sentimentality."

  • Posted By: rorydobson @ 10/08/2008 10:07:07 PM

    "What if we had an oil shortage but were using only 20 percent of the oil at our disposal? Wouldn't that seem stupid and shortsighted?"

    If women are 50% of the population and women hold 20% of the leadership positions, then we are using 40% of the resource at our disposal. (applying her proportion by numbers argument). Although Ms. Quindlen includes herself among the "20 percenters," it does not appear that her math skills could have helped avert the "great banks and brokerage houses [from] crumbling around the ears of their male executives." What percentage of math teachers are women?

  • Posted By: openmind4 @ 10/08/2008 2:39:24 PM

    I don't know as many big words as Anna Quindlen but I think my understanding of cause and effect is equal to hers. She actually concludes (yes, that is what you are saying) that things would be better if more women were in leadership positions. What she does not say is that only if good women were in those positions, same as if good men were in those positions or good men and women if you insist. Is there a difference between men and women? You bet there is, and we better get used to judging each of them in a different way.

  • Posted By: jrsampul @ 10/08/2008 11:30:53 AM

    I agree with lament7's comments - your article makes no valid argument for the 20% lid. Provide some real numbers to back it up.

    Also, as you quote Marie Wilson: "Focusing on bringing women into leadership..." who is she suggesting do the bringing? Are you saying that men are holding women back? Is it a conspiracy? As I say to my 5year old girl, stop whining and say what you have to say.

  • Posted By: DJWood148 @ 10/07/2008 7:55:46 PM

    The past 3 "The Last Word" articles have resonated loud and clear with me. I love that you have put into words what was in my head, heart and experience but somehow could not be articulated. It gives me hope that very, very soon a woman who is deserving because of her hard work, intellect and contributions will be find herself in the president or vice president's seat. "Certain women being moved too far, too fast, to fill a vacuum for the convenience of men" is a hard blow to women who are not convenient but deserving and capable to in any role no matter what side of the aisle they reside. The GOP nomination for VP is a betrayal, make no mistake about it.

  • Posted By: aq666 @ 10/07/2008 2:34:20 PM

    When are you going to make up your mind. Women are or are not capable. Yes there are still shortcomings in recognition but strides have been made by many great women. Palin is just politics. Hillary didn't make it now Palin has and that is your real beef. I am a staunch conservative but read some of your print. I am glad you get to stay in your cozy little magazine environment as you would be muzzled in public. All the politicians should be voted out as they are as ineffective as you at making change for the better. I love all the crap your so called good democrats put in the bailout bill as well as the republicans. That money could be better spent by the states or the incividuals who paid it in. I hope Barak gets elected and he raises taxes causing lots of job loss to those who need it most and maybe then you will understand that it is the wealthy who give them their job.

  • Posted By: lament7 @ 10/07/2008 11:42:14 AM

    An example of gross misuse of statistics.
    20% of women in leadership is NOT an indicator of anything, especially when correlated with 50% of humanity.
    The first biological fact is that only women bear children; men do not. That has three consequences:
    (a) women are the overwhelming leaders in family production (of course, perpetuation of society is not of concern to Quindlen and so does not count as leadership).
    (b) So, as soon as 50% of all aspects of monetized, "professional" workforce, including "leadership", is women, that society will begin to disappear for lack of new generations.
    (c) bearing children puts women at an inherent disadvantage for leadership because it mean less time in job trajectories that produce to leadership. But that disadvantage is necessary for its mirror advantage -- continuation of humanity.
    The second fact is that percentage of representation in population is NOT the appropriate comparative base. The two relevant factors are (a) percentage in the particular labor market, e.g., managers, and (b) experience, i.e., time in job path (where men have longer experience on average because they cannot take time out to bear children.
    Let us praise women for bearing and rearing children, and their overwhelming predominance in that leadership position, so essential for survival of the species and society. Let us grant that as much status as serving as some corporate CEO.

  • Posted By: Bunny212 @ 10/07/2008 10:25:58 AM

    Women will continue to take a back seat to men in every aspect of American life until American women understand that the only way to adjust the power balance is to start voting as a block. This means that the issues are less important than gender. Issues can become important once the choice is between two women but until then women will be marginalized.

  • Posted By: Bunny212 @ 10/07/2008 10:24:22 AM

    Women will continue to take a back seat to men in every aspect of American life until American women understand that the only way to adjust the power balance is to start voting as a block. This means that the issues are less important than gender. Issues can become important once the choice is between two women but until then women will be marginalized. This means voting for any woman who is running for officePalin despite her deficits.

  • Posted By: solmanone @ 10/07/2008 2:04:42 AM

    Hillary was a shoe in for president, if she had appolagized for her war vote and not ran her campaign into the ground financilly. The US is ready for a woman to lead, unfortunately there were no women in the election ready to lead.

  • Posted By: jtwardmo @ 10/07/2008 2:02:23 AM

    The article by Anna Quindlen is one example of how the media and the liberal Democrats tend to be sexist, racist, whatever-ist. So what if Barack Obama is black? So what if Sarah Palin is female? So what is John McCain and Joseph Biden are senior citizens? So what?

    As an Independent, I have voted for a third nominee when it has appeared that the election would not be close in the state in which I was living and when the third nominee appeared best. In elections where I voted for a Democrat or Republican, I have voted for the person who gives more evidence that he or she can handle the job better than the other and spends less time saying unrealistic words that attract voters..

    That is why I will be voting for John McCain and Sarah Palin..

  • Posted By: Krohn @ 10/06/2008 6:14:06 PM

    The Antichrist!:
    When George Soros failed to obtain the election of his candidate, John Kerry, in 2004, he brooded for a while, even said he might get out of politics altogether, but he just couldn???t stop himself. He has stated publicly that he wishes to burst the ???bubble of American supremacy,??? because he says our preeminence in the world is a detriment to global ???equilibrium.??? So far, he has failed, but he keeps on trying.

    And Mr. Soros has made no secret either of the fact that he sees the shortest way to effect political shake-ups, what he terms ???regime changes,??? is through very difficult economic conditions.

    America has not yet felt the full force of Soros style economic shock treatment. But others have.

    Soros made his first billion in 1992 by shorting the British pound with leveraged billions in financial bets, and became known as the man who broke the Bank of England. He broke it on the backs of hard-working British citizens who immediately saw their homes severely devalued and their life savings cut drastically in comparative worth almost overnight.

    When the Asian Financial Crisis of 1997 threatened to spread globally, George Soros was right in the thick of it. Soros was accused by the Malaysian Prime Minister of causing the collapse with his monetary machinations, and he was branded in Thailand as an ???economic war criminal??? who ???sucks the blood from the people.??? Right in the middle of this crisis, Soros dashed off his book, The Crisis of Global Capitalism, which demanded a ???third way??? toward economic stability.

    Wake up, America, before it is too late!!!!

  • Posted By: good conscience @ 10/06/2008 5:14:30 PM

    Anna, I agree with your assessment of how underused the talents and services of women are concerned. I date back to the 60s when the Women's Lib movement germinated. Or at least began getting some national press. Since I've been watching/listening now for several decades, there are times when I feel disappointed and discouraged. Will we ever be able to change to a truly equal society? How many more generations is it going to take? Thank you for an engaging article.

  • Posted By: Dylan Rossi @ 10/06/2008 9:34:36 AM

    Women? What about minorities. The next time you see a minority on one of the political talk shows when the topic isn't about OJ or some "minority" oriented issue, stand up a take notice. It's so rare, you're likely to see something that's on the extinction list before you see a minority on a panel of "experts."

  • Posted By: psychnurse @ 10/06/2008 7:48:14 AM

    This is one of your most insightful columns. I believe women would be of much greater service to our nation than many of the men who lead us today. Unfortunately, I do not believe Sarah Palin is one of those women. Her "folksiness" seems as false as Bush's Texas accent. And, like Bush, there's not much else there. We face the risk of replacing the "good ole boy from Texas" with the the "folksy Joe Six-Pack" from Alaska. Status quo.

  • Posted By: lordmi @ 10/06/2008 6:33:20 AM

    Great.
    BUT , let's talk about Leadership skill, but not "honor of barking".OK?

  • Posted By: Krohn @ 10/05/2008 8:36:10 PM

    he ACORN does not fall from the tree:
    http://justsaynodeal.com/acorn.html

  • Posted By: Krohn @ 10/05/2008 1:10:58 AM

    This is one of the few Democrats that I am proud of!:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZR5ekEuGyvk

  • Posted By: Krohn @ 10/05/2008 1:10:45 AM

    This is one of the few Democrats that I am proud of!:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZR5ekEuGyvk

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse