‘Only women become more radical with age’ One can only marvel at the self-congratulation of this statement, in light of her sharing the stage with both Hillary Clinton and Madeleine Albright.
Mrs. Clinton who supported three of the cornerstones of President Clintons political reforms of the 90’s: The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 and The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLBA) that were, in effect, reforms that Reagan could not have even advocated, much less passed, in his tenure. But were perfect political bait for the Reagan Democrats and their clearly demonstrated, indeed abundant prejudices. Against Welfare Queens driving Cadillacs, a motto for the New Democrats, of the Clinton eight year tenure ?
The New Democrats were really pseudo-Reaganites, who discarded the New Deal tradition as inconvenient political baggage . These first two laws were utterly disastrous for the most vulnerable segment of American society poor women. Surely not an imperative for Gloria Steinem nor her audience of readers/admirers! And the last the harbinger of the economic collapse of 2008.
Ms. Albright and her notoriously callous, not to speak of morally inexcusable comments of a foreign policy technocrat, in the mold of Herman Kahn, on 500,000 dead Iraqi children place her beyond the pale.
On May 12, 1996, Albright defended UN sanctions against Iraq on a 60 Minutes segment in which Lesley Stahl asked her “We have heard that half a million children have died. I mean, that’s more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?” and Albright replied “we think the price is worth it.” Albright later criticized Stahl’s segment as “amount[ing] to Iraqi propaganda”; said that her question was a loaded question; wrote “I had fallen into a trap and said something I did not mean”; and regretted coming “across as cold-blooded and cruel”. Sanctions critics took Albright’s failure to reframe the question as confirmation of the statistic. The segment won an Emmy Award.[1
Can we judge anyone by the company they keep? Where is the self-proclaimed ‘radicalism’ of Steinem’s age? Her political/moral conformity are on full display, wreathed in more of the abundant self-congratulation. If Steinem is representative of Feminism in the 21st Century, the abject poverty of the leadership of that Feminism is an inescapable conclusion.