Two strong women

Vincent J. Curtis

19 Aug 22

RE: Two strong women who deserved better.  Spectator editorial 19 Aug 22.

Two strong women who deserved better on account of what- being women?  Well, it’s refreshing that the Spectator seems to admit that it knows what a woman is, but the tenor of the editorial is that modern society is as sexist as it was in 1965.  All that progressivism, all that pressure, all that political correctness has proven worthless.  So, why don’t we scrap progressivism and start with something that will advance society shall we?

Liz Cheney is not someone the Spectator would ordinarily show sympathy for.  But she’s against Donald Trump, and that’s all it takes.  When Liz Cheney was elected to Congress in 2016, her personal worth was $7M.  Six years on, she’s now worth $44M, a rate of gain of $6M per year in Congress.  She didn’t get that by representing the people of Wyoming.  She was defeated by a more than 2:1 margin by another woman in a democratic election.  The Spec needn’t have shed crocodile tears over Liz Cheney save for her hatred for Donald Trump, and that the woman that defeated her was endorsed by Trump.

Lisa LaFlamme had 35 years in front of a camera, the last ten as anchor for the CTV nightly news.  Nobody has a God-given right to be famous and to be on TV every night, but because she’s a woman we ought to pretend that she does?  Sad but true, old men look distinguished, old women look…old.  CTV management have a responsibility to keep viewership, and if they make a mistake, they’re gone.  LaFlamme had her 35 years of fame, time for someone else.  If he bombs out, the next one is up.  That’s the business.

If your opinion is that society hasn’t progressed since 1965 then either you’re wrong, or progressivism has failed to produce the goods and it’s time for another ideology.  The Spectator portrays two of the most privileged people on earth as victims – because they are women.

-30-