Dear New York Daily News-- shut it.
While the NYDN is not a bastion of journalistic integrity (their headlines disturb me to the point where I'll stop dead in my tracks and curse when I see them) I really hoped that they could do better than this:
Hard-charging prosecutor Jeanine Pirro announced plans yesterday to run against U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton and wasted no time baring her claws - accusing the former First Lady of using New York to pave her return to the White House.
The phrase "hard-charging" would not be applied to a male prosecutor. End of story. He'd be "bullish" or "tough," but "hard-charging" is a nice way of saying "uppity bitch." Then, in the very same sentence, we get "claws."
If there is one thing I hate, it's the use of "claws" or "catty" when it comes to women disagreeing in a professional environment. When it comes to a Lohan/Duffthrowdown, the words are appropriate because it's women fighting over something stupid (Aaron Carter? For real?). But when two women oppose each other when running for political office, or disagree about issues, it's not the time to use a word that people associate with scantily clad women wrestling in a gooey substance for the pleasure of men. Pirro thinks she'd make a better senator than Hillary Clinton. She didn't call Clinton a skank, didn't sleep with Bill, didn't do anything to start a hair-pulling throwdown. They are two professionals who are fighting for office. Knock it off with the sexism. You never hear about George Bush pulling Condi Rice's hair over an international incident that she handled poorly, but if Condi says something disparaging about a woman, it's bitchiness. It's like when guys rationalize a girl's being upset on PMS. Sometimes, people just disagree and biology has no part in it.
So, to the gentlemen who wrote so nicely about the women candidates from New York, can it. Take them seriously, because they both look like they could school your asses on just about anything. Even writing articles about politics.