Neocon and Netanyahou buddy. Would have no problem with another war. A big war.

Shut the Fuck up you fucking harpy

Jesus, what are we on now FOX Snooze?

Is this thing from the Washington Post? OMG OMG

Jennifer Rubin. She's appalling and the fact that the Washington Post gives her credibility is disgusting, imo.

Why he would talk to her is beyond me.

Her eyes were literally rolling and the spittle was flying. Whoa.

I'm at a loss for one more appropriate - and I am of the female persuasion, incidentally. The word doesn't offend me since it perfectly describes what I was hearing.

"2.
(lowercase) a scolding, nagging, bad-tempered woman; shrew."

Not a good reason at all to repeat them.
If you're going to perpetuate shitty stereotypes, just own it already.

Harpy is a word worth a long historical record and has not always been a bad thing:

In Greek mythology and Roman mythology, a harpy (plural harpies, Greek: ἅ?????, harpyia, pronounced [hárpyːa]; Latin: harpȳia) was a female monster in the form of a bird with a human face. They steal food from their victims while they are eating and carry evildoers (especially those who have killed their family) to the Erinyes. They seem originally to have been wind spirits. Their name means "snatchers".

Hesiod calls them two "lovely-haired" creatures, the daughters of Thaumas and Electra (not to be confused with Electra, daughter of King Agamemnon), who were sisters of the Iris. Pottery art depicting the harpies featured beautiful women with wings.

Harpies as ugly winged bird-women, e.g. in Aeschylus' The Eumenides (line 50) are a late development. Roman and Byzantine writers detailed their ugliness.

Love the history lesson, but not really feeling the relevance. Cheers!

She was requesting suggestions for another term to use in place of "harpy".

Your rude reply, therefore, looks silly.

And then defended its usage.
Blowhard is a great word.

Suit yourself.

I know Blue's a great person, but this harpie thing is a load of crap. Wait till Hilary actually runs- it'll be harpy and cankles all day long. We shld be better than that!

taking offense over what might happen later. We shouldn't be so small.

even though as a candidate Hillary isn't at the top of my list, I have never and won't ever in the future call her a harpy or any other such word. I think you would be hard-pressed to find me slinging epithets at Democrats, even when I disagree with them vehemently, which happens. (Except maybe Rahm Emanuel.) I don't march in lock-step as far as my personal opinions go, but I try to keep name-calling of Democratic politicians and even people here at DU to a minimum. But these stupid Republicans are fair game in my book.

You have your opinion on this particular word's usage, and I have mine. We'll agree to disagree on whether "harpy" was an appropriate descriptor of the very unpleasant Ms. Rubin.

words much more problematic than harpy- towards republican women. Ann Couoter, Sarah Palin, Condeleza Rice, all denigrated as whores, too ugly, or as transvestites. That is shitty, and not progressive at all. There's plenty of better ammo describing their actual character and actions, rather than focus on what "unpleasant females" they are.
I think when you find yourself denigrating an asshole for not being sweet and soft toned, it is worth a second thought. Because it's going to be repeated about Warren, Clinton and any decent Dem who uses a strong voice.

I was feeling beleaguered.


I am a strong believer in words that mean something. If we took all the gender-specific descriptors out of the dictionary, there would be some big holes in our vocabularies.

A specific model.

It is getting really stupid.

Don't let 'em get you down.

It's a perfect choice. The cause of ensuring political power and political space be kept for men only depends on attacking women for transgressing normative gender roles. That is why such words exist. There is nothing in the OP about the content of the speech, her political position, or what ideas she expressed that the OP found problematic. Instead, the sole point is that she is a woman who behaved in a way the OP believes women should not.

and had she been a guy, I probably would have called her a "dickhead" or something insulting along those lines. I'm not going to remove gender-specific words from my vocabulary, especially when they're perfectly good words like "harpy."

:lol:

Sheesh get a fucking dictionary and join the 21st century

and what bothered you about it instead of insulting her for being a woman with the audacity to speak in public. You have said nothing about her ideas. Your say only that she is a "harpy," a woman who doesn't stay in her place.

The world is full of people who see women as less, who believe we do not have the right to engage in political speech or to hold power of any kind. Your choice of the word harpy and complete lack of interest in discussing the content of her speech reinforces that view. Your post tells me noting about the person in question or her ideas. It only tells me how you see women who transgress normative gender roles by speaking on political issues. Which issue, I have no idea since you don't seem to care enough about the content of what she said to devote any attention to it.

That we see similar gendered insults directed toward Democratic women in pubic service, insults made by Republicans and self-proclaimed progressives alike, shows how entrenched misogyny is in keeping women from political life. You have contributed to and affirmed that discourse. If that was not your intention, you might do well to focus on ideas a person articulates rather than assailing her gender.

OP did not explain what the person was saying or any other details, for that matter.

if we hadn't gotten derailed onto the whole word thing. I was assuming that maybe some other people had been watching her insanity and could use my OP to vent their own feelings. How she was saying what she was saying evoked a "holy shit" moment from me and I posted accordingly. I guess I should know better than to express anything spontaneous here. This is DU, after all.

Hectoring asshole is just not finely descriptive enough.

When describing men.... And that's kind of the point here.

about Hillary, it's okay to call her a "harpy".

That's pretty damn interesting.

She was talking about Iran. And she was a very unpleasant, shrieking, shrill woman. I'm sorry if the word "harpy" offends, but it is the definition.

http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/jennifer-rubin-goes-all-in-with-chris-hayes-412000323655

However, it won't be me; I'm in agreement with you.
Sometimes the perfect word is the perfect word.

because it's the only way to describe f# - like sarah palin and elizabeth hasselbeck - like chalk. and if ever i meet a male with the same intonation i will not hesitate to use it either.

on a defensive tear as he was on Morning Joe the other day?

His voice went up a couple of octaves and he was close to hysterical,

while trying to defend the 47 Republican Republican assholes who sent

the letter to Iran.

It was only later I read that his organization gave Cotton about 1 million

dollars to lead the project.

Not.

but I will enlist for this war if they strap her and all the other war lickers to the first bombs dropped. Deal?

She kept spewing "Hillary said..." "Obama said" so much I'm amazed the Post keeps her on staff. Guess they are not ashamed to give a stenographer her own column. She is very astute at filibustering and talking over while saying absolutely nothing significant. Perhaps her own opinions and ideas got lost in the chatter? naw she's just another Beltway blowhard.

All I know is, somebody seriously needs to switch to decaf!

Kind of amusing since I'm a 69-year-old hippie grandma. I've been called worse.

because f# is described as shrill.

Chris will need one after this show is over...

I know my words are scant payment, but all I can give. May you have a nice spring in Alaska.