Hillary Clinton — Bombshell?

By now you’ve surely heard that the Brooklyn-based Hasidic newspaper Der Tzitung “disappeared” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and another woman from the iconic White House Situation Room photo, taken while the Osama bin Laden attack was going down:

The original photo, taken as the raid was occurring, famously shows Clinton in the center of the room, with her hand over her mouth. But the newspaper Der Tzitung, described by the Jewish Week as “ultra-Orthodox,” has a policy of never printing photos of women in its pages because it thinks they could be sexually suggestive. Thus, Clinton and counterterrorism director Audrey Tomason, who was seen standing at the back of the room, were removed from the picture.

In a non-apology apology, Der Tzitung said in part:

In accord with our religious beliefs, we do not publish photos of women, which in no way relegates them to a lower status. Publishing a newspaper is a big responsibility, and our policies are guided by a Rabbinical Board. Because of laws of modesty, we are not allowed to publish pictures of women, and we regret if this gives an impression of disparaging to women, which is certainly never our intention. We apologize if this was seen as offensive.

Some people may find the following limerick to be offensive. And to them I say, too damn bad!

Hillary Clinton — Bombshell? (Limerick)
By Madeleine Begun Kane

What a shame that some men are so weak,
They can’t handle so much as a peek
Of a Hillary pic.
Seems they fear that their dick
Can’t withstand her alluring physique.

UPDATE: A very funny take on this same topic.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

22 Responses to “Hillary Clinton — Bombshell?”

  1. Granny Smith says:

    Your limerick says just what needs to be said!

  2. Photoshop is an extremely insidious tool and it has been used for good and bad and to manipulate and confuse. I truly believe such is the case after reading through on this story that seems to have exploded of late. Not to mention the fact it involves a bit of religion (not to mention the ubiquitous POLITICS). That initial photo was very well circulated when the news of the Bin Laden raid became known so I am personally at a loss as to how the Hacidic publisher assumed people wouldn’t care about this.
    A picture is worth a thousand words. Manipulating a picture using PS is worth a thousand more! And your limerick? Pretty darn funny as usual!

  3. madkane says:

    Thanks so much, Granny and Dan.

    As for the publisher, my experience with extreme religious sects of all kinds is they they don’t care what anyone else thinks. Theirs is the gospel. :)

  4. Poetjanstie says:

    Agreed, Mad, there are still those small sectors of society, who are basically, well, bigoted; there’s no other word for it. We’ve a fair share of those here in the old Blighty. It is so easy to become incensed by such behaviour and this is a ‘policy’ that is completely out of line with a more enlightened broad church. It might be appropriate to ask: what if women feel it is sexually suggestive to see men in photographs? Could it thereby be argued, in defence of the publication, that this policy actually acknowledges men as the weaker sex! Hmm, there’s a thought.

    Perhaps it is a policy imposed by men who are afraid of the own sexual impulses… who can say?

  5. Hansi says:

    I think the Hillary pic really captured the gravity of what was going on. Good for her, she’s a human being. I probably would have had the same expression if I had a front seat to an assassination, no matter how deserving the recipient was.

  6. Linda Motley says:

    Personally, I can’t imagine a more horrific position to be in than front and center watching an assassination taking place. But, as Secretary of State, that is where she belonged. I can’t imagine it was an easy thing to watch for any of the people there. And I agree with Poetjanstie – I sometimes see pictures of men (think George Clooney) which I find sexually suggestive; therefore, they should not be printing pictures of men either. Perhaps the Hasids should stop printing pictures entirely.

  7. Dondura Miller says:

    The picture that had two women of power photoshopped out to “protect” them was proof that the men in that part of the world are just plain afraid of women. For our protection, they insist WE cover in a bed sheet, put us behind high walls, insist education will mess with our minds, we cannot drive, our children are not ours, we cannot even go shopping alone. And to make things worse, they kill us like we were nothing to them, oh yeah, we aren’t..my bad. That isn’t protection, that is sexism. They oppress us so they don’t have to learn to control their own libido.

  8. madkane says:

    Thanks everyone for your thoughtful comments!

  9. Scott says:

    Damn Mad, that is funny.

  10. Peter E Dant says:

    Cartoons By Rosandich is being ‘photoshopist’. Don’t blame the tool, blame the user! Photographs were famously manipulated by the Stalin Regime, and I believe that was before Photoshop was invented. Yes, Photoshop makes it easier to do for most people, but the point is that it happened before.

  11. Zaphod says:

    This little stink

    Was not based on pink

    But a bearded man up in the sky.

    And the liberal elite

    Still wants to compete

    While the rest just turn a blind eye.

  12. Steve Bates says:

    <10_yr_old_boy_voice> Mad Kane said “di-ick”; Mad Kane said “di-ick”… </10_yr_old_boy_voice> :-)

    Seriously, Mad, welcome to the “dark side” … rhyming is much easier when you can use your full vocabulary. And today there is no more worthy target of your barbs than Der Tzitung. Good one!

    (What’s with the “Der” anyway? Do these jokers not even allow a feminine article?)

  13. Jim Blass says:

    I’ve read many letters from believers in the religious experience. Many explain why I should do or not do something because the “Word of God” has rules about the subject. I don’t believe they are wrong in all cases, but, I would like to express an opinion which may be disturbing to some and thought provoking for others.

    First some caveats. I am not a learned man. I have not studied deeply the texts defining the faiths of the believers. I may sometimes use the wrong word or expression to describe a fact or belief. With that said, I have thought about these things for many years.

    The believers I speak of are diverse and call their belief systems by many names, primarily Christian, Jewish and Muslim. Because of our local culture most all of the writers are of the Christian persuasion. All these believe there is but one God. Silly, but they kill or hate each other because of or instead of this similar belief, I can‘t figure out which. It seems to me to be a totally ridiculous response to a belief in the same one God who has inspired the writing of books which are similar in content . Yes, this God has only stated his wants and requirements in certain Books which some humans have written down. According to them, under the inspiration of God. All the destruction is caused by individuals who purport to have the ability to discern what God wants either through direct contact or by interpreting the contents of these Books.

    The perpetuators of these first two named beliefs are called by many names from Rabbi to Reverend to Pastor to Pope. These people receive instruction in the beliefs and are declared by their teachers to be ready to propagate the that belief. To be sure, there are some people who declare themselves to be one of the propagators without benefit of being instructed. Any of these named people, instructed or not, may interpret the written word on which the beliefs are discerned in his own way.

    Let us take the two groups called Christian and Jews and ask some questions.

    First we must explain that these two groups base their beliefs on a group of writings called the “Bible”. Though both groups use the older portion, i.e., the Old Testament or Torah, only the Christians use the New Testament which includes the “Gospel”. Though men had to actually write the books, they are considered the Word of God. It should be noted that there are or were many writings considered to be included in this canon, but, it had to be decided, amongst men, which were to be excluded. This choice was not just done once but many times over the history of these writings.

    Why is it believed that the God of the universe would select a small insignificant tribe of desert nomads to be the ONLY humans to understand what he wanted in the way of obedience, societal behavior and worship? And why would He manifest Himself in the guise of a poor itinerant preacher of that tribe and say that He would sacrifice the human form He had acquired as expiation of the sins against Himself of all those who would believe that He in fact had done this? And why does this God require us to worship him? Is he of such low self-esteem that he requires his creations to acknowledge him, constantly? Isn’t this just all a human mind game trying to understand, with our logic, our place in the vast universe?

    How many humans existed when this God made this initial selection? Remember, the world had reached its first billion of living humans in about 1800 of the ‘Common Era’, or ‘Anno Domino’. Why didn’t he offer the same circumstances to ALL the humans then in existence? Are we to believe that God had offered this system to other tribes and ALL of them had turned him down? Nobody understood the significance of the offer except this one tribe? Are there no people in existence since this initial choice who merit the same treatment?

    This one tribe had the termerity and ego to suppose they were a “Chosen People”, which is probably understandable considering their leaders spoke to God. Many other tribes and people seem to have accepted this because this tribe was a successful group. This selected tribe developed a system of human behavior and society which followed reasonable, successful basic rules that became codified in various forms. The morality of these rules is the basis of our western laws and morals. Other parts of the world and its citizens developed similar codes of societal behavior.

    Now we find another group, the Muslims, followers of the faith of Islam. A group who believe that one man from the Arabian peninsula was privy to the revealed thoughts of Allah. He wrote them down some 500 hundred years after the God of the Christians sacrificed Himself and about 2500 years after the tribe mentioned above began their history with God and now a portion of the earths population believe that what this Arabian man wrote is the word of Allah (God ?). It is interesting that this man considered his families and religious beginnings to be descended from the above mentioned, “Chosen People”. Whether God and Allah are the same entity is in dispute.

    Each generation of Muslims have perpetuators of the belief whom they call Imam. For some reason, any Imam can interpret the writings of the words of Allah in any fashion he desires. Apparently, anyone who desires may call himself an Imam, there being no central authority on who has the knowledge and faith to be an Imam. Sounds eerily similar – what? Oh, these Imams may declare a fact or action to be the will of Allah and even though that action is against the basic rules of the religion the perpetrator acting under cover of that declaration will be treated as a hero not a criminal, at least by Allah, according to the Imams.
    Now some more questions.
    What explains the remains of humans and their endeavors found in various parts of the world which obviously predate the stories this small tribe ascribes to itself and its history? Is all the found evidence false or falsified? Is the science which dates these artifacts a sham or totally mistaken?

    How does one explain the fossil remains of obviously extinct forms of life? Did a creator make mistakes and those mistaken entities died because they could not compete for resources? How would an all knowing creator come to make a mistake? Does the previous existence of extinct forms of life fit into a great plan of this creator?

    How does one explain the differences in the human form? Are they merely different tribes created by God/Allah or are they mutations of genetic matter? Science says the genetic differences are miniscule but because they affect the outer appearance they are perceived to be wide differentiations of the human form by many. If they are genetic mutations then that proves that part of the “Theory of Evolution’, does it not?

    Many of the above questions presuppose one or another philosophical thought on the type of creator we are thinking of: One who creates and lets the accidents of nature and the free will of the created follow their own ways or a creator who plans all things and everything is predetermined. Even so, the other questions remain.

    Is the story of creation just that? A story to explain the world and its people to a relatively naive people. It is known that various tribes over the worlds surface have various creation stories and because the human mind is not very different in any of its manifestations the stories can be similar or different depending on the mindset of the proponents and their life experience. One who has never seen a mountain may believe the whole earth is very smooth while the mountaineer might believe there are no deserts or great plains where mountains cannot be seen.

    It is requested that all who claim that the word of God as explicated in the Bible or Koran, or explained by any one man be viewed as merely one opinion among many and not be used as the controlling, absolute law of the world. To use the general rules and common sense of these books is a good idea for they are, in many cases, the distilled wisdom of many people and their experiences. But, to condemn, kill or force any person to do anything because of the interpretations of these books or the pronouncements of a perpetuator of their belief systems is to avoid the greatest truth shining from it all: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you!

    And how do we explain the remaining people of the earth? In the Asiatic and African regions a population of about 3 to 4 billion people have many religious beliefs which do not comport with the three mentioned above which require a written book to define the relationship between God and human. What are they – condemned to have no contact with the God of creation?

    Because there is no answer to most of the questions posed why can’t we just admit that there probably was or is some force or being which started this universe and we don’t know what it is or was. Accept that as fact and apply the Golden Rule stated in the previous paragraph because it has proved to be the one constant of human relationships which produces the greatest good.

  14. Scott says:

    I was kinda surprised when Madeleine hit us with a dick.

    let me rephrase that…….

  15. Steve Bates says:

    Shorter Jim-Bob: “I know everything, and I’m going to tell you 2/3 of it right now. Why can’t everyone just admit that I am right about all of it, and save us all some trouble?”

    Jim-Bob, you are your cause’s own worst enemy. People who write interminable, preachy, off-topic comments are among my strongest motivators in my old age to abandon religion and find more meaning in individual human relationships in the here-and-now. YMMV, but I’ll bet you’ve driven more people away from your religion than you’ve converted to it. Have a nice day!

  16. C.G. Jung says:

    And after that War Hawk death merchant voted against the cluster Bomb Amendment and for the kyl-Liebermann Amendment. Why the disrespect?

    She’s clearly a Friend of Israel, clearly of friend of war.
    and clearly a friend of child sized prosthetic limb manufacturers.

    I think there are bigger issues with that particular monster, than how sexist, retarded, religious fanatics photo shop her out of the war room. Like why supposed liberals applaud her.

  17. madkane says:

    Scott and Steve, for some reason I have the odd impulse to defend myself by saying, “I swear like a sailor. ” :)

    Thanks everyone for your comments and kind words!

  18. Patrice of the ManyCats says:

    Mad, I LOVE your limerick. I’m late to this conversation, but nonetheless :) [Scott, are you implying that Mad is a-dick-tive?!]

    She’s Good ~ and Mad

    Mad for Prez! Hey, she’s read – wide, true blue;
    She knows more than the pols who’ll run, do.
    Sure, agnostic [acrostic],
    Perhaps a tad caustic…
    She’d stick! …quick, not slick :) I’m in! You??

  19. Patrice of the ManyCats says:

    Status Non Grata: What A Lotta *$# !

    Of Audrey and Hil, not a trace…
    Guess we’ll brace for your big non embrace.
    Our face, you’d erase?
    You’ve defaced half our race!
    And to that, God lends no saving grace.

    Gee, it’s “heavy” to publish the news
    When tradition rules. Wake up, think! Choose!
    Your idea of modest
    Is simply the oddest,
    Cruel notion, by which we all lose.

    Strange, I don’t feel like a sex symbol!
    (Are Hasid-dicks the size of a thimble?!)
    Just extremely dismayed;
    Should this issue be laid…
    To rest, or pursued by the nimble?

    This all just confirms my belief,
    Blind religion leads – mostly – to grief;
    Case in point here, Rabbinical
    Board: call me cynical…
    “Erased” females? You self-righteous thief! :(

    You’re certain you’re right, so you say,
    But I hear a smug, pious bray;
    You’d steal our identity,
    Make us each a non-entity:
    How dare you imply that’s God’s way?!

    To you, we’re mere temptress or whore
    To adore, scorn, or simply ignore.
    I’ve a man who sees me,
    And that’s reality!
    It’s your views that we all should deplore.

    Let’s flip this: your pix without males?
    You’d declaim this as sin! (ah, loud wails)
    So men aren’t to be trusted?
    You’ve lusted: you’re busted!
    [I’m angry, disgusted…]
    My sisters, let’s strip off our veils.

  20. madkane says:

    Thanks, Patrice! I really enjoyed your limericks too!

  21. Patrice of the ManyCats says:

    Glad you like ’em, Mad ~ I so enjoy both reading and contributing to your blog and FB wall :^D

  22. madkane says:

    Patrice, I’m happy to hear it! Thanks!