Ok...so blogs were a-burning over the past couple of days with regard to Rebecca Eisenberg's comments regarding John and Elizabeth Edwards' choice to bring their kids with them on the campaign bus as they make their way around the country. Now there are myriad points that I could take from her post to gnaw on: her criticism of their choice, her bashing Elizabeth for choosing to leave her job and stay home with her family, her obvious envy of their financial status, her willingness to take one news article and use that as her guiding point of research, her pot-calling-the-kettle-black approach to enlightening her readers (all ten of them, according to her post) with the fact that she has no respect for John's chosen profession (in case you didn't know, he's a lawyer; so was Elizabeth) describing him as an "ambulance chaser"; yet she refers to her candidate of choice, Hillary Rodham Clinton, as a highly-respected attorney. (Now I don't mean to split hairs here, but I was always under the impression that a lawyer and an attorney were one and the same.) She also doesn't mention that she, too, is an attorney/lawyer. I suspect she can avoid the label of ambulance chaser since she works for some Internet Start-up company--unless they chase after sick or dying or injured internet companies for their own gain...but I digress. She goes on in her rant in what I took to be a misguided attempt to garner support for HRC--although I can't imagine the Clinton camp beating a path to Becky's door to film her for any upcoming advertising any time soon--and then tries to soften her outpouring of disgust toward the Edwards by lamely lamenting that it is tragic that Elizabeth is terminally ill with cancer. Save it, Becky. I doubt that all 10 or so of your regular readers bought that bucket of de rigeur sympathy.
Anyhoooo...the bottom line is that I personally found Ms. Eisenberg to be shallow, at best. But that's ok, 'cause I can be pretty damn shallow myself, which brings me to my topic this afternoon. They say that first impressions last. How very true indeed! You see, my very first impression of Ms. E was yesterday morning as I walked by the family room TV (which, as usual, was left on with nobody in the room) on my way to the kitchen for my don't-talk-to-me-til-I've-had-my-first-cup cup of java when I happened to catch the Good Morning America report on this whole thing. I was processing the information when, what to my wondering eyes should appear? But a Fake-n-Bake Bimbo with Boobs down to here!
Seriously, my jaw dropped when I saw the photo that Becky had selected for her profile on the Silicon Valley Mom's Blog. No kidding! This woman, who claims to be an "old-time feminist" (or something to that effect), chose a photo of herself with her little poppets--one under each arm--dressed in a black, uber-plunging-necklined cocktail dress. Her sweet little angels at risk of getting smacked by the free-flying orbs at best, or being teased on the playground for having the mommy who opened the first Heidi Fleiss Franchise in Palo Alto, at worst. Now there's a message for up-and-coming feminists everywhere: Show 'em if you got 'em. If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with your free-range boobies. Did she not get the fact that the bra-burning movement was meant to be symbolic?
Anyhoooo...the bottom line is that I personally found Ms. Eisenberg to be shallow, at best. But that's ok, 'cause I can be pretty damn shallow myself, which brings me to my topic this afternoon. They say that first impressions last. How very true indeed! You see, my very first impression of Ms. E was yesterday morning as I walked by the family room TV (which, as usual, was left on with nobody in the room) on my way to the kitchen for my don't-talk-to-me-til-I've-had-my-first-cup cup of java when I happened to catch the Good Morning America report on this whole thing. I was processing the information when, what to my wondering eyes should appear? But a Fake-n-Bake Bimbo with Boobs down to here!
Seriously, my jaw dropped when I saw the photo that Becky had selected for her profile on the Silicon Valley Mom's Blog. No kidding! This woman, who claims to be an "old-time feminist" (or something to that effect), chose a photo of herself with her little poppets--one under each arm--dressed in a black, uber-plunging-necklined cocktail dress. Her sweet little angels at risk of getting smacked by the free-flying orbs at best, or being teased on the playground for having the mommy who opened the first Heidi Fleiss Franchise in Palo Alto, at worst. Now there's a message for up-and-coming feminists everywhere: Show 'em if you got 'em. If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with your free-range boobies. Did she not get the fact that the bra-burning movement was meant to be symbolic?
Brassieres are not, in and of themselves, the chains that bind us to subservience. Not unless you consider an athletic supporter the pedestal upon which the men of the world rest the holy twig and berries of supremacy. 
Letting the girls fly free like that is one of the oldest tricks in the book, Becky. I can't help but wonder why you would pick such a cleavage-laden photo to represent you as a mother. Sexy photos get attention, but is it the kind of attention you want? The kind you want your kids to value? And you bemoan the fact that you simply can't spend enough time with your own kids? How about some quality time in the SUV as you toodle on down to Kohl's for some Playtex 18-Hours? Do you honestly expect to be taken seriously as an insightful, intelligent woman of the new millenium when you spend less time crafting a "vitriolic" post viciously attacking one woman's right to choose how she raises her children than you do selecting your profile pic? Wake up and smell the judgement, Ms. Eisenberg. Pretty stinky, huh?
Oh, and gentle reader, if you try to find that picture, you will search in vain. It's been taken down. Pronto. One of the real moms at SVM must have seen the clip on GMA, also. Too bad they saw it three hours after we did here on the East Coast.
