2016 Postmortem

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)

190. Polly is a woman who epitomizes strong women, never allowing anyone to emotionally

Fri Jan 29, 2016, 04:48 PM

Jan 2016

manipulate her, seeing the phoniness that so often rears its ugly head when it comes to women on this forum. Yet many of us have watched faux 'feminists' abuse, or try to, one of the most admirable examples of how women in REAL LIFE actually are.

Did you express outrage, as much as you are expressing here in defense of the very privileged Mrs Greenspan lest she be horribly damaged by letting the public now of her close ties to Wall St, when polly was being laughed at for the loss of her child?

Maybe you did, I don't know as I found it to disturbing actually to follow that shameful assault on a woman who has a longtime respected record on this forum, coming from, supposedly 'feminist's. Hence the term they have and are earning 'faux feminism'

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

248 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why did Mrs. Greenspan Automatically Think of Hillary When She Saw This Ad? [View all] sabrina 1 Jan 2016 OP

Great way of demeaning a woman Sabrina! hrmjustin Jan 2016 #1

wtf?? nt. polly7 Jan 2016 #2

Wtf is right polly. hrmjustin Jan 2016 #3

What are you going on about? nt. polly7 Jan 2016 #4

Calling Andrea Mitchell Mrs Greenspan is demeaning. hrmjustin Jan 2016 #6

Seems a lot of people are committing this sexist attack. le sigh... JonLeibowitz Jan 2016 #12

Classic! frylock Jan 2016 #18

It is wrong. I love that poster but i disagree with using that term to describe her. hrmjustin Jan 2016 #19

okay, just so we're clear it isn't a "berniebro" sexist smear. JonLeibowitz Jan 2016 #34

Explain your thinking on this. I never heard this term. hrmjustin Jan 2016 #39

what term? JonLeibowitz Jan 2016 #50

The one you just asked me about! hrmjustin Jan 2016 #55

I asked no question. JonLeibowitz Jan 2016 #59

She IS Mrs Greenspan, why would that be considered a smear other than the fact that Mr Greenspan Dont call me Shirley Jan 2016 #215

Come on Shirley, put on some more Mr. Greenjeans nolabels Jan 2016 #238

... Dont call me Shirley Jan 2016 #245

All right everybody, -get in crash positions nolabels Jan 2016 #246

No, you just dont want to talk about your candidate AgingAmerican Jan 2016 #172

Now where's that fainting couch when you need it?!? The one I've been seeing polly7 Jan 2016 #26

I will light a candle for Sanders supporters. hrmjustin Jan 2016 #30

What about the OP and trying to turn the ad into a negative attack against Clinton? nt. polly7 Jan 2016 #40

I will not light candle for the Ad. hrmjustin Jan 2016 #42

IOW, you have no interest whatsoever in the attempt to smear him with something polly7 Jan 2016 #46

I made my point from the start. hrmjustin Jan 2016 #49

And I'm not required to agree with your point. polly7 Jan 2016 #52

Oh polly! hrmjustin Jan 2016 #63

Well .............. where is it??? polly7 Jan 2016 #65

Always better when I get to talk to you. hrmjustin Jan 2016 #68

Awww ....... thank you. You too. Maybe after you get some rest you can find it. nt. polly7 Jan 2016 #70

The oddest thing about the internet is misperception Prism Jan 2016 #133

LOL .............. love it, Prism. polly7 Jan 2016 #179

Whoa! Six hides in a day?! Prism Jan 2016 #180

Oh, my! polly7 Jan 2016 #182

Seven. kath Jan 2016 #192

Polly is a woman who epitomizes strong women, never allowing anyone to emotionally sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #190

Feminists all over the country have been calling out this 'faux feminism' USING women for political sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #184

How sexist it is to try to protect a 'poor little woman' from full disclosure of possible biases, sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #107

...I agree with you. JonLeibowitz Jan 2016 #109

Lol! Sorry didn't get the sarcasm. But no harm done, it needs to be repeated as often as possible sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #110

Exactly. I see "Mrs Greenspan" as a snarky way of pointing out the obvious biases she won't reveal JonLeibowitz Jan 2016 #111

Exactly. nt dflprincess Jan 2016 #221

You Prism Jan 2016 #131

Well the poster can pat herself on the back kenfrequed Jan 2016 #157

Lol! Oops! sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #189

Doesn't matter who does it, it is sexist and demeaning. n/t cui bono Jan 2016 #200

No, I didn't know that. polly7 Jan 2016 #15

I think it is demeaning. hrmjustin Jan 2016 #22

I don't. nt. polly7 Jan 2016 #28

Mansplaining. nt Bonobo Jan 2016 #41

Well, here is a bit of womansplaining. Luminous Animal Jan 2016 #51

The ties between Ms. Mitchell and her husband are important and although this bumps up against Bonobo Jan 2016 #56

Then spell it out with out the demeaning shorthand. Andrea Mitchell is odious in her own right. Luminous Animal Jan 2016 #67

Well I can agree with that! SusanCalvin Jan 2016 #76

Here's some more womansplaining, to say it is demeaning to address a woman as 'mrs.whoever' is to sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #195

It's about choice and how one prefers to be addressed. Luminous Animal Jan 2016 #197

That's your experience and others are different, most of my married friends, all of them very strong sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #229

And she is not Mrs. Greenspan. She is Andrea Mitchell, asshole in her own right. She will always Luminous Animal Jan 2016 #231

Of course it would be okay to use a simple and commonly understand word to identify any biases sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #233

Yeah. And is so difficult to type… Andrea Mitchell wife of Alan Greenspan. Luminous Animal Jan 2016 #235

What did you think of what she said to Sanders about his ad? sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #236

pfffft ......... nobody cares about polly7 Jan 2016 #240

I expected exactly this polly, lol. Mission accomplished as they say. Thread got kicked, people sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #244

Yes it is. Her name is Andrea Mitchell. Luminous Animal Jan 2016 #17

Why is it demeaning? I do not feel demeaned when people call me Mrs. and my husband's last JDPriestly Jan 2016 #115

Her name isn't Mrs. Greenspan, it's Andrea Mitchell. cui bono Jan 2016 #201

I have to agree with you on this one Justin. cui bono Jan 2016 #199

Oh, the drama! DisgustipatedinCA Jan 2016 #241

Yeah ....... I just had to do a search. There are pages and PAGES that show it polly7 Jan 2016 #242

Don't engage. frylock Jan 2016 #8

see post 12, lol :p JonLeibowitz Jan 2016 #14

ha! frylock Jan 2016 #20

Well done Autumn Jan 2016 #24

Huh? DJ13 Jan 2016 #5

Don't take the bait. frylock Jan 2016 #9

Which woman is being demeaned? And please, women are sick to death of the 'poor me, I'm a female, sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #13

While trashing another human being you could at least use the name she goes by. hrmjustin Jan 2016 #27

How is it trashing a woman to address her by her husband's name? I have never been ashamed or sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #38

Too cute by half Sabrina. hrmjustin Jan 2016 #53

Right. She is a journalist and her husband is Greenspan, I have no problem reminding Autumn Jan 2016 #57

I wonder if it would be "sexist" to call James Carville James Matalin... cascadiance Jan 2016 #203

Go right on ahead and do so if you wish. Autumn Jan 2016 #204

For the same reason as I addressed Mitchell by her husband's name, it not be sexist. IT would inform sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #230

No she isn't Mrs. Greenspan dsc Jan 2016 #69

The Greenspans are Divorced? sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #88

Are you saying a woman has to take a man's name if they marry? JTFrog Jan 2016 #122

marriage doesn't make a woman the property dsc Jan 2016 #139

Sure kenfrequed Jan 2016 #158

then say that dsc Jan 2016 #162

I did say that. But in a much shorter way. So what is your objection to identifying her possible sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #234

if I am not an asshole and my husband is not an asshole, I would prefer to be recognized by my own Luminous Animal Jan 2016 #79

As a woman, i have to say that if my husband was an asshole, there IS a way out, I would divorce him sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #92

She is an asshole in her OWN RIGHT. No need to diminish her own assholeness by erasing her name. Luminous Animal Jan 2016 #98

It's about changing the subject AgingAmerican Jan 2016 #171

Her name is Andrea Mitchell. Calling her Mrs. Greenspan presumes she is a mere extension of the MAN Luminous Animal Jan 2016 #32

Thank you! hrmjustin Jan 2016 #36

During the 2008 campaign, I found myself in the embarrassing position of defending Luminous Animal Jan 2016 #44

Agreed! hrmjustin Jan 2016 #45

Mr and Mrs Greenspan are public figures. The connection between Wall St and our so-called 'news' sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #47

No woman is referred to Mrs. (husbands last name) unless that is THEIR CHOICE. NOBODY. Luminous Animal Jan 2016 #62

I would not dream of calling her that were I to meet her personally. SusanCalvin Jan 2016 #71

I am Mrs. _______, my husband's last name. JDPriestly Jan 2016 #119

You have to opt in not out to change your name. It's not automatic. JTFrog Jan 2016 #166

It's been a long, long time, but I think you are right because my Social Security card has my JDPriestly Jan 2016 #188

a woman Rosa Luxemburg Jan 2016 #25

Read. hrmjustin Jan 2016 #31

Are you saying that Andrea Mitchell is not a woman? Luminous Animal Jan 2016 #35

Yeah, that must be it! AgingAmerican Jan 2016 #48

Would I be demeaning call Hillary Mrs. Clinton? I like Hillary and would not want to offend. The Wielding Truth Jan 2016 #73

Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton uses Clinton in her full name, so no, it would not be demeaning. n/t JTFrog Jan 2016 #167

It's only sexist if the individual says so? aspirant Jan 2016 #174

I think you are arguing just to argue. JTFrog Jan 2016 #176

If we call her Mrs. Greenspan just how are we forcing her ("must") to change her name? aspirant Jan 2016 #177

The fact that Andrea Mitchell is married to Alan Greenspan... ljm2002 Jan 2016 #74

^^^THIS^^^ SusanCalvin Jan 2016 #81

Yep. zeemike Jan 2016 #96

Yes - ty 840high Jan 2016 #106

Exactly. It's so obvious. senz Jan 2016 #117

How hard is it to say "Alan Greenspan's wife"? a2liberal Jan 2016 #121

It seems like a fine point to me... ljm2002 Jan 2016 #125

I think that's only half the criticism a2liberal Jan 2016 #127

Why hasn't Mrs. Clinton aspirant Jan 2016 #129

Because she chose to take her husband's last name a2liberal Jan 2016 #130

If I choose to aspirant Jan 2016 #134

No, she did NOT take his name when she got married - she only did it later, when she thought it kath Jan 2016 #224

That may be a2liberal Jan 2016 #227

The charge made that it was 'sexist and demeaning' to address women by their husband's name, The sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #232

Here's what I don't get a2liberal Jan 2016 #237

Exactly. treestar Jan 2016 #145

'pseudo feminist outrage'! exactly that nonsense has been rejected by a majority of feminists, many sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #136

what BS treestar Jan 2016 #144

No one is judging her by her spouse... ljm2002 Jan 2016 #150

why should she have to mention who her husband is treestar Jan 2016 #152

" Men don't have to tell who their wives are"... ljm2002 Jan 2016 #153

Baloney no reporter or even TV pundit should have to do that treestar Jan 2016 #160

Not really. She demeaned herself when she married "Grand Nagus Greenspan." TrollBuster9090 Jan 2016 #101

"Grand Nagus Greenspan" progressoid Jan 2016 #214

Thanks! Grand Nagus Greenspan works almost as well as Roger "Baron Harkonnen" Ailes. TrollBuster9090 Jan 2016 #225

Instantly trying to change the subject AgingAmerican Jan 2016 #170

It seems as if Clinton is suggesting, she can take their money and it's meaningless. Jefferson23 Jan 2016 #7

She revealed herself. How cosy the relationship between our so-called 'news' media and Big Money. sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #23

Shameless and I recall she did the same with Eliot Spitzer, who unfortunately was Jefferson23 Jan 2016 #43

Yes, hypocrisy at its best, as Andrea tries to hide her connection to the now notorious sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #54

I didn't know. polly7 Jan 2016 #60

Lol, many people don't know that Andrea is the wife of the notorious Alan Greenspan. As a woman who sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #75

It sure makes it all more understandable for me, and yes ... you probably would have been! polly7 Jan 2016 #82

No, you are fine. I actually am thrilled with the response frankly. To see people on DU actually sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #100

If I hadn't seen 'Greenspan' in your post and then that strange first reaction to it, polly7 Jan 2016 #181

What this is has now been identified by women all over the country as 'faux feminism' sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #185

Mrs Greenspan? I suppose I can see both sides of how that is used to mock her and Jefferson23 Jan 2016 #77

. SusanCalvin Jan 2016 #84

She and he are public figures. She has reported on people like Elliot Spitzer, the Sherriff of sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #87

She is unprofessional, if she had recused herself I would respect that. Jefferson23 Jan 2016 #89

"her married name"? a2liberal Jan 2016 #123

People are entitled to their own opinions. I am of the opinion that language is for the purpose sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #132

Because it's not her fucking "married name". JTFrog Jan 2016 #124

"antiquated and sexist" aspirant Jan 2016 #126

And as far as I know, Chelsea still goes by Chelsea Clinton. JTFrog Jan 2016 #135

So how respectful is aspirant Jan 2016 #141

About the same as BO (endured that one during Obama's candidacy). JTFrog Jan 2016 #156

So Bernie and BHO should endure aspirant Jan 2016 #164

There are plenty of things to attack her for. JTFrog Jan 2016 #165

"sexist crap" includes both genders aspirant Jan 2016 #168

Sure, people are free to engage in sexist attacks on DU. JTFrog Jan 2016 #169

Mrs Greenspan (my free choice) is free to call herself Andrea Mitchell anytime. aspirant Jan 2016 #173

Yes, sexist attacks are not difficult. JTFrog Jan 2016 #175

Mrs. Clinton doesn't consider it a sexist attack on herself aspirant Jan 2016 #178

Is she or is she not married to Alan Greenspan? I don't CARE whether she has adapted the name sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #183

You get nothing. JTFrog Jan 2016 #186

No you don't get it. My priorities are to see the best possible Representative of the People sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #193

What I have seen JTFrog Jan 2016 #196

Awesome hard hitting ad. Easy answer. Autumn Jan 2016 #10

what a fail, Joe Shlabotnik Jan 2016 #11

Great ad! He really really has great people working for him. Fast Walker 52 Jan 2016 #16

I'm more shocked Mrs. Greenspan didn't first think it was about her hubby. jillan Jan 2016 #21

It's just great that she immediately thought of Hillary Jarqui Jan 2016 #37

Well, normally if a woman wants to go by her own name, I'm fine with that. But when a woman sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #61

^^^^THIS^^^^ SusanCalvin Jan 2016 #72

Absolutely. Particularly in light of how she handles herself. nt Jarqui Jan 2016 #78

Most people now think "Wall Street sycophant" when they see the name Hillary. reformist2 Jan 2016 #29

That is a great ad. nt. polly7 Jan 2016 #33

I plead guilty to using "Mrs. Greenspan" the same way, SusanCalvin Jan 2016 #58

That is precisely what I wanted to say above. Bonobo Jan 2016 #66

Bernie's new ad is apparently hitting a nerve. It didn't even need to mention Hillary 99th_Monkey Jan 2016 #64

Sexist BS. She's not "Mr.s Greenspan". MeNMyVolt Jan 2016 #80

OK. SusanCalvin Jan 2016 #85

Just stop using women for political purposes, that is sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #94

I don't think it's fair to single out how they are using women for political purposes. Bonobo Jan 2016 #138

Sanders runs an ad about one issue. Hillary's media minions start pouting Doctor_J Jan 2016 #83

Mrs Greenspan is what she needs to be called. jalan48 Jan 2016 #86

This message was self-deleted by its author kath Jan 2016 #90

Absolutely full disclosure when you are in a position of trust. I wonder why people think sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #108

Why do I think of horses when I see a saddle? Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #91

I like that Mrs Greenspan actually made the connection for anyone who didn't make it sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #112

The problem is that it is not her name. Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #143

"not her name" aspirant Jan 2016 #148

Mamy consider it demeaning. Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #149

and many don't "consider it demeaning" aspirant Jan 2016 #151

If you don't understand the disrespect then you are incapable of understanding my argument. Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #154

What a cop out. aspirant Jan 2016 #155

Some people would not have a problem with the "N word" either. Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #159

Mrs. Greenspan = the "N word" ....beyond LOL aspirant Jan 2016 #161

I didn't say that. Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #163

The reason you can't explain is because it is not demeaning to use the word Mrs, nor has it sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #226

Maybe some think aspirant Jan 2016 #113

sabrina, do you have a link to that clip, please? I saw a snippet of it on the evening "news" and kath Jan 2016 #93

I saw it on the news too, and haven't seen a clip yet, but I'm sure someone will put it up on sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #97

Thanks. I spent some time searching for it a little while ago, with no luck. kath Jan 2016 #99

Here's the link thesquanderer Jan 2016 #211

Thanks so much. bernie handled himself very well (like he always does with the media assholes) kath Jan 2016 #223

Goldman Sachs. Speaking fees. Brilliant ad! NRaleighLiberal Jan 2016 #95

Yes,and Mrs Greenspan inadvertently filled in the blanks that Bernie left out! Lol! sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #102

Yup! SoapBox Jan 2016 #104

It is a brilliant ad, never mentioned Hillary or her campaign. Mrs Greenspan did though sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #105

Let's see aspirant Jan 2016 #103

I love the ad. Mrs. Greenspan may have a point of view. Anyway, Bernie has dressed her JDPriestly Jan 2016 #114

Lol, well, this is why I believe in full disclosure when someone is in her position as a 'trusted' sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #116

It mentions "Goldman Sachs" and "Speaking Fees" so that's obviously Hillary.... Spitfire of ATJ Jan 2016 #118

Well, yes, it did. But if Hillary were the ONLY one doing it, it wouldn't be a problem. sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #120

In Mrs. Greenspan's circle it's no big deal to get a six figure fee for flapping your gums. Spitfire of ATJ Jan 2016 #128

Sanders' questions to the "reporter" saltpoint Jan 2016 #137

Poifect! Fumesucker Jan 2016 #140

every time someone tries to make bernie eat a shit sandwich... tk2kewl Jan 2016 #142

HUGE K & R !!! - THANK YOU !!! WillyT Jan 2016 #146

The truth always sounds like an attack to those accustomed to lies. nt raouldukelives Jan 2016 #147

Dear NBC News: It's Time For A Talk About Mrs. Greenspan Go Vols Jan 2016 #187

It reminded me of a Columbo episode. mhatrw Jan 2016 #191

Lol, it did actually. She actually did for Bernie, connected Hillary to Wall St, what he didn't do sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #194

Can we please not call Andrea Mitchell Mrs. Greenspan? cui bono Jan 2016 #198

I consider it sexist and demeaning to all the women who are ALSO women in their right, like me and sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #206

But Andrea Mitchell didn't choose to use her husband's name. It's about her choice. cui bono Jan 2016 #207

And many of us women did and have just been insulted and again NOT LISTENED TO here on DU sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #209

I have to disagree with you on this one sabrina. cui bono Jan 2016 #216

Actually it's rigged by their clients nt Depaysement Jan 2016 #202

Best ad yet! TIME TO PANIC Jan 2016 #205

Her name is not Mrs. Greenspan... SidDithers Jan 2016 #208

Hey, Sid how are you doing?? Haven't seen you for a long time. Thanks for kicking my thread and sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #210

Woosh...nt SidDithers Jan 2016 #212

Most people already know that Andrea Mitchell is married Alan Greenspan. She's never... George II Jan 2016 #218

I have a problem with our Corporate Media and all the Wall St connections that control sabrina 1 Jan 2016 #228

Brother Sid! So good to see you here. You're back, I'm back, we're all back. DisgustipatedinCA Jan 2016 #243

LOL n/t passiveporcupine Jan 2016 #213

Andrea Mitchell goes by her OWN name, why do you refer to her as "Mrs. Greenspan"? George II Jan 2016 #217

Mrs. and Mr. Andrea Mitchell: snort Jan 2016 #219

Is this Mrs Mitchell and her boy toy? aspirant Jan 2016 #222

That's him? polly7 Jan 2016 #239

Mrs. Greenspan, Mrs. Greenspan, Mrs. Greenspan mhatrw Jan 2016 #220

Lol! I love how people defend these people under the pretect that they are defending women. sabrina 1 Feb 2016 #248

of and for Wall Street amborin Feb 2016 #247