Apparently, the writers at The New York Times donâ€™t read the front page of their own newspaper. Rather than delve into the hard hitting questions facing the nation such as what to do about the increasing instability in Afghanistan, the strategy to repair a still lackluster economy or how much debt we really are poised to pass onto future generations, one Times journo decided to explore the real hand-wringer of the day thatâ€™s keeping Americans awake at night: is there too much testosterone in the White House??
The article was sparked by recent outrage from womenâ€™s groups (and apparently one very isolated, out of touch, culturally delusional Times employee) over an all-male basketball game hosted by the president. The author writes that Obama is an â€œunabashed First Guyâ€™s Guyâ€� who boasts â€œencyclopedic knowledge of college hoopsâ€� (as if to imply that an impressive aptitude in sports trivia is somehow the measure of a man and that George Bush and Bill Clinton were somehow presidential girlie men who, if spontaneously interrupted, could be caught painting their toe nails while listening to old Liza records).
The piece continues:
â€œThe technical foul over the all-male game has become a nagging concern for a White House that has battled an impression dating to the presidential campaign that Mr. Obamaâ€™s closest advisers form a boysâ€™ club and that he is too frequently in the company of only men â€” not just when playing sports, but also when making big decisions.â€�
What impression? And who exactly is the president battling this faux â€œimpressionâ€� against besides The National Organization for Women (NOW) who called basketball game â€œtroublingâ€�?
Isnâ€™t the real concern that the president recoils when it comes to making any big decision?
As someone who is frequently critical of the president, a female, and a conservative, insinuating that a handicap of his is the fictional perception that he is operating an exclusive chest bumping, fraternity like good ol' boys club is mindboggling, even to me.
Obama has given women notable placement in his administration. While militant maniacs seek to destroy us abroad, Hillary Clinton is our Secretary of State and Susan Rice is a Senior Foreign Policy Advisor. As we face a global pandemic Kathleen Sebelius, the Secretary of Health and Human Services and Janet Napolitano, the Homeland Security Secretary, are faced with how to keep citizens safe. From Valerie Jarrett to his wife Michelle, Obama has elevated females to positions of power seeking their leadership on some of the most serious and sensitive of issues.
Even the White Houseâ€™s official Fox News basher, Anita Dunn, has been given a megaphone with which to whine (a bizarre one, but a megaphone nonetheless). Though I disagree with these women ideologically, itâ€™s indisputable that they are, in fact, women.
Perhaps most importantly while these females try to do their important jobs, having a campaign for affirmative action in the White House in the midst of all the other problems we face seems misguided. When I look at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue I donâ€™t see Greek letters on the front and a keg in the back. I see a dark cloud overtop.
With unemployment on the brink of hitting 10 percent, escalating violence in the Middle East, and a ballooning national debt, the media should be focused on the presidentâ€™s ability to put points on the only board that matters using the team he surrounds himself with off the courts.
Instead, the "Gray Lady" and those on ABCâ€™s "The View" reliably and unsurprisingly lambasted the president for not letting Hillary suit up that day. Elizabeth Hasslebeck insinuated that if Obamaâ€™s daughters looked out the window and saw an all male basketball game, the president had somehow failed them as a father.
â€œHe presents himself as a feminist, so the hypocrisy is glaring,â€� insisted Joy Behar.
Girlfriends: how about discussing contradictions that count, such as Obama campaigning on balanced budgets but now breaking the bank? Or his crafting of ethics laws to keep lobbyists out of government but then changing course? Or his waffling on sending more troops to wage a war that he called a necessity?
Itâ€™s insulting to females everywhere to deduce that because our gender wasnâ€™t represent to shoot three pointers that day, the president is somehow a misogynist â€œtowel snapper,â€� who puts us at a disadvantage, and is corrupting his children.
These types of temper tantrums undermine women, distract and reverse decades of progress. As long as women and men view every issue through a prism of gender, females end up marginalized. Women have made tremendous progress. We should embrace it, not seek to disprove it. Real women donâ€™t complain or pout, we play ball, whether the president invites us or not.
Andrea Tantaros is a conservative columnist and FoxNews.com contributor. Follow her on Twitter: @AndreaTantaros.