“Hitchens Watch: We Watch the Loonies, So You Don’t Have To” should be the updated title for this website. As part of our current effort to diversify our portfolio, I have monitored Tammy Bruce. Dear readers, you do not know how I have suffered while listening to her on-line radio program.
As a self-described conservative feminist, Bruce provided a unique perspective on May 2 on the assassination of Osama bin Laden. Incorrectly reporting the death of one of the Mesdames bin Laden, she said:
“An older son was killed, the bastard himself, a courier, and a woman, who is believed to have been the freak’s youngest wife and whom someone grabbed to use as a human shield. Yeah, well, it didn’t work out that well. If you’re going to be married to Osama bin Laden, you’ve chosen your level. I give women a lot more agency than others do, and if you’re in that house, I don’t care. There’s a lot of other women who weren’t in that house, and if you’re the woman in that house, now you’re not.”
I agree that feminism gives women agency, but one does not give unarmed women agency by executing them in violation of all their rights as a human being, let alone international law. Unfortunately, Bruce did not stop there:
“We arrest something like twenty-two others. We get them alive, which includes six other of his children, two others wives, and four friends of the beast are arrested, at least…Others were arrested, were in the compound. Can you imagine the intelligence we’ve gathered?....Too bad we can’t waterboard them.”
Can you imagine the intelligence we could have gathered if the Navy SEALs had simply arrested bin Laden instead? In any case, the feminist movement has defended the physical and psychological integrity of all women. The Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the infliction of “cruel and unusual punishments.” In their phrasing, the framers of the Constitution did not include any exceptions. Philosophically, a true feminist would favor the application of this enlightened principle to all women, whether good or evil. Of course, we know nothing about bin Laden’s wives. Please note that Bruce did not exclude children from her waterboarding fantasy.
Why would a “feminist” offer such vile commentary? An examination of Bruce’s estrangement from the National Organization for Women might provide some answers. As president of the Los Angeles chapter of NOW, Bruce was a prominent critic of O.J. Simpson, an abusive man who was wrongly acquitted of the murder of his former wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ron Goldman. In her book, The New Thought Police: Inside the Left’s Assault on Free Speech and Free Minds, Bruce bragged about her campaign against Simpson. She coordinated rallies against Simpson throughout the trial period, as well as a march that drew more than 5,000 people after the verdict. She was also a constant media presence, which is how she got into trouble. Eventually, the members of the NOW board censured her for making “inflammatory, racially insensitive statements.”
At the first reading, some of Bruce’s comments may seem innocuous. She called for “a needed break from all that talk of racism. Ours was a clear position and certainly less contentious. We focused on anti-violence and on the victims.”
Indeed, I would have agreed with Bruce at the time. I also believed that race was a diversionary issue. If you believe that the Los Angeles Police Department framed Simpson in a racist conspiracy, I would advise you to consult Outrage: The Five Reasons Why O.J. Simpson Got Away With Murder by Vincent Bugliosi, the legendary prosecutor of Charles Manson.
Appearing on the ABC News program Nightline in response to the verdict, Bruce argued that “what we need to teach our children is..not about racism but…about violence against women.”
Of course, Bruce denied that her attitude was racist, later writing: “This country is not at a loss for organizations working for black civil rights, but we are starving for a truly feminist effort that devotes strict, focused attention to women’s rights.”
Whether there are enough African-American organizations in this country, her perspective was too narrow. Attempting to differentiate sexism from racism was an impossible and idiotic task. By ignoring racism, Bruce was ignoring the victims of racism who should have vitally mattered to NOW, black women.
Hypothetically, a feminist organization could do good work by advocating the promotion of women at high-powered law firms and elite universities, but such advocacy would mostly benefit affluent white women. The disadvantaged and poorly educated residents of a predominantly black ghetto would gain nothing, and have no reason to join such an organization. In the end, this hypothetical organization would fail because all progressive movements must form coalitions in order to advance. Certainly, NOW did fail when the NAACP California State Conference boycotted the “Fight the Right” march in San Francisco in 1996. Although the women’s rights group had carefully planned the march, the NAACP withdrew because Bruce had remained at her official post.
I suspect that Bruce possessed a flaw in her character far more significant than ideological narrowness. According to a report from the Associated Press, Bruce refused to appear on a television program about the Simpson case because she did not care “to argue with a bunch of black women.” She claimed the remark had been distorted, but why would the television producers have lied?
In fact, the evidence suggests a pattern of dishonesty on Bruce’s part. She alleged that NOW neglected to invite her to the board meeting that would vote on her possible censure: “We were not given notice that we were on the agenda…It breaks my heart. I can’t even begin to tell you.”
Kim Gandy, the executive vice president of NOW, contradicted Bruce’s assertion: “I personally told her that it was going to be a topic of discussion. I urged her to come. She said, ‘I may come.’ I said, ‘You need to come.’”
In the July/August 1996 issue of Ms. Magazine, journalist Helen Zia apparently resolved the controversy: “When Bruce is asked if this means one of them is lying, she grows teary and says softly, ‘It’s sad that it’s come down to this.’” It was convenient for Bruce to avoid answering the question.
If Bruce is not prejudiced against African-Americans, it is difficult to explain her hatred for President Barack Obama. On her radio show, she constantly refers to him as “the dumb bastard” and “Urkel.” Steve Urkel was the nerdy character on the old sitcom Family Matters. As far as I can determine, the only trait the president shares with the fictional geek is his blackness. Now, I do not like Obama myself, but Bruce’s attacks even strike me as petty and mean-spirited.
Nevertheless, Bruce reserves most of her venom for First Lady Michelle Obama. Seeking to encourage black teenagers to work hard in school, Mrs. Obama said that she had applied herself despite the teasing of her peers. Bruce exploded while serving as a guest host on The Laura Ingraham Show:
“We’ve got trash in the White House. Trash is a thing that is colorblind. It can cross all eco-ecosocionomic kind of categories. You can work on Wall Street or work at the Wal-Mart. Trash are people who use other people to get things, who patronize others, who consider you bitter and clingy.”
It seems that Bruce does not want black kids to perform well in school. I do not understand precisely what Bruce was trying to say, but I am willing to bet that Mrs. Obama knows the correct word is “socioeconomic.”
I believe that Bruce has now extended her contempt for African-Americans to women in general. The former abortion rights activist is now extremely judgmental about women who have terminated their pregnancies. Although she claims to be pro-choice, “it doesn’t mean…that abortion is something that women should be proud of, or should seek out, and….with everything we have when it comes to birth control, if you’re marching into an abortion clinic, you have failed.”
00:02:03
Even today, no foolproof method of birth control exists. If you do not believe me, read Our Bodies, Ourselves. Sexual gratification is an essential tenet of the feminist philosophy. A woman who cannot control her own reproductive system is an unliberated human being. By determining their own destinies, women who have had an abortion have not failed; they have succeeded.
Bruce does not stop at condemnation, however. “I am pro-choice,” Tammy said on her program on January 20, “and I think, yes, we need to stop using federal funds for abortion…and if you…need to have an abortion, you pay for it, or let the guy pay for it.”
Her attitude clearly indicates her indifference to poor women. Since Bruce believes only women with money should exercise biological self-determination, her pro-choice position is hypocritical. Childbirth is ten times more dangerous to a woman’s life than a safe, legal abortion. A pregnant woman should only risk her life because she wants to be a mother. Surely, a sincere feminist would care about the lives of her fellow women, and willingly express that care with her tax dollars.
On other issues, Bruce has made a decided move to the right, and she makes Christopher Hitchens look like a master logician by comparison. The former president of the International Monetary Fund, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, has recently been charged with rape. On her program on May 16, Bruce provided a very curious analysis:
“This guy’s a socialist, so he’s managing the redistribution of wealth on the global level, and he attempts to rape a maid in a hotel…This is who these people are. This is the left. They feel…their sense of entitlement, their lives are based on the fact that some people deserve more than others, and that there should be some arbitrary, artificial construct of life…when he tries to rape a maid in New York, this is a guy who has gotten away with a lot.”
Admittedly, Strauss-Kahn is a member of the Socialist party in France. On the other hand, Moshe Katsav, the former president of Israel, is a convicted rapist. Will Bruce now smear all Zionists as rapists? Considering her ignorant denial of the Palestinian community as a distinct society and culture, I predict that she will not.
“The enemies of intolerance cannot be tolerant." • "If it is an offense to justice to hold people who may have been victims of mistaken identity or of vendettas by other factions, then it is also an offense to justice to release psychopathic killers who believe that they have divine permission to throw acid in the faces of girls who want to attend school." • "Don't be such a lesbian!
”
