Sexist web of infighting circling Jarrett

Still more post election lashing out by the Liberal Left, now to defend the first female of the White House. Not Michele but Valerie Jarrett.

Enter old strategist turned pundit from the Clinton era, Donna Brazile, who seems to think Jarrett is being martyred by the media and pundits — i.e. scapegoated. Golly, Valerie is like the most powerful female in the White House, and she is exempt from critique?

Veteran strategist Brazile writes on CNN:

No sooner was the hunt on for a fall guy for the Democratic midterm losses than some in the press predictably went after a fall gal — President Barack Obama’s senior adviser, Valerie Jarrett.

Reporter Carol Felsenthal in Politico and others have decided that the best way to address Democratic losses is to have a “shake-up” at the White House, and the person they most want to see shaken out is Jarrett.

She is pilloried for everything from run-ins with other staffers to playing herself in a cameo role on CBS’ “The Good Wife.” That’s how much they object to the job Valerie Jarrett is doing — they don’t even want her doing it in the fictional realm. The Politico story, headlined “Fire Valerie Jarrett,” even notes that “nobody knows precisely what Jarrett does in the White House.” But whatever it is, it’s wrong enough that she needs to be fired.

(she suggested Holder receives more palatable criticism than Jarrett)

So let the friendly fire begin. The Politico story said:

” The morning after the elections, Democrats and their top staffers were hopping mad, blaming Obama and, by extension, his staff for the defeat…. We’re at that point in an already long-toothed presidency when things inside really need to change.”

No scorn like the scorn of a Liberal.

If the stories all confirm it, Valerie was the one holding down the White House during Benghazi attack. That’s when Obama’s whereabouts were a complete mystery. She was the one who went down to the situation room, according to reports, where the stand down order would have been given. Someone in such an importantly critical role, as top adviser to Obama at every move, duly invites criticism on herself. She was likely key in the video blame strategy. She was instrumental in the bin Laden mission delays on a few occasions, for fear of problems. She’s instrumental on most appointments.

But the critical point with Jarrett is that she is there at every turn. She’s been there with all the controversy, when these policies that were apparently on the ballot — which are all politically driven — were made. She is one of the designers and would have been privy to the Obamacare lies.

Yet Brazile has problems with people picking on blaming her for the fallout post election. If anyone deserves much of the responsibility for our political state, it would be her. (not that there ever is accountability) If ever there was a deserving target for criticism other than Obama it would be Jarrett.

So Brazile does what Liberals do best, turn it into a sexist attack on Jarrett. All the criticism of Valerie is just because of her sex. They lost the election, as many people are growing weary of their war on women mantra. There must be a major estrogen shortage, and women are now on the protected species list. Now she defends one of the chief advisers using the standard “sexist” dribble. Maybe they just haven’t gotten new talking points out yet. Dirty Harry must have bestowed his gun to Donna Brazile. She has a round chambered and the hammer back. She just can’t decide who to aim at first.

Brazile’s piece in CNN is a tortured battlefield of straw men bloodying every trail. It’s a nasty job but someone has to do it. From comparisons with Karl Rove to Condi Rice and back to Hillary Clinton, she lathers on the self-serving criticism of how Jarrett has been skewered by zealots, while knighting her to martyr status. Forget the reality about why she has been a target of blame. The author of “Cooking With Grease” puts the blow torch under this entree, then doubles up on her famous sauce.

She then leans on the titan of spew, Maureen Dowd’s commentary on prior women, for evidence. She tries to pass it off as bipartisan sexism. It’s everywhere. In all the flurry, her grievous examples of “sexist” criticism came from her own kitchen — the Stalingrad Left. If those are her examples, the context is a bit lost. So she succeeded in pointing out the Left’s robust criticism of the ‘other sex’. That would be like turning the gun on herself, or her own allies. It ends up smelling more like friendly fire than a valid indictment of the vast right-wing conspiracy.

Always credited with being a smart gal with an instinct for politics, her diatribe sort of fell flat in baking.

So for all the valid Valerie criticism from various inside sources, Brazile chooses to turn it all into a montage on sexism. The author, Carol Felsenthal, rendered sexist as well. Maybe the problem is that it is also other women saying it.

It seems ironic that what Donna vilifies as a menial, sexist job as librarian is probably what Jarrett wants to spend the rest of her prestigious career/life immersed in – after creating the legacy. That doesn’t look like a sexist demotion to me. Considering all the details and Obama’s secrecy of records, it’s more like overseer of the vault. But I won’t hold my breath for any action.

Or maybe this was just Donna Brazile’s folksy way of telling Valerie, “call me.”

RightRing | Bullright