In an interview (via HuffPost) with Sirius Radio's Bill Geddie, Time Magazine's Mark Halperin said the following:
"BILL GEDDIE: Haven't we heard all along that [John Edwards] doesn't like [Hillary Clinton], haven't we heard this?
MARK HALPERIN: Yes, that's right. And I can tell you, he's really
skeptical of her ability to be the kind of president he wants. But, he
kinda thinks Obama is..he thinks Obama is kind of a pussy.He has real
questions about Obama's toughness, his readiness for the office.he has
real doubts about Obama, not just as a president, but as a general
To me that looks like a pretty honest and unvarnished opinion, and I think there is a lot of truth to it. Except for the fact that pussy is not the most elegant way top describe it, Barack Obama's spine is fair game. Do we not want someone who will stand up for whats right and not make compromises in the name of bipartisanship that will further damage this nation? Or are we all such pussies that we can't take a little criticism?
Yet here is what was posted on time.com today:
"I'm sorry. In a live radio interview this week, I used a word I
shouldn't have. The fact that I was conveying other people's words is
no excuse for my lapse in judgment. It won't happen again." -- Mark
Why is this even worth taking time to discuss. If Mr. Halperin thinks that Edwards thinks that Obama is a pussy (I think Edwards does have that concern, and to be honest that is my main worry about Obama as well) he should be able to say it. What is the point of all these coy pc games about controlling language? I really think its time for every one to get off there hight horses. People are entitled to their opinions, and should be free to express them using an vocabulary they feel necessary without being forced to apologize.