Criticizing Elizabeth Warren’s "angry" rhetoric is not just unacceptable, it is sexist. At least that’s the contention of Mika Brzezinski’s tantrum over Warren Buffett’s remarks about the Massachusetts Senator on Tuesday’s Morning Joe.
What terrible misogynistic screed did Buffett unleash that made Brzezinski so upset? He observed that Warren "would do better if she was less angry and demonized less” and he “believe[s] in hate the sin and love the sinner."
To the average person this is as harmless as criticism can get, but Brzezinski insisted “I think that’s sexist. I think it’s preposterous. I think her message is angry because the middle class are angry in this country. And she is tapping into something that they feel and she’s also extremely nice when she’s talking to people about this as well.”
When Scarborough asked how this is sexist, she replied:
BRZEZINSKI: He’s the third richest man in the world...and men can sit there and say ‘don't be angry to women’ and, quite frankly, they're allowed to be as angry as they want and slam tables that they need to to it get their point across effectively.
Elizabeth Warren, whenever she gets a little bit upset and talks about how people in America at this day-- in this day and age when we've already seen the effects of "too big to fail," they're not getting a fair shot and she gets heated about it and passionate about it and every time that happens she gets a standing ovation.
SCARBOROUGH: Well-
BRZEZINSKI: So I think Warren Buffett’s the only person who has a problem with her quote "anger."
Eager to understand Brzezinski’s new rules of sexism, Scarborough wondered, "So whenever you tell me not to get angry then I can accuse you of being sexist?"
Ever the gentle teacher, Brzezinski explained, "No, because men are allowed to be angry and it's considered strong."
However that works out, we can be grateful for Brzezinski’s teaching that one’s reputation as a gentleman depends in large part on whether or not he criticizes Elizabeth Warren.
