“stop making your husband so mad” or “just try to reason with him”

Everyone forgets (or doesn’t know) that the Temperance movment had as much to do with women not wanting the men in their lives to get drunk and beat them all the time.

Yeah, there’s a focused effort in the RW media to rewrite what the historical record says about Nixon, Regan and McCarthy (every so often a ‘Actually, McCarthy was right about all those communists’ take floats around there). We got to be vigilant about keeping the facts of history alive.

The husband’s name is Steve.

Exactly this.

I read a biography of Nixon earlier this year and this line is essentially what was given. That is, the contemporary author mentioned to rumors, and that the press of the day wouldn’t go into ‘family matters’ like this, they way they would now.

Heck, in 1955, the #2 sitcom in the country used the husband’s repeated threats to beat his wife as a recurrent joke. “One of these days, Alice . . .” is literally the “Bazinga!” of 1955.

Yep. Even if these reporters could independently confirm solidly enough to publish about this, they’d have been hogpiled for “embarrassing” the president and Pat, “revealing a private family matter,” and so on. Nobody would have seriously considered it something important as far as political reportage.

Exactly. It’s imperative that we continue to discuss how the modern day conservative movement is from a poisoned tree. Trump isn’t the outsider making a mockery of it, he’s the grand fruition of it.

What is most stunning about this story is the realization that not only were these abuse allegations widely known among the journalists and members of the political class of the day, they were brushed off and deemed unimportant, irrelevant to what were considered more pressing political matters.

Is it? No one remembers Tricky Dick as a good guy. Maybe just throw a line of two about this in the history books and move on.  We kind of have out hands full with alive people.

I assume we’re both thinking of the same BS obituary of Yvonne Brill? God, that was a disgrace. I “loved” how the NYT doubled down by demonstrating the art of the tone deaf non-apology:

As a PR person and government in politics, I’ve gotten that version of the NYT response in many different forms. “You can’t expect us to include every single detail because some issues are so broad. We have space restrictions, you know.” Okay sure but all the flattering details you DO include somehow benefit white men…

Really interesting story, and definitely shows the ways in which the “Great Man” narrative (i.e., the idea that social change occurs through one or two individuals alone) can so easily erase the impact of women.

The NYT wanted it because she will bring readers.

Religious faith (according to the Bible) is supposed to based on evidence as well. One can reject that the evidence leads to a religious faith, just pointing out that the Biblical definition of faith embraces rather than rejects evidence. It’s essentially saying I have evidence of something I have not yet seen so I…

Look at all these anti-Christian sources you’ve cited, where non-Christians try to assert what Christians believe!

No, not particularly great literature. But, there are people out there who like to build upon tradition. So, for example, there may be someone who grew up going to church but doesn’t believe that heaven or hell are literal places, who wants to incorporate some of the philosophy of Christian writings throughout the…

The people that you are describing aren’t Christians. Not really.

It was hyperbole. But some things to consider: 1/3 of American children, 15 million in all, live without fathers according to the 2010 Census. Additionally, when fathers *are* present, they spend half as many hours with their children, on average, than women do in a given week according to an analysis by the Pew…