What I am saying is that I have seen enough of what Eve Ensler has promoted in the past to know that she has an agenda and everything she touches serves to advance that agenda.
Good grief, dude. Not everything has some deep underlying 'message'.
Well, I would agree with you...except, they brought in the author of the 'Vagina Monologues", Eve Ensler, to consult on making the film. You do not bring her in unless you are putting in some deep underlying message which she would approve of. For that matter, Eve Ensler would not have consented to consult on the film unless she agreed with the message.
OH yes, look how well those "smart" people have solved the problems of Baltimore and Detroit. Liberals have been running those cities for as long as I have been alive, yet the problems keep getting worse. Perhaps it is time to try something different?
As for your example of the DC metro area, perhaps you have not noticed, but the overwhelming majority of the people living there are liberals and vote for the Democratic Party.
Liberals are stereotypically the party that wants progressive solutions to everything, and prefer spending tax money making the bulk of the people dependent on the government and unable to take care of themselves so that the elites can enjoy a lavish lifestyle at the expense of everyone else.
Having sex or not with Monica Lewinsky had beans to do with whether he forced himself on Jennifer Flowers...
Way to go on trying to mislead people about what happened. Bill Clinton did not perjure himself in a lawsuit about forcing himself on Jennifer Flowers (which of course never happened, since Jennifer Flowers was the woman he had a several years affair with).
However, Bill Clinton DID perjure himself in the case where Paula Jones sued him for sexual harassment. That was why his law license was suspended and why he was held in contempt of court. As to the woman he forced himself on, the only one I know of for sure was Juanita Broderick. The Anonymous Coward who replied to you did a much more thorough rebuttal of your post.
I'm reminded of hurricanes and how the public viewed them in the US prior to the introduction of the modern naming convention,
Considering that naming hurricanes dates back to at least `1825 I think you are mistaken. More importantly, our current system dates back to just after World War II (although the naming convention has changed several times since then). Which means that the practice of naming hurricanes was instituted at the same time that we instituted a practice of tracking them so as to give advance warning and call for evacuation on anything other than a local scale. Basically, before we started naming hurricanes you were unlikely to know one was coming far enough in advance to make reasonable plans for evacuation. There are complicated reasons why people have changed how they react to evacuation warnings regarding hurricanes, but naming hurricanes plays an insignificant rile in that change.