I happened to go to history.com this morning, just for the heck. I was reminded of the fact that long before Hillary Clinton seized the nation’s interest (and considerable support) as the first woman to ever even get close to winning her party’s nomination for president, there was Geraldine Ferraro.

She advanced further than Hillary — and this was 23 years ago, which made it no small feat. Unfortunately, she had a mediocre running mate (Geraldine was actually the vice-presidential candidate), and back then, no one could challenge Ronald Reagan and expect to come out on top. Still, it was a historic choice indeed.

But it got me to thinking, which is always dangerous. As I named a few great leaders I could think of off the top of my head, I realized that several of them were women. Women leading entire countries…but not the US. Why?

Anyway, these three powerful female leaders came to my mind:

Elizabeth I. During what we now call the “Elizabethan Age,” this young queen took Britain from poverty and isolation to success in commerce, the arts, and politics. Sure, she had help and advisers, but what leader didn’t/doesn’t? In a time when women were considered far from equals to men — nothing even close to it, actually — Elizabeth ruled with smarts and bravery, even in the face of blatant plots by rivals to assassinate her.

[This made the question of why women can't seem to get elected to lead America all the more interesting. What's the drawback? Puritan influence still haunting us after almost 400 years?]

Indira Gandhi has long been considered one of the most powerful leaders in history, male or female. She led the largest democracy in the world (India) and championed many causes for individual and religious tolerance and non-violent conflict resolution, while maintaining a confident presence in dealing with other world powers. She definitely had problems holding on to her office, but she still serves as an inspiration to women — especially Indian women, who had endured centuries of what we would call persecution at the hands of men.

And sadly, it was at the hands of the men Indira Gandhi trusted most — her bodyguards — that she became a martyr. They shot her down in her own garden on 31 October, 1984.

Trained as a research chemist and married with boy and girl twins, Margaret Thatcher began her political career in 1959 with her election to Parliament. She was the first woman elected Prime Minister in any European country, and the people elected her twice. She ranks #5 on the all-time longevity list of Prime Minister terms in office (the first one was arguably Robert Wolpole in 1721) at 11 years.

She proved to be a formidable opponent in the Falkland Islands invasion of 1982 (the Argentine invaders surrendered to Britain within two months), and never lost a step to the other two “big boys” in the world power structure; both Ronald Regan and Mikhail Gorbachev admired, respected and befriended her.

I found a quote from her that makes a whole lot of sense:

“If you just set out to be liked, you would be prepared to compromise on anything at any time, and you would achieve nothing.”

A lot of teachers could take that as heartfelt advice. But I digress.

The above is just a partial list, but you get the point. Why is it that other countries have no problem with electing woman leaders, but the US just can’t bring itself to do it? Props to Barack Obama & all, but let’s face it: he’s inexperienced and an unknown. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. And like it or not, people (especially Americans) are habitually loyal to what they know; the things in their comfort zones. Obama is definitely a stretch.

So again…why can’t a woman get elected to lead a country that prides itself on being an open, relevant, current, progressive world power?

Questions, questions, and so little coffee in my mug…

Fink out (to the kitchen).

In what Variety calls an “eye-poking Three Stooges act,” Bill O’Reilly of FOX News and Keith Olbermann of MSNBC are still going at it.

Spraying down the decks with testosterone, and trading endless “Oh, yeah? Well, take THAT!” barbs, their bosses have now been forced into it. Ladies and gentlemen, phone calls have been made. <<insert dramatic chord>>

Puh-leez.

Now don’t get me wrong. I concede that both of these donkeys are passionate about their beliefs. In fact, I used to like O’Reilly, back in the beginning days of his show. I thought that, for whatever his beliefs, he brought an unapologetic toughness that other interview shows lacked. But then he boarded the loony train. “Absolute power” and all that…

Same thing with Olbermann. He’s passionate, and most times, makes sense. But lately, his rants have become so personal in nature, he sounds more like a wackjob; out of control. It’s like, sweety, we know you think Bush is Satan, Stalin, H**ler, Mussolini and Dracula all rolled into one. Can we move on?

Both sides have their points, and they’re hired to air them. But then they muck it all up by playing what I call the “humanity” card. The “you’re not fit to show your face in public” (O’Reilly) and the “Worst Person in the World” thing from Olbermann. Slingin’ the mud, throwin’ the rocks. “You don’t think like me, so you’re sub-human and I hate you.” It’s ridiculous, truly.

I say that the discussion of two topics — namely, religion and politics — cause more animosity between otherwise civil and intelligent human beings than any other. Don’t you agree? They can so quickly and easily turn personal. That’s what is happening to Bill and Keith. It’s not about the issues anymore; it’s become a slugfest. Ain’t nobody winning this one.

Bottom line: Guys, it’s news. Granted, it’s important news and you’re paid to blather on about it, but it’s television, fuh cripesake. If I didn’t know better, I’d say that you’re both secretly enjoying this gargantuan elephant of a ratings grab…

But I know better, don’t I.

Fink out.

Am I in a mood this morning? Um, yeah.

Mavis and I were never allowed to shout “Shut up!” when we were kids. I can hear Mother: “Don’t say ’shut up.’ It’s not nice.”

Well, I’m not feeling very nice today, so I’ma tell somebody to shut up. To Mother, up in heaven: pay no attention to the following.

Al Sharpton - Shut up.

This guy is the adult version of the kid you remember back in school, who tattled on everyone for everything. He’s also got to be the busiest man on the planet. Sharpton must do nothing all day but listen to multiple talk shows on radio and television, and read political pundits by the thousands — just to see if anyone made a comment that might be construed as racist.

Mr. Sharpton apparently thinks that his fellow African Americans lack the mental fortitude to see that Don Imus is an idiot, and they need Al to intercede for them. If I were African American, I would be completely insulted. I’d wanna backhand Sharpton and tell him to go get a real job. [Yes, we know your ancestors were owned as slaves by the ancestors of Strom Thurmond. Get. Over. It.]

After the thing last year, and then adding on the comments from yesterday, yes, Imus can’t keep his mouth shut. But that’s why God gave us fingers: to change channels on the radio.

Quoth the Sharpton:

I find the inference of his remark disturbing because it plays into stereotypes. We will determine in the next day or so whether or not his remark warrants direct action on our part.”

Direct action? Direct action? Who is this guy? Fuh cripesake, stop worrying about some loudmouth moron on a radio show and focus on some real issues. You want to consider taking direct action because Imus said something you didn’t like? You call yourself an “activist” for African American issues, and you have time for this?

And don’t even get me started on the double standard issue. (”We can say the ‘N’ word and call women ‘hos’ and other filthy names, and openly degrade and exploit black women in music and videos…but only us.”) Where’s the direct action being taken on that score? I mean, honestly. Who says “boo” when black comedians openly ridicule “white people?” I’ve seen it on television a hundred times over the years, from Richard Pryor to Damon Wayans to Chris Rock. They say things like, “White folks do this…” or mimic some uncool, uncoordinated, uninformed and generally irrelevant nerd in reference to white people in general. That’s not a stereotype?

Can you see a white comedian pulling this in the reverse — and still walk away with a career? Feh.

See? You got me started. Look what you did.

Anyway.

Al - shut up. Focus on real problems, as opposed to getting all frothed up over the blatherings of an old man who fried his brain one too many times back in the 70s. He’s not worth your time.

Fink out (of coffee…can ya tell?).

There was a time when journalists didn’t blab every little tiny secret about a political candidate. They had a sort of “gentleman’s agreement,” whereby sordid details and human frailties (and possibly even bizarre behaviors) were not fodder for the national news.

Not so nowadays. From the Clinton-Lewinsky mess to Dick Cheney’s questionable business deals, everything’s fair game. Newbie politicians are immediately thrust into the turkey shoot of diggin’ up dirt. Case in point: this wackjob Jeremiah Wright has got to be making Barack Obama’s life plenty miserable — especially with the press dissecting every word they both utter as of late. Nothing’s sacred. Nothing’s secret.

Take marital infidelity, for instance. Was President Franklin Roosevelt’s affair with his wife’s secretary splattered all over the front page? No, but you can be sure that someone in the press knew about it.

And what about Dwight Eisenhower’s extramarital relationship with his secretary, Kay Summersby? The press were winking enablers back then. Imagine George W. Bush having an affair with his secretary. The boys from the press corps would be falling over each other trying to get the first pictures published.

Then there’s the Poster Boy of Presidential Philanderers: John F. Kennedy. Do you think all those midnight rendezvous with Marilyn Monroe, Kim Novak, Jayne Mansfield and Angie Dickinson were secret? I mean, how far can a president go without being seen? The newspaper guys were there — bet on it. They just didn’t make it the country’s business.

Truth is, some politicians are not model citizens by any stretch. I don’t think that necessarily makes them bad politicians. But they’re held up without mercy to public scrutiny, as if none of us has any faults. Richard Nixon was not a nice man, granted. But his worst political sin was breaking the hallowed Eleventh Commandment: Thou shalt not get caught. He was in good company, too. Remember Gary Hart?

I tell ya. The world is out of control.

In reading yesterday’s news about New York governor Eliot Spitzer being tied to a high-class prostitution ring, it got me to thinking.

Lord Acton had a point when he said, Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Interesting side note here…did you know that when Acton wrote that famous line, he was talking about the pope? Yep, and from the same letter, an even better quote: Great men are almost always bad men.

Making even more sense is a quote from the bible: Great men are not always wise. Job 32:9. Gee, Eliot…ya think?

Once again we are reminded of how far the powerful people of the world can fall when they become dizzy with the stuff. It’s an aphrodisiac that soon becomes a full-out addiction. Think of people who have “had it all,” so to speak, then ruined it by stupid decisions based on total disregard for responsible behavior because they just didn’t think the laws that bind the bourgeoisie like us applied to them. Below, we have the collection of usual suspects:

1. Saddam Hussein
2. Josef Stalin
3. A***f H****r (Sorry - you know who I mean, but I don’t want the search engines leading all the “Knot See” wackos here)
4. Lucifer (OK, so he wasn’t “people,” but you get the idea)
5. Mussolini

And you could probably add a bunch to that list. But what about people who are power addicts today? As several of my friends could tell you, they don’t have to operate on a national scale. Your own boss could be one of them, you know? I think sometimes that’s why bad bosses come and go so often - their own system of “leadership by intimidation” eventually renders them ineffective. Happens all the time.

It all comes down to the dangerous supposition that power equals infallibility, or some bizarre free pass from being accountable to someone. It raises the question: What was Spitzer thinking?

I’ve always thought that John F. Kennedy, were he president today and pulling the crap he got away with in 1962, would be roasted on a spit, civil rights rhetoric notwithstanding. I submit that he was just as power-hungry as Mussolini, and not at all the demigod he’s been made out to be. Only difference: the press weren’t as vicious.

Which brings me back to the opening of this post….nothing like having your proclivity for high-priced call girls trumpeted from the rooftops on CNN. The man simply wasn’t thinking.

Snorting lines of power can mess a brother up.