Even better, he has as his guest professional douchebag and author of The Man's No-Nonsense Guide to Women and Under the Clitoral Hood: How to Crank Her Engine Without Cash, Booze, or Jumper Cables (really; I couldn't make that up), Mark Rudov, to help answer that searing question.
And Rudov—who has previously appeared on Fox to helpfully explain that women are "untruthful, unfaithful, and unabashedly mercenary" and remind married bitchez that "sex is a requirement, not a reward"—performed splendidly in his role as sex and gender expert for The O'Reilly Factor.
O'REILLY: Tonight, we begin a brand new segment called, "He Said, She Said," where we'll deal with issues from a gender-based point of view. The segment will run every Friday, but we wanted to debut it tonight with a very provocative question: What is the downside of having a woman become president of the United States? […]If you're like me, you're probably wondering WTF a "female agenda" is. Well, fear not. Rudov is happy to edify us.
RUDOV: You mean besides the PMS and the mood swings, right?
…Well, you know, I'm joking. Of course, the main problem I have is if a woman has a female agenda. If she doesn't have a female agenda, if she just wants to be an executive for all the people, then all I care about is if she's qualified. And I have no qualms about having a female president. But if we take Hillary Clinton, she specifically does have a female agenda.
Hillary embodies the female agenda. She wants to be the feminist in chief. She represents women. It says so on her website. And a lot of women are voting for her because she's a woman.ZOMG!!!11!!!eleventy-one!!!111!!! She represents women?! And it says so right on her website?! Jebus H. Grumbles! SOMEBODY STOP HER!!!
I eagerly await O'Reilly and Mark Rudov exploring the downside of having a man become the president of the United States, and whether the men currently in the running, especially John McCain, have a male agenda.
[H/T to Shaker Corrie.]