Karma, thy name is Bitch

Saturday, August 30th, 2008 · 38 Comments »

Barack Obama lost the election yesterday.

He sowed the seeds of his destruction himself many months ago, when he decided to exploit sexism and misogyny in his quest to defeat Hillary. Now John McCain will reap the harvest.

Back in June, BDBlue at Corrente wrote:

I have long believed the most dangerous thing about this primary was the misogyny, especially aimed at older women, running rampant unchecked by Obama or the Democratic Party. You can’t simply put that back up in its cage now that the nomination is over. That kind of hatred spewed into the culture is bound to affect the culture and change it in ways that are not positive.

Obama may very well want to stop this now, but I’m not sure this monster is still within his control. But then that’s what always happens when you accept help from a monster, it eventually turns on you. What? Obama and the Democrats thought Frankenstein was really about a scientist who built a monster from dead people?

With the addition of Sarah Palin to the Republican ticket, Obama almost certainly wishes he could re-bottle the misogyny he uncorked. But it’s too late. Woman-hating is now such a routine aspect of the Obama movement that the true believers can’t help themselves anymore. It simply pours out of them:


“She looks like a porn star.”

“Sarah Palin’s judgment is despicalble. She knowingly whelped a Mongoloid child earlier this year, probably to pander to the Right to Life Nutbags. Irresponsible decisions like hers dilutes the viability of the American Gene Pool. No wonder why we are falling farther and farther behind in an increasingly competitive global economic environment.

Her OB should have cut her tubes after her first child!!!”

“What is this, the Vagina Epilogue?”

“Will McCain have Palin do a Lewinsky on him every day to get his juices flowing?”

“I’d like to retract some of the thoughts of her qualifications that are stirring in my head. Sarah Palin is, likely, qualified to wash my dishes, even moreso to fetch a Big Wheel from my driveway. I was thinking she wasn’t, but those are just exaggerated thoughts.

What a bimbo!”

Obama supporters, all.

Yesterday I wrote that the possums will lose this election for Obama by alienating every woman in America who hasn’t already run screaming from the sexism in the Democratic party. Well, not every woman, but enough. Enough women will either stay home or vote for Sarah Palin (not McCain) to make that nut.

They’ll do so not out of spite and not because they’re irrational. They’ll do so because they will have decided that the critical thing, right here, right now, is not to be bound by some historical allegiance to the party that used to be the home of women’s rights, but to strike a hard blow against the sexism and misogny of today.

Can’t say I blame them.

Filed under: Various and Sundry · Tags:

38 Responses to “Karma, thy name is Bitch”

  1. myiq2xu says:

    Sounds like rational self-interest to me

  2. RKMK says:

    I will preface this by saying that I am no fan of McCain, but… McCain, you wily fox. He aimed a missile straight at Obama’s Achilles heel – the fauxgressive addiction to misogyny – and he’s letting the ‘Bots sink themselves.

    I have trouble understanding how the Democratic leadership allowed him to become so vulnerable like this- blind arrogance? Hubris? Snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory, indeed…

  3. Ugsome says:

    I have been hearing out of the Obot spouse that McCain is just a lame old grampa. Well, sounds like Gramps still has a few tricks up his sleeve.

    Reminds of a sign that my professor father used to have on in office: “Old Age and Treachery Will Outdo Youth and Skill.”

  4. tdraicer says:

    I want Obama to lose (even though that means accepting a McCain win) and if he does lose, yesterday may well be the reason why. But I’m not counting my chickens either-it is a long way to November, a lot could happen, and W. has left a very damaged GOP. We’ll see…

  5. Happenstance says:

    Don’t feel at all bad about wishing for Obama’s defeat. Certainly, the consequence (as we are regularly reminded by the Obots) is a McSame presidency, and all the evils that it would entail.

    But you have to remember the big picture. Where were these voices of concern for consequence in 2000 and 2004? Right: baying at us to vote for Nader or stay home, and #$%@ the consequences AND the party.

    Here’s a typical statement from late 2007, when Hillary was “inevitable:”

    Even though I strongly feel that the U.S. will be best served if a Democrat, not a Republican, is elected President in 2008, I will vote for a third-party candidate, even if it means the Republican candidate is elected. I won’t be alone in doing so.

    That’s the sort of hypocritical piss-ant who’s telling us now that we must all swear allegiance to the Chosen One.

    That’s the sort of hypocritical piss-ant who’s in charge of the party now.

    And that’s the sort of hypocritical piss-ant we have to take the party back from if we wish to keep it even remotely sane.

    Step One: Teaching them that their vote-tossing tactics are a double-edged sword.

  6. kenoshaMarge says:

    Obamacrats continue to make ageism and sexism their response to everything. Thus they, with their rampant stupidity, alienate two of the most reliable voting blocks for Democrats.

    How on earth could anyone with a brain think that insulting women and seniors is a smart tactic?

    I think you’re abso-damn-lutely right Dr.Socks, they uncorked the genie and now the damn thing refuses to go back into the bottle. Hate is funny that way.

  7. Margaret Nelson says:

    I’m at a loss to understand why any of you would either vote for McCain or not vote at all, so let him in by default. Do you seriously imagine that would serve women’s interests? I give up.

  8. Jack says:

    Violet, if sexism from Obama would have made you stay home, then I hope corporate union-busting from Clinton would have made you stay home as well. Do you really believe that anything Obama has said or done comes remotely close to the evil of sitting on Wal-Mart’s board while the company squashes unionization efforts? Corporate scumbags are still corporate scumbags even if they are female.

  9. Natasha says:

    Well, Look at the Bright side folks,

    WAMI is offering courses, at low cost, to help us all prepare for our future, regardless of Which REGIME we are thrust under…

    since issues got lost in this election somewhere, thought it might be good to at least begin an educational campaign on being prepared for Changes…

    go see if you dare, LOL

    http://wami-womenagainstmaleimperialism.blogspot.com/2008/08/sing-with-me-now-there-is-no-such-thing.html

    brought to you by your unhinged no Obama or Palin supporter,

    Natasha

  10. Anna Belle says:

    Sounds like rational self-interest to me

    Bingo, myiq! You always did have such a succinct way of articulating the truth. I’m a 20+ year Democrat who recently registered as a Independent (I will never join another political base in my life), and I’m voting for Palin, for the reasons listed here, as well as several others (which I’ve been attempting to articulate on my blog).

  11. Anna Belle says:

    “as aN Independent: not “as a Independent.” SOrry.

  12. Apostate says:

    Why is “voting for Palin” a pro-woman thing to do any more than voting for McCain or Obama would be?

    Of course, I don’t even buy the premise that “voting for Palin” is even a rational course of action. You don’t vote for the VP. You vote for the President/the ticket/the party.

    But even if I grant that people can vote for Palin without voting for McCain, that’s about as anti-woman as it gets.

    Palin is a tool of the patriarchy just as much as any anti-choice anti-birth control god-bothering Republican is.

    Who cares if she’s a woman? That doesn’t mean she cares about women or will be good for women.

  13. creeper says:

    I am one of those who has already run screaming from the racism, sexism and sheer corruption of the Democratic party. Come November I will cast a vote for a Republican president for the first time since 1972.

    Let Barack Obama reap the whirlwind of the discontent he has fostered. Let him stand amid the debris and hubris of his campaign on November 5 and know that we did not go quietly into his nightmare.

    P.S. RL, thank you for this blog. As more and more of the Hillary-supporting bloggers drink the Obama kool-ade it’s nice to find there’s a place for those of us who find it impossible to crawl out from under the bus and climb aboard.

  14. all the marbles says:

    Apostate:

    Of course a voting in Palin will be good for women.

    It strikes a blow to the misogyny that is the Democratic party. The world is watching and if we do not vote “for Palin” (more to the point against the Dems) as a protest of the unchecked misogyny, we will have wasted a prime opportunity to make a statement about women’s power. A very powerful statement to future generations of women.

    After all the fighting we have done over the years, to NOT vote against misogyny will render toothless any future arguement we may have for generations.

    For me it is not about issues, it’s about respect and standing up for myself. It’s not about the Republicans v. Democrats, it’s about women standing together and proving a point, that we are powerful.

  15. lambert strether says:

    Great post.

    It would be nice to have links to the posts, both for the record, and to have the handles of the posters.

  16. slythwolf says:

    Shorter Jack: “Woman, the stuff I care about better be at least as important to you as the stuff you care about!”

    Excellent post as always, Violet.

  17. CognitiveDissonance says:

    Wow, Obama’s Frankenstein monster just gets uglier by the day. That comment about preserving the gene pool is particularly ugly, and reminds me all the more of their likeness to the brownshirts. I’ll be voting for Palin and against the monster that Barry built in November. I cannot live in a country where they are allowed to run wild.

  18. Annie Oakley says:

    Obama has run a campaign destructive to the party. He had to deal gender cards from the bottom of the deck to win. He had to cheat, or he wouldn’t have been the presidential nominee, although HRC signaled he could have been her VP. The wreckage of the party was his choice, his and perhaps Donna and her sidekick Rove, and whoever else thought the party needed a little creative destruction.

    Funny thing about wars, they have unintended consequences.

    What gets me is that the brain trust that unleashed this havoc can only keep pointing to those who revolted at the hands of their abuse, instead of taking any responsibility for their own tactics. And, as Dr. Socks has pointed out, the repercussions of their choice will be with us long after the election. They have sacrificed the party for their ambition, and will likely treat the country with no greater concern for its welfare.

    I am about as far left as you can get, and yet there is a very good chance that I am going to vote Republican for the first time in my fairly long life. Maybe it is about change after all.

  19. Ciccina says:

    @ apostate

    Do we know that Palin is anti-birth control?

    from the Anchorage Daily News
    http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/elections/governor06/story/8049298p-7942233c.html

    In 2002, when she was running for lieutenant governor, Palin sent an e-mail to the anti-abortion Alaska Right to Life Board saying she was as “pro-life as any candidate can be” and has “adamantly supported our cause since I first understood, as a child, the atrocity of abortion.”

    Palin said last month that no woman should have to choose between her career, education and her child. She is pro-contraception and said she’s a member of a pro-woman but anti-abortion group called Feminists for Life.

    “I believe in the strength and the power of women, and the potential of every human life,” she said.

    She supports a health exception, but not an exception for rape or incest…

  20. Violet says:

    She seems to be about as genuinely feminist as a pro-life Republican can be.

    Read her interview with Time:

    Sarah Palin interview

    She’s hardly challenging the patriarchy, but she’s unequivocal about believing in equality for men and women, says she was raised to believe in that and is trying to raise her daughters and sons to think the same way.

    I know women like this. I’m related to women like this.

  21. Violet says:

    By the way, since Feminists For Life has been mentioned, here’s a link to Katha Pollitt’s rather hilarious article about them a few years ago:

    http://www.thenation.com/doc/20050829/pollitt

  22. Natasha says:

    one more thing

    I WORKED THE ENTIRE TIME AND WENT BACK TO WORK ONE WEEK BLEEDING LIKE A PIG AFTER SHE WAS BORN

    DON’T DO DRUGS, DON’T DRINK, DON’T SMOKE

    SO FUCK YOU TOO WITH YOUR WELFARE MYTHS AND ALL YOUR OTHER MISOGYNIST SHIT

    I’LL WRITE IN HILARY OR I’LL VOTE ALTERNATIVE BUT NO WAY IN HELL

    WILL I VOTE TO EVER FORCE MY DAUGHTERS TO GO THROUGH WHAT I DID…

    AND HER FATHER–GOOD OLE CHRISTIAN

    GOD HELP HIM IF I EVER SEE HIM–I’LL SEND YOU THE BODY BAG–HIM AND HIS ‘RELIGION’ CAN BOTH ROT

    HOWS THAT FOR PRO LIFE ASSHOLES

  23. Natasha says:

    here’s the pro-woman LOL ideology behind

    pro-life feminism

    “I’ll let Lance Mannion do it for her:

    Once upon time we were all good and well-behaved, if plagued by demons and temptations within. You know, back in the day, when lynching was a spectator sport, children were worked to death in factories and mineshafts, and employers thought nothing of hiring goons to beat and kill workers who dared strike for safer working conditions and decent pay.

    Then came the Fall, and with it moral relativism, post-modernism, Freudianism, Marxism, feminism, birth control, Roe v. Wade, situation comedies that make dad into a buffoon, and black people who expect to live in our neighborhoods and send their kids to our schools…whoops, did we say that last one out loud? We meant entitlements, the nanny state, and the culture of dependence brought about by Welfare.”

    read the rest at: http://stevegilliard.blogspot.com/2006/04/incest-ball.html

    SO, WONDER HOW MANY INFANTS THEY GONNA CHAIN TO THOSE IRON CRIBS IN ORPHANAGES AND HOW MANY OF THE CHILDREN

    THEY’LL SENT TO PRIESTS AS GIFTS?

    ;)

    because its about caring for life [cough cough]

    why not start killing girls too like they do in other places,

    ya know honor killings

    if you’re going to go Taliban Fundamentalist EXTREMIST

    go all the way then.

    pro-life fanatics ARE CHILD ABUSERS

    THEY CONTRIBUTE TO TRAFFICKING, ABANDONED CHILDREN, RAPES OF GIRLS…

    JUST ASK THE WOMEN IN COLOMBIA, PERU, FOR EXAMPLE–

    AND THEN GOING IN THEIR AND PATCHING UP THE CRAP YOU START–DOESN’T CUT IT,

    FORCED PREGNANCIES AGAINST A WOMANS WILL IS A HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN

  24. falstaff says:

    The literary reference that occurred to me was different — Yeats rather than Mary Shelly (http://falstaff-falstaff.blogspot.com/2008/05/if-blogs-could-kill.html) — but like most of you, I knew the misogynist beast that was being unleashed hadn’t sated its appetite when Obama “won.” Palin will be an hors d’oeuvre compared to Hillary, but he’ll gobble her up just the same.

    Which is, of course, the McCain’s very clever strategy. As long as Palin doesn’t become an actual anchor — that is, as long as there isn’t some scandal in her background — she’ll help him enormously. Even if she turns out to be a cypher, a symbol. Because what she will symbolize isn’t just women in general, but the one that got away… the one whose continued presence — and probably increased visibility on the campaign trail, in order to “counter” Palin — will serve as a continuing reminder of what could have been and what should have happened.

    This is brilliant political jujitsu (http://falstaff-falstaff.blogspot.com/2008/08/possibly-master-meta-stroke.html), and the children’s crusade, misogynists and cultists who believe themselves to be in charge of the Democratic Party don’t have a clue as to what is about to hit them. They’re too absorbed in their narcissistic bubble to see it coming. It will be left once more — of course — for Hillary to pick up the pieces after the election, and get the ship in shape for 2012. But she’s more than up to that task.

  25. Apostate says:

    It’s possible to be a pro-life feminist, but it’s not possible to be an anti-choice feminist.

    The difference is when you want to make it illegal for other people to have abortions. I despise such women on a personal level, but as politicians, they’re worse – because they’re making it happen.

    I can’t believe so-called liberal feminists are discussing “voting for” a token woman, let alone a token woman who is an anti-choice Republican scumbag.

    (Not you, Violet.)

  26. slythwolf says:

    I know women like this. I’m related to women like this.

    Me too. She reminds me strongly of my best friend, whom I love. I’m not going to be voting Republican in November, but I won’t fault those who do.

  27. sister of ye says:

    And what in heaven’s name during this campaign leads anyone to believe that Obama will stand up for women’s rights, including reproductive freedom?

    Is it his “women get late-term abortions because they’re blue”?

    Is it his “we have to understand and reach out to pro-lifers” rhetoric?

    Is it his “a women has to consult her husband and (male?) pastor” requirement?

    Is it that fact that he was ready to vote for Roberts as Chief Justice until he was informed that it would bite him in his political ass?

    I have as much confidence that Obama will champion women’s rights as I do that he’ll champion gay rights – none whatsoever. That’s also true on a lot of issues important to me.

    Since it’s basically a wash between candidates, I’ll enjoy watching John McCain and Sarah Palin stick a thumb in the eye of misogynist Dems, even if I don’t vote for them.

  28. Apostate says:

    I’m not voting for Obama either.

    Voting for McCain only sends the old message to Dems that they need to move further to the right to get our votes.

    It’s a losing strategy no matter how you look at it. But if you are capable of voting for people who have contempt for women, go right ahead. Your vote is yours.

  29. Violet says:

    This is brilliant political jujitsu

    Yes indeed. Barring some catastrophic faux pas or scandal, yes indeed. One of the most brilliant moves I’ve ever seen in politics.

    A fascinating thing is the disparity between the regular folks on the blogs (most of whom, if they aren’t possums, know damn well how fricking brilliant this is), and the media, which is full of doubt and worse about the wisdom of McCain’s choice. But I suppose they’re possums too.

    Really, I think anyone who’s a mature American and understands our culture knows in their bones that Sarah Palin is the All-American Dream Girl. She appeals to so many people on so many levels.

  30. octogalore says:

    Great post, Violet.

    I’m with sister of ye. It’s a wash. Neither party’s earned my vote. Given that Obama doesn’t put his money where his mouth is on equal pay (even when compared to McCain, see http://www.cnsnews.com/Public/Content/Article.aspx?rsrcid=32005), and per your earlier post highlighting his admiration of Roberts, he’s not wowing me on women’s issues. I don’t know whether, push comes to shove, his talk/action gap will continue into his policies.

  31. Jenn says:

    Hey, great minds think alike!

    While I’d rather carve my own eyes out with a rusty spork than vote for John “Cunt” McCain or Palin (Ms. Anti-Choice), I’d say that voting for the dude that stole the primary and stands to benefit from sexism twice with that fucking smug look is just as bad.

    P.S. – I added you to my blogroll, I hope you don’t mind.

  32. M.W.Paules says:

    Liberal and conservative Americans share something in this election; both have suffered betrayal by the leadership of political parties claiming to represent the rank and file. The Republican Party was punished in the election of 2006, and justly so. Now the shoe is on the other foot. It’s healthy for our democracy when voters send a message and reject leadership that craves position and privelege at the expense of principles.

    This is where I think the sisterhood fails to understand what Sarah Palin means to the conservative base. She has taken on the corrupt machinery of her own party and restored integrity to the process. Should the sisterhood vote for her because she is a woman? The question is both insulting and cynical. But some will vote for her because Sarah Palin has displayed character.

    I fully understand those who will not vote for Palin on ideological grounds. But surely her list of virtues stands for something. A vote for Palin brings with it integrity, fidelity, and empathy for the women’s movement. Women could do much worse in this election.

    I beg your pardon for invading this space. I just wanted you to know that all conservatives are not trolls. We can disagree without being disagreeable.

  33. Ciccina says:

    I’m with Sister of Ye – what she said.

    I don’t know if I sprained my outrage joint or what, but I find I just can’t get too excited over Palin being anti-choice. I guess I already made my peace with the idea of a McCain White House. I couldn’t withhold my vote from the Democratic ticket if I hadn’t.

    On the question of what kind of SCOTUS appointments we’ll get under McCain, I think it will be the responsibility of the Senate Dems to bork bad nominees. Which means the rest of us will have to work our asses off trying to fabricate a backbone for those snivelly bastards. But it can be done.

    I keep having this knee-jerk defensive reaction whenever I see someone criticize Palin. That rancid primary has me all bent out of shape.

  34. Mike J. says:

    I love the smell of panic in the morning (and in the afternoon, and in the evening). Because it’s hard to interpret these posts as anything else. Have you noticed that nobody is discussing the convention, Obama’s acceptance speech,or pretty much anything else to do with “The One”? McCain neatly stole Obama’s thunder, took the spotlight away from him, made himself and Palin the focus of everyone’s attention. So now everyone is scrambling for some dirt in Palin’s life, desperately hoping to dampen her impact on the campaign. They wouldn’t be doing this if they didn’t realize Palin is the game-changer McCain needed.

  35. creeper says:

    What a hoot! Obama’s laying the law down to his Obots re: trashing families. Someone must have showed him the filth about Palin that’s being posted by his supporters.

    It’s going to be SO much fun for the next two months watching him try to put the monster he has unleashed back in its cage.

  36. m Andrea says:

    The dems have long insisted that the repubs are hypocites about family values. But only lately have repubs noticed the Democrates profess all these wonderful qualities of egalatarianism — but are sexist and misogynstic as hell when it comes time to convert thought to action.

    They need to hear our displeasure and there is only one way to do that: vote McCain-Palin. Perhaps in four years they will have learned their lesson — one must consider long term strategy.

    The race is tight: you need to decide and act. Staying home and moaning helps no one. The only message that sends is that you lack the strength of will to do that which must be done — congrats! You’re a true democrat!

    Last winter the Times ran a story analyizing the negotiating pattern of Obama during the Exon fiasco. He was trying so hard to “be fair” that just like Jimmy Carter he lost everything.

  37. Carmonn says:

    “Someone must have showed him the filth about Palin that’s being posted by his supporters.”

    *shakes head* No, that’s his pattern. His people put this stuff out there and push it with his full consent and knowledge (remmeber how he admitted it when Stephanopolus nailed him on his campaign pushing the Bosnia bs behind the scenes), and then after letting it rage, Mr. Clean solemnly condemns it, thus drawing even more attention to the rumors. He has no interest in putting the monster back, it’s just filthy Chicago style politics all the way, while pretending that it’s just as far away from his sweet pure intentions as can be. The only reason he’d actually tell his supporters to back off and mean it is if all the vileness is causing a backlash, which, considering McCain’s willingness to sit back and let it go, seems very likely.

  38. sas says:

    It’s pretty bad when I, as a loyal Democrat, cannot stand the thought of the Democratic candidate taking office.

    I will never forgive the misogyny and sexism I have seen from the Obamabots. As a feminist, who believes in the advancement of women to leadership positions, McCain’s pick of Palin has ignited my interest.

    I know they say…”not this woman”,but, after the same thing being said about Hillary, I realize all of that is fear of the “wimmin folk being in control.”

    Look out Obama, I sense a train wreck is coming.