Give ‘em hell, Sarah
Gawd. Sarah is a star.
I disagree with this woman on almost every policy position, but I like her anyway. Actually I think I have a tiny little spirit-crush on her. She’s Annie Get Your Gun, she’s Mr. Smith Goes To Washington, she’s about a half dozen American populist fantasies all rolled into one. Hockey moms and pitbulls. Yeah. Bring it on, cheeto dicks. Fuck with me now, flipper.
By the way, did any of you catch that inspiring introduction by noted feminist Rudy Giuliani? I forgot to tell you — I think I died a second death during that speech. When I heard him say, “When did they ever ask a man that?”, my brain tried to process what was happening but couldn’t. I think it kind of exploded there inside my skull.
57 Responses to “Give ‘em hell, Sarah”
-
Charity says:
My brain exploded when I heard Steve Doocey say that on Fox and Friends this morning. Too bad it’s all just for show.
September 3rd, 2008 at 11:39 pm EST -
sister of ye says:
I, too, question the sincerity of Guiliani’s feminist creds. Yet the Dems can’t even make that much of an effort anymore.
We’ve gone down one hell of a rabbit hole, haven’t we?
-
Sis says:
She’s going to want to continue in Iraq.
Now time to turn my attention to our very boring election, with Harper wanting another go-ahead to support that, and pour more money into Afghanistan. He’s going down on that alone.I will hold my nose and vote Liberal.
-
Ciccina says:
Oh, I’m glad I’m not the only one. I thought she was awesome! My mind cannot process that this smart, strong, spirited, supremely confident woman is a wing-nut. When she “told” the media she wasn’t going to Washington to seek their approval, I was all, hells yeah! And when said she was raised to believe there was no door a woman couldn’t walk through, and thanked her parents… oof! Direct hit right to my daughter-of-a-feminist solar plexis. And all those women in the crowd looking at her with pride, like ‘that’s right, not only can we do it, but we can do it damn well.” And the men looking at her too – well, its not the same as if they were looking at a female commander-in-chief (cough); the VP is still sort of a helpmeet role – but that was respect I saw on their faces.
I kind of zoned out during the jingoistic stuff. This woman’s policy position’s are so wrong.
But that didn’t stop me from enjoying the sight of her handing Possum his ass.
I guess we should expect utter, utter boy-hysteria tomorrow.
-
Violet says:
But that didn’t stop me from enjoying the sight of her handing Possum his ass.
There you go. Precisely. I lurved seeing her hand Possum his ass. Now that was cathartic.
-
Anna Belle says:
My own drunk-blogging take: http://annabellep.wordpress.co.....ce-speech/
(Whadda ya want? It was Project Runway night. Beer’s just part of the program)
-
Anna Belle says:
I just want it noted somewhere that she delivered this ground-breaking speech wearing CONFEDERATE gray. And I still don’t care. She’s got my vote.
-
Tabby Lavalamp says:
Sis wrote:
Now time to turn my attention to our very boring election, with Harper wanting another go-ahead to support that, and pour more money into Afghanistan. He’s going down on that alone.I will hold my nose and vote Liberal.
There used to be a time I didn’t have to hold my nose to do that, but this year I’m straying from them for the first time and vote NDP unless the Grits run a complete star in my riding. Unfortunately this same riding saw fit to get rid of the excellent Anne McLellan last time around. That’s the pain of living in Alberta, even if it’s in Edmonton. I could vote for the fringiest of fringe parties and it doesn’t matter.
-
Alex Curylo says:
@Tabby:
So if you really feel that way — hey, I’m in Hedy Fry’s riding, I understand the feeling completely! — here you go then:
-
Alex Curylo says:
Hmmmm, just occurred to me that considering the territory here, maybe I need to state explicitly that my last comment was only meant to imply that my vote is meaningless because a Liberal win is completely guaranteed in my riding, not that I have any problem with The Honorable Dr. Fry herself. I’d wish her best of luck, but she needs it about as much as the 70-80 Libertarian votes that typically come out of Vancouver Centre…
-
Sis says:
We have to get Harper out, so the NDP will just have to manage without me for this go-round. I doubt it’ll affect their status one way or another. Sadly.
Harper must be in delirium over Palin’s anti-abortion and tear up the Arctic policies. Oh God it’s going to be so humiliating to be Canadian for the next several weeks.
-
FemB4dem says:
Anna Belle — Confederate grey with Jackie O’s pearls! Sarah Palin was awesome. I disagree with her on many issues (actually, I am on board with energy independence), but I don’t care. She has my vote and I very much look forward to Clinton vs. Palin in 2012. She absolutely shredded Obama. And if I have to listen to one more male commentator tell me that Hillary voters will not vote for her, I really will scream. Thank you John McCain for being man enough to select a strong woman as your running mate. She will be our solace as we move forward to beat Obama, reclaim our party, drive the misogynists out of the media, and move forward to 2012.
-
Sis says:
I can’t find the speech. I have to watch online. Where?
-
Briar says:
The Republicans and Guiliani could score that goal because the Dems left the goal mouth open. Shame on them and their grubby, foul-mouthed supporters on the net. Meanwhile, Palin represents most of what is nasty in the US – warmongeroung, worship of the military, hostility towards the rights of anyone the far right doesn’t designate “good”, blind, mindless nationalism. She’s as fascist as she can get without wearing a swastika. So how could the Dems have let her and her kind have another shot at wrecking not just the US but the world? One day I would like to know why the Dem machine got behind Obama and chucked Clinton out, because it certainly had nothing to do with left wing policies as I understand them. Was it the DNC putting the too powerful Clintons in their place? In that case they miscalculated, because Obama just moved in on them instead.
-
Randall Shake says:
By rights this election should not even be close. We are in two Wars not one. We have lost over 4000 Americans, with tens of thousands Wounded. A Bank systemic crisis, Mortgage Crisis, still looming through 2011. We are exporting our National Wealth to our enemies to buy their oil. While they fund Terrorists with our Money.
We have a potential war with Iran looming. We have Pakistan who is becoming hostile toward us. Our ally may no longer be our ally. And we have insane debt levels that are getting worse. And real economic woes and job losses in Middle America.
A house sold in Detroit last month for $1. You can buy homes in some parts of the Northeast for $15,000. We have 117 Banks on the FDIC ailing list. So what does the Democratic party do? They allow a candidate who is tied to a Convicted Financial Felon to be their nominee. A Man who has never governed, never gotten any major National policies enacted and has zero experience. But he gives a great speech. And the Woman candidate of their Party who knows how to run the White House. Is not only ignored, she is marginalized, insulted, demeaned etc.
Republicans who have attacked the Clintons for years, had sympathy for her. She was being treated unfairly. And in amazement they said. We thought we were rough on her. How can any Party expect to win if this is how they treat their core base of supporters. This is just insanity.
And the irony here is this. JC Watts, Sarah Palin are both stars in the GOP. It turns out its the Democrats who are the worst misogynists and that is a wake up call. A Vote for Obama and Joe Biden is a vote for the Hilliary Haters.
I am voting for McCain and Palin. It is my way of raising my middle finger at the Media, and the Good Ole Boys network. You see my children grew up in a small town. My ex Wife is the mother of Five children. If she was treated this way and my children were attacked forget about Beware of Dog. Beware of an Angry Father whose daughter is being attacked. And the new insults this is a White Trash Family. Wow talk about being Stuck On Stupid.
-
Adam says:
Sis, youtube is your friend. The speech is also available at talkingpointsmemo.com and many other websites.
Violet et al – a question for you. You’ve been, more or less, cheerleading for Sarah Palin since her nomination. You’ve been outraged by the media treatment she’s gotten, and a big fan of her image and style, and the way she attacked Obama. But you’ve always been ready with the caveat that you disagree with her on 99% of the issues and could never vote for someone like that. OK, granted.
My question is, who are the people you think WILL be swayed by the selection of Sarah Palin, or the speech she gave last night, to not vote for Obama, and/or to vote for McCain? You are not joining the latter group, and were already in the former. The same goes for most of your commenters.
Here’s another few ways I could ask, essentially, the same question:
- which of Hillary’s 18 million supporters would vote for the McCain/Palin ticket? Do you think that there are a significant number of still-undecided Hillary supporters who are that issue-blind?
- Do you think anyone who didn’t already realize the media has problems covering women’s issues and female politicians suddenly figured it out this week? If so, what made it more obvious this time?
- From an election tactics perspective, was Palin’s speech more of a red meat, fire up the base speech, or an appeal to a swing demographic?
-
Alikatze says:
Republicans as Feminists?? Ha-ha, when pigs fly. It’s just that the Dems did such a piss poor job of supporting women in this election cycle, the door was left wide open for the GOP’ers. Frankly, once the “little woman” has been trotted out, she’ll be shoved back in the kitchen, barefoot and preggers (b/c that’s where the Bible sez they should be!). *sigh*
While Sarah Palin is making my “panties” all wet, I’m still voting for McKinney/Clemente — no amount of faux Feminism is going to make me abandon my Hairy Liberal principles. (Although, just to fuck with everyone, I kinda hope the election is so damn close that no one knows who won! – Haha!).
-
Alex Curylo says:
“Frankly, once the “little woman” has been trotted out, she’ll be shoved back in the kitchen, barefoot and preggers”
What convention were you watching? The one I was watching was full of comments like ‘Is it too late to flip the ticket?’.
Methinks somebody has their ideological blinders tied on tight enough to cut off the blood flow to the brain…
-
Bruce says:
If Sarah Palin is a star then Phyllis Schlafly is a freakin supernova.
She’s Annie Get Your Gun, she’s Mr. Smith Goes To Washington, she’s about a half dozen American populist fantasies all rolled into one.
I’m not seeing it. She’s a typical right wing extremist. She’s trying to play the maverick card like McCain, but she’s no different from the rest of them. She claims to be a renegade but yet the record is showing that she’s a money hungry, power tripping, good ol’ god fearing conservative. This isn’t a fantasy, it’s a nightmare.
Hockey moms and pitbulls. Yeah. Bring it on, cheeto dicks. Fuck with me now, flipper.
So she’s tough because she lives in Alaska and likes shoot guns and kill animals? I guess Clinton should have killed a few kittens with her bare hands, maybe she’d be the nominee right now?
Palin may be a good public speaker, although personally I didn’t find her nearly as enthralling as you did. But if Romney or Lieberman was the VP pick and gave roughly the same speech last night I doubt you’d have the same reaction.
Dislike of Palin has nothing to do with her gender and everything to do with her position on policy and her actions as mayor and governor. McCain is a right wing conservative hack and so is Palin. No amount of pretend rugged maverick individualism or faux feminism is going to make her appealing to me because her world view makes her just another hateful conservative.
-
octogalore says:
Briar said “One day I would like to know why the Dem machine got behind Obama and chucked Clinton out, because it certainly had nothing to do with left wing policies as I understand them.”
I’d love to understand that too. But my suspicion as to at least one reason why is the reason I will not vote for Obama, who I believe is complicit in this.
-
reader says:
The Republicans are just as sexist at the Dems, and just as hypocritical…
-
Randall Shake says:
Many years ago while living in the SF Bay Area. The News Director for the NBC Channel said he refused to “Bastardize the News” for just ratings. At that time a New TV Tabloid show was on Inside Edition with Bill O’Reilly as I recall. Now we have The Comedy Show an Entertainment show is the source many younger Folks are getting their news from. This is indeed a sad development.
Too much corporate control of information, and content. You have to read the Foreign Press and sometimes another language to get the News censored here.
-
Violet says:
She’s a typical right wing extremist.
No, she’s a woman. There is nothing typical about a woman politician.
She’s trying to play the maverick card like McCain, but she’s no different from the rest of them. She claims to be a renegade but yet the record is showing that she’s a money hungry, power tripping, good ol’ god fearing conservative. This isn’t a fantasy, it’s a nightmare.
If you have any proof of any of that, fine. But at this point even the Washington Post is printing lies about her record — and when the lies are pointed out they refuse to bother with printing a retraction. Money hungry? Oh, sure.
This blog won’t be a platform for more lies about Palin.
So she’s tough because she lives in Alaska and likes shoot guns and kill animals?
No, she’s tough because she stood up to the fauxgressive sexists and misogynists who are so full of hatred for women, especially working-class women. Her speech last night was terrific.
Dislike of Palin has nothing to do with her gender and everything to do with her position on policy and her actions as mayor and governor.
Oh right. Of course. Because any Republican MALE VP choice would of course have been treated in EXACTLY the same way. No Republican man with children is fit to be commander in chief, no Republican man whose kids aren’t perfect is fit to be commander in chief…yep, I hear that every goddamn day.
No amount of pretend rugged maverick individualism or faux feminism is going to make her appealing to me because her world view makes her just another hateful conservative.
Faux feminism? Okay, Bruce? Here’s what you do: find a mirror. Look in it. You are a faux feminist.
-
Sis says:
http://www.inews.com/topstory.php?id=537c4973
I’m throwing my hat in the ring.
-
Sis says:
Ignore. That link doesn’t seem to work
-
Tabby Lavalamp says:
Alex Curylo wrote:
So if you really feel that way — hey, I’m in Hedy Fry’s riding, I understand the feeling completely! — here you go then:
Vote Libertarian? I know the temperature around here has been below seasonal, but has hell frozen over?
reader wrote:
The Republicans are just as sexist at the Dems, and just as hypocritical…
I can’t access that from Canada, but if it’s the Daily Show from Tuesday night that shone a bright, glaring light on GOP hypocrisy, I loved it!
Even though I’m in no position to give Sarah Palin my vote, there is absolutely no way I would if I could. I love that a woman is a VP candidate, but unfortunately she’s the wrong woman, very much in the same way I love that an African-American is a presidential candidate, but he’s the wrong African-American. Hell, both elderly white men on the tickets are the wrong elderly white men.
One of the various reasons fauxgressives are such idiots is that by going after Palin as a woman instead of a candidate with some very wrong positions on several issues is that they’re actually making her look good, much better than any male candidate who was so wrong-headed would look!
My only concern if McCain/Palin win in November is if the Dems are going to get the message that misogyny is very, very wrong or if they’re just going to move even further toward the wrong-wing trying to appease evangelical voters. I’m behind the PUMA cause (from the afar here in the frozen north, of course), but I’m no longer sure the people who need to hear the message are smart enough to understand the message.
-
Tabby Lavalamp says:
I carelessly wrote:
My only concern if McCain/Palin win in November…
Oh for an edit button! Please let me make it very, very, VERY clear that the above concern is FAR from my only concern should they win! No, I have many concerns about them in office.
-
Sis says:
Well I sure don’t like her policy positions. I think that’s valid. I like her guts, but wish that could be redirected. Isn’t it always that way though: Margaret Thatcher, Mary Kay Ash (cosmetics) Martha Stewart, Condoleezza Rice. Damn, Hillary Clinton. Where are the hard assed lefty female politicians and role models? I’m just fainting to think what she and Harper together would get up to for the north.
-
Apostate says:
In all sincerity, who are you and what have you done with the real Violet?
I’m very sad.
-
Violet says:
What are you sad about? I don’t understand at all why you’re confused.
-
Ciccina says:
I’m not trying to hurt your brain or anything, Violet, but have you heard that Senator Reid’s spokesman called Palin’s speech “shrill”?
http://politicalticker.blogs.c.....spokesman/
I’m fine now, thank you. My brain exploded hours ago.
-
Violet says:
Yes, in fact that’s why I couldn’t take time to listen to McCain’s speech tonight. Working on The New Agenda’s response to Harry Reid. We’re sending a letter and doing a press release.
-
Apostate says:
Your admiration for someone who is essentially a more polite version of Ann Coulter is what is confusing me.
I wrote a longer post if you’re interested.
-
Violet says:
Ann Coulter likes to say that women shouldn’t have the right to vote. She never misses a chance to ridicule women. She’s built a career on vile slanders about everyone to the left of Ayatollah Khomeni.
Sarah Palin is not a polite version of Ann Coulter, unless you believe that all Republicans are polite versions of Ann Coulter.
-
Sheelzebub says:
Well, I don’t see the GOP as particularly friendly to women, even while I acknowledge that the Dems are shitty when it comes to women’s issues and are happy to backpedal and compromise on things like reproductive rights (and yes, actually, I DO think Roe is important) and the Iraq War. But if McCain and the GOP is so angry about sexism now, I await their VERY belated denunciation of Citizens United Not Timid. (‘Cause we all know what Hillary is! HUR HUR HUR!!) I await to hear their apologies for contining to trashing mothers who work outside the home and push for policies that make their lives more difficult. I await the conservatives’ acknowledgment that mothers who work outside the home are not bad people OR the same level and frequency of criticism to be lobbed at every man (including GOP man) with children who runs for office or holds a high-powered job.
I do NOT regard these people as my friends or allies, any more than I regard the hypocritical Dems my friends or allies. I’m amazed at the very short memories some Clinton supporters have of the rank misogyny flung at her from the GOP since her husband’s first term in 1992. (And note: given that Clinton and Obama have very similar policy positions, I was never that excited about either of them, and I’m very skeptical about Obama.)
Citizens United Not Timid? Beat the bitch? Hello?? Anyone remember that crap?
Yes, Sarah Palin is running into the sexist double-standard flung at mothers who work outside of the home. It’s wrong and it’s disgusting, and I’ve already gotten into quite a few arguments with so-called liberals about it. But you know? It’s her conservative movement that championed that damn double standard. I’d bet the next mortgage payment that in another year, the same conservatives crying crocodile tears over sexism will be engaging right back in misogynist rhetoric and action.
I’ve seen more energy by otherwise progressive women focused on how great Palin and the GOP are for sticking it to Obama than on Cynthia McKinney, the very progressive woman who is ALSO running for President on the Green ticket. Violet, I recall you saying you will vote for McKinney. She might have a better chance of reaching people if disaffected and angry Hillary supporters threw their support behind her and blogged about her positions.
-
simply wondered says:
‘Sarah Palin is not a polite version of Ann Coulter, unless you believe that all Republicans are polite versions of Ann Coulter.’
damn that’s a good way to represent my position!!! obviously you might have to substitute ‘margaret thatcher’ and ‘tory’ but i assume that is the direct translation from us – uk.
and maybe delete polite… -
Anna Belle says:
Thank you, Violet. If I’m judging your POV accurately, we’re in similar places. Where I’m at feels like a corner that the Democratic Party put me in, which has been shrunken by some voodooo coming from religiously-inclined disaffected Hillary supporters. I don’t belong to any church, not even the church of the left.
And, at the end of the day, I have to ask myself: Would Stanton and Anthony, or Paul and Burns have hesitated to cross a party line in the pursuit of rights for women? The answer: Nope. I mean, Wilson was in the middle of WWI, but Paul never stopped and said, “I’m sorry, Mr. Wilson, but you belong to a war-mongering party so I’ll just wait to petition the government for fair rights when the non-warmongering party gets into office.” And where would we be today if she had? Would we even have the 19th Amendment?
-
Anna Belle says:
Oh, my word, you’ve inspired me this morning, Violet! I’ve articulated it: Alternate Universe: Where We’d Be If Suffragettes Had Been Disaffected Clinton Supporters
-
Sandra says:
I voted for a Democratic Party candidate once this election, and my vote was thrown away, not even counted. You better believe I want the thug who engineered that theft to lose. Palin may make that happen.
As for why feminists might like Palin despite her being a conservative Christian — Did you not see her proud husband standing there holding the baby? I remember when no real man would ever change a diaper or fix his own breakfast, lunch, or dinner. Some men still won’t. Seeing the husband of the VP nominee holding the baby while she walked on stage was a Big Deal.
-
MountainSage says:
Once again the Republicans have outsmarted the Democrats….not just by the choice of Palin as VP but by going after the sexism the Democrats turned a blind eye to.
-
Alex Curylo says:
Hey, Violet, you seen this poll yet?
I’m rather interested to hear what you have to say about this line:
“She earns positive reviews from 65% of men and 52% of women.”
Isn’t it us guys that people like you tell us are supposed to feel threatened by strong women? I’m thinking I see some kind of disconnect here…
-
Tabby Lavalamp says:
MountainSage wrote:
Once again the Republicans have outsmarted the Democrats….not just by the choice of Palin as VP but by going after the sexism the Democrats turned a blind eye to.
It’s sad indication how badly the Dems screwed up when this has been allowed to happen. I’ve seen a couple of conservatives unable to help themselves and show their true colours by questioning how a mother of five could be a good mother and vice president at the same time, but one was “Dr.” Laura who nobody significant pays attention to anyway, and the other was Canadian so nobody significant pays attention to anyway.
For the most part they’ve been able to stay on message. On deeply hypocritical message as The Daily Show was able to demonstrate to amazing effect, but on message none the less.She doesn’t believe climate change is caused by human activity, fought to keep polar bears off the endangered species list, believes the creationist Trojan Horse “intelligent design” should be taught in schools beside evolution, opposes proper sex education, anti-choice except for the health of the woman, believes pregnancy should be a private family matter except when supporting parental notification laws, and is against same-sex marriage.
Once again, I’m fortunate not to be in a position to choose, because I could not in good conscience support this woman. I’m also an atheist, which prevents me from praying for a shocking third party Cynthia McKinney win in November.Anyway, some links for the above allegations.
http://www.newsmax.com/headlin.....26139.html
http://www.climatesciencewatch.....mate_anwr/
http://community.adn.com/adn/node/102978
http://www.politico.com/blogs/.....sexed.html
http://www.adn.com/sarah-palin/story/513141.html
http://palinforvp.blogspot.com.....palin.html
http://civilliberty.about.com/....._palin.htmAs a little bonus, and as a Canadian even I knew what was wrong with this statement as soon as I read it…
Sarah Palin said:
Question: Are you offended by the phrase “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance? Why or why not?
Palin: Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me and I’ll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....22965.html
I wanted twice to link to the Eagle Forum Alaska blog post two different sources link to, but oddly enough it has vanished.
As I said earlier, it’s great that there is a female candidate for vice president, but she is the wrong woman. -
octogalore says:
If I may, I think the disconnect between feminists with a nuanced reading of Palin and those feminists who think a nuanced reading of Palin is inaccurate or traitorous is the following.
Factually,the kind of religious doctrine Palin grew up with and continues to (I believe sincerely rather than strategically) believe is totally at odds with what’s good for women and that people who ascribe to those beliefs are not going to advocate in women’s best interest.
I also believe women with such beliefsare not necessarily evil, and may have feminist leanings in other areas, such as believing in women’s equal participation in sports and male-dominated professions.
I don’t believe the latter is traitorous to the feminist cause. Feminism isn’t boolean. Someone can have pro-feminist beliefs in some areas and not others. That combination may legitimately cause feminists to decide she is not an effective political representative. But to make that case, there is no need to call her evil or to insist that every discussion of her be an A to Z condemnation. Few people fit into that kind of boolean category.
To indict someone’s fitness for office, all we need to do is factually and reasonably articulate why their policies in sum aren’t in our best interest. If we are able to do that re Palin, or Obama, or anyone, we will be convincing. Arguments that categorize someone completely into one category, on the other hand, IMO do the arguer a disservice. Anyone who doesn’t already buy in (and therefore whom there’s no need to convince) will see some bias.
I too love where people echo my views for someone I violently dislike. But if I wanted to make a case against them, I wouldn’t pick me or those who echo my views, but those who are able to say – here’s the good, here’s the bad, and here’s why the latter is devastating to what we want to accomplish.
It’s the latter group who gets listened to.
-
Violet says:
I’m going to post here what I said over at Apostate’s:
I see Sarah Palin as an ordinary modern Republican woman with feminist leanings — about as feminist as Republicans get.
I do not think she’s evil, anymore than I think most ordinary Republicans are evil. I believe she — and they — are mistaken about many things. I do believe to some extent they are tools, because they’re misled.
To go beyond that, and paint all Republicans as fascists with black hearts of evil, is a mistake. I know it’s a mistake, because I — like most Americans — have Republicans in my family. Lots of them. I know these people. I know women like Sarah Palin. In fact, every time I see or hear Palin I think of a cousin of mine, who’s that same kind of conservative Republican go-getter woman.
We gain nothing for the cause of liberalism when we fail to see the humanity of everyone, including our political opponents.
Meanwhile, Erica Jong has a piece up in Huff Post in which she refers to Sarah Palin as “white trash” and as a “redneck.”
If you really can’t figure out what’s wrong there, then you need to go back to remedial feminist class.
Some of Apostate’s commenters are saying things like “feminism doesn’t mean we support women just because they’re women.”
Actually, it would be more accurate to say that feminism means that we stick up for women against sexism even when we don’t agree with the women.
All these soi-disant feminists who think that because they disagree with Palin politically, it’s okay to revile her and call her trash and attack her with misogyny and sexism — nope. Wrong. Sorry. That’s not how feminism works.
-
Randall Shake says:
My Grandmother lost three Sons in WW2, three. She was the best cook I have ever met. She was tough, yet gentle, Feminine, yet smart as a whip. And Sarah Palin reminds me of her. Not ashamed to be a Woman, Loves her family and Husband. Is very capable and Confident. She owes nothing to the Feminist movement. She knows where she comes from. She was encouraged by her Parents. And I suspect many of the Elitists in the Feminist Movement who sneer at working class people as inferiors.
Are shocked to see her rise this far. If McCain wins Sarah Palin will be our First Woman President. America is over all a Conservative Nation. Conservatives have more children than Liberals. Its about Demographics. There are many Working Class Catholic and Religious Feminists in the US. Yes Feminist Women ignored by their Progressive Sisters and looked down upon.
They have a champion now. Too bad Obama is too weak to appoint a Woman to be VP. And he is too insecure in his own position. It shows and betrays he will only do the safe thing always.
-
Sheelzebub says:
Right, Violet. Because I spent my entire comment here–and my comment there–calling her a white trash redneck.
I don’t need remedial feminist classes, thankyouverymuch. As I’ve said, I’ve gotten into a few knock-down drag-outs over the sexist double standards progressives and feminists are showing regarding Palin working outside the home, etc. But I’m still taken aback by your glee at the GOP, your praise of Rudy Guiliani, and your amnesia of the GOP’s rank misogyny.
These people are not our friends. I can call people on their sexism against Palin and still recognize that the movement she’s a part of is a misogynist one. I can look very skeptically at Guiliani’s posturing, and the posturing of the GOP, since I know they will revert right back to their woman-bashing when the election is over. They were quite happy to bash HRC. Again–Citizens United Not Timid was a creation of a GOP asshat, and McCain said nothing about it.
I can also remember Cynthia McKinney, the woman who is still *in* the Presidential race, who’s ignored at best and derided and scorned at worst.
Feminism means we stick up for women we don’t agree with–yes, indeed. It also means we hold people accountable for their misogyny, even if it’s the guy who’s trying to stick it to Obama. And you know, it sure would be nice if the feminists for McCain would remember Cynthia McKinney. Ain’t she a woman?
-
Violet says:
What makes you think I’m talking to you? Did you call her white trash or a redneck? Are you Erica Jong?
-
Violet says:
But I’m still taken aback by your glee at the GOP, your praise of Rudy Guiliani, and your amnesia of the GOP’s rank misogyny.
Oh my god. You didn’t get the snark in my comment about Guiliani? You thought when I said “noted feminist” I was serious? Jesus christ.
My “glee” at the GOP, my “amnesia” about their misogyny…good lord. Obviously the problem is that you don’t actually read my blog.
You know, I don’t mind defending my actual beliefs and statements, but there’s really not much that pisses me off more than people showing up here and putting words in my mouth — and then expecting me to defend things I didn’t say. Thanks a lot.
-
Sheelzebub says:
Why, Violet? You’ve been going on about how great the GOP is for sticking it to Obama by putting Palin on the ticket. You’ve spent so much time on the sexism from the Obama campaign, and so little time on the sexism from the McCain campaign, that you’ll just have to forgive me if I thought you were impressed by Guiliani.
-
Violet says:
Not how great the GOP is. I’ve noted that it was a brilliant political move by McCain. And it was. In large measure because the fauxgressives on the Democratic side have alienated so many women.
Sexism from Republicans is as common as air. It’s one reason I’m not a Republican.
The Democrats, on the other hand, are supposed to be the party of equal rights, supposed to be the party of women’s rights, which is precisely why their abandonment of that principle infuriates me no end.
-
Alex Curylo says:
“The Democrats, on the other hand, are supposed to be the party of equal rights, supposed to be the party of women’s rights”
Yet somehow, it’s the Republican Party that was founded to oppose the expansion of slavery, the Republican Party that produced the Emancipation Proclamation, a majority of Republican states that passed the Nineteenth Amendment, and a larger percentage of Republicans than Democrats in both houses of Congress that passed the Civil Rights Act — honorable mention to still sitting Democratic Senator and former KKK Exalted Cyclops Robert Byrd for his stirring 14 hour 13 minute speech opposing it!
I’d go on, but the disconnect here is getting embarrassing….
-
Violet says:
There is no disconnect. Unless you have access to a time machine, then the Republican party of the past is irrelevant. Lincoln?
For 40 years now the Democrats have been the party of equal rights (though apparently not anymore). The Republicans have been the party of racism, sexism, opposition to integration, opposition to the ERA, opposition to abortion rights, opposition to pretty much everything decent.
-
Alex Curylo says:
“For 40 years now … The Republicans have been the party of racism”
Let’s examine that statement, shall we? I pick from Wikipedia that votes by party for the Civil Rights Act were
The original House version:[9]
Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)
The Senate version:[9]
Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%-31%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)So it seems apparent that in 1964 the party of racism was the Democrats, particularly since this bill was introduced by a Democratic president, yes?
Well, how exactly then do you explain that in 44 years the Republicans are now “the party of racism”? And exactly what year did it switch? This year? 2000? 1990? 1980? What? And why exactly did that change happen? The Republicans just all woke up one morning and decided “Woah! Enough of that! We’re the PARTY OF RACISM now!”? Or do you have a more believable explanation than that for flipping party labels?
-
Violet says:
You must not be an American. Are you the one who was talking about Canada?
The parties switched on civil rights 40 years ago. The Democrats were dominated up til then by the Southern racist Dixiecrats, but they fell out of favor when JFK and then Johnson embraced Civil Rights. Then the Republican party became the party of white flight, the party for disaffected racists. This was emerging in 1968, but really matured in 1972. ’72 was kind of the last stand for the Dixiecrats with George Wallace.
By 1980 Ronald Reagan was able to implement the Southern strategy, drawing former Democrats into a racist coalition that crossed economic and regional boundaries. That’s when the Republicans became the majority party of Southern whites.
-
Sis says:
I just heard from a former Ontario MP. Well connected, Conservative. He is full of praise for Sarah, beginning with the mother part. I know what that means. Can you send some PUMAs north Vi?
Shut up Alex. I know where you live.
-
Randall Shake says:
Eric Jong is typical of many Elitist Women. Who see working Class Women as inferior. This is Elitist Feminism only for Ivy League, Trust Fund Wives, and the Women who married Money. Teresa Heinz, and Arriana Huffington.
Now it is the Moral Coward Obama sending out the Democratic Feminists to protect him from Sarah Cuda aka. Sarah Palin. This man is expected to stand up to Vladimir Putin. Are you kidding me? He cannot stand up to a Hockey Mom. Hilliary has more of a spine that his Wimp. Who is part of the Chicago Corrupt Machine Politics.
-
Yanni Znaio says:
It’s truly Bizarro World.
The Republicans are The Party Of Change, and the Democrats are The Party Of The Status Quo.
I couldn’t be happier, except for the fact that it makes the Republicans look somewhat good.
