What we can learn from the Vanity Fair hit piece on Sarah Palin
Vanity Fair continues its fine tradition of journalism.
The infamous Vanity Fair piece on Sarah Palin — you’ve heard of it by now, right? — is a fascinating study in the lack of self-awareness. The source for the article, McCain campaign chief Steve Schmidt, is an egomaniacal Republican strategist who thinks people with lady parts have no business running for office, especially if those lady parts have recently produced babies. The article is little more than a brain dump of his warped hatreds and resentments, compounded by a sense of burning injustice that he — a man! a man with no lady parts at all! — actually had to work for a lady-parts person. That the lady-parts person had ideas of her own and expected the campaign staff to do their jobs (rather than, say, trashing her to their buddies in the press) just made the situation even more intolerable.
Alll of this is lovingly and uncritically transcribed by Vanity Fair editor Todd Purdum, who describes Palin as an “indisputably fertile female” whose life resembles “an unholy amalgam of Desperate Housewives and Northern Exposure.” What these two men — Schmidt and Purdum — think they’re doing is very different from what they’re actually doing. They think they’re showing us that people with lady parts are idiot bimbos who need to shut the fuck up. What they’re really doing, of course, is demonstrating the full extent to which they are sexist freakazoids from hell who are the main reason Palin and other political women have such a goddamn Sisyphusian task.
So, lesson number one: Women running for political office need to stay the hell away from male campaign strategists. If it has a dick, don’t hire it. Just stay away. I realize that sounds unfair, but the problem is there’s just no telling how much of a bruised male ego any one of these clowns is carrying around in his pants. He might say his job is to get you elected, and he may even believe it, but deep inside his tiny brain there may lurk a resentful sexist pig who feels compelled to undermine lady-parts people. Patriarchy is strong.
Lesson number two: The media is not your friend. Ever. They all hate you. Doesn’t matter if you’re a Republican or a Democrat, liberal or conservative, pro-choice or anti-abortion, brilliant or mediocre, young or old, pretty or plain. If you have lady parts, they hate you.
Lesson number three: This has nothing to do with politics. So-called progressives don’t hate Sarah Palin because she’s a Republican; they hate her because she’s female. Check out all the liberal blogs that are joyfully citing the Vanity Fair piece and commiserating with their new best friend, Steve Schmidt. Notice that Steve Schmidt is a Republican and a Rovian insider who helped re-elect George Bush in 2004. He oversaw PR for the Alito and Roberts confirmations, acted as Dick Cheney’s spokesman for awhile, and ran Governator Schwarzenegger’s campaign in 2006. His politics are the same as Palin’s. But he has a dick, and Todd Purdum of Vanity Fair has a dick, and the progressive bloggers have dicks, and thus they can all join hands across the political aisle to wank each other off in their mutual hatred for a lady-parts person.
Lesson number four: Feminists of the youth persuasion who still haven’t figured out lessons one through three need to school up. Joining in with the Palin-bashing and the rest of the woman-bashing in the culture doesn’t get you a pass; it doesn’t make you an honorary man. You’re still a lady-parts person, and the dudes will as soon destroy you as Sarah Palin.
Edited to add: You know what this reminds me of? This thing with progressive types suddenly discovering that Republican hacks are models of truthfulness? This.
61 Responses to “What we can learn from the Vanity Fair hit piece on Sarah Palin”
-
Amy K. says:
I have been wonderingb about what Steve Schmitt could have been thinking through all this. How does he think he can ever work in politics again? He has proved himself to be completely untrustworthy.
At first I thought maybe he was trying to blame Palin for the McCain campaign failure thereby shifting the blame from himself, except it doesn’t matter if she was the entire problem (which she wasn’t), it was the campaign that picked her and the campaign that handled her so it would still be his fault. Also, the campaign has been over for many many months. What is the point now?
After thinking of all the ways this spewing of crap could in any way make him look good, I could not find any. I have come to the conclusion he just has a powerful hate for this woman. It has rendered him incapable of making rational decisions. He is willing to immolate his career in order to make a hit against Palin. Sad, really.
July 1st, 2009 at 11:51 pm EST -
Violet says:
How does he think he can ever work in politics again? He has proved himself to be completely untrustworthy.
Only if his candidate is a woman. He would never back-stab a real human being, the kind that doesn’t have lady parts.
I have no doubt that Schmidt will continue to be employed by Republican male politicians, many of whom probably feel the same way he does about women.
-
Sameol says:
Yeah, if the Republican Party is anything like the Democratic Party, this won’t affect him at all. You know those women, they’re impossible. They push human beings to their limit.
-
octogalore says:
Todd Purdum and to a lesser degree wife Dee Dee Myers seem to have a vendetta against Clinton, for some reason, both launching articles that appeared specifically timed to help Obama beat her in the primary.
Now Purdum is turning his venom on another woman, making veiled comparisons to Anna Nicole Smith and focusing in on Palin’s looks. As you note, he isn’t dealing in substantive critique of her positions, but instead in belittling her as a woman. Carping at her attempts to make money off a book is in pretty poor taste, considering the timing of when Obama’s literary efforts (which sold poorly pre rock star status) began coining in for him. And suggesting her response to Letterman’s misogyny was overdramatic because he’d only told “borderline jokes” was pure angry frat boy.
Purdum seems fascinated with taking down women, irrespective of political party, that threaten Men in Power. Noting that despite his contempt for Palin, some consider her to be a “sexy brand” and a “star,” he clearly sees her as some sort of threat, as he viewed HRC.
And as you so cogently note in #4, this subtext will be largely if not completely lost on many of our third wave friends, who ally with the Purdums of the world as ideological brethren, and therein miss the hatred.
-
octogalore says:
Somewhat of a derail — but in keeping with your note about the fine tradition of journalism that VF upholds. VF is supposedly a magazine about culture, fashion and politics for both men and women. It’s not a GQ or an Esquire. Yet, check out these covers.
With the exception of the Brad Pitt one (and he could easily wear what he has on in public), it’s all scantily clad (or unclad) women, often photographed with leering or groping fully-clad men. Possibly the magazine has decided to appeal only or mostly to men, but it appears from the letters and anecdotal info that there are a fair number of female subscribers. Seems pretty tone deaf…at the very least. Or, if I may take the liberty, a signal that the publishers as well as the inside-the-cover crowd like Purdum generally view women as decorative appendages, and take offense when some, like HRC or Palin, opt for a different role.
Of course, so is this.
-
Sis says:
According to w*ckipedia Steve specializes in “political message development and strategy”. Like, as in here:
“Schmidt voiced his support for gay rights at meeting of the Log Cabin Republicans, a gay Republican group. Schmidt, when referring to the group, said “I just wanted to take a second to come by and pay my respect and the campaign’s respect to your organization and to your group. Your organization is an important one in the fabric of our party.” (…) I admire your group and your organization and I encourage you to keep fighting for what you believe in because the day is going to come.”
-
yttik says:
“But he has a dick, and the progressive bloggers have dicks, and thus they can all join hands across the political aisle to wank each other off in their mutual hatred for a lady-parts person.”
LOL, you nailed it.
Make no mistake about it, this is about icky girly parts, the fact that we can bear children, and dangerous hormones that make us unstable. That is why women should not be airplane pilots, presidents, or make decisions about financial matters. That is why we shouldn’t play sports and why we should be stuffed into burkas and kept at home.
What they are saying about Palin, they are saying about all women. They’re saying it about your mothers, your sisters, your daughters, and you. If enough women finally stop making excuses and confront this fact, we can unite and say ENOUGH ALREADY. Until we do we’ll never have equality.
-
Northwest rain says:
Although I KNOW that women have been hated throughout written history — and that the deck has been stacked against females from birth. I know this deeply ingrained cultural misogyny because of the massive research on “sex-role stereotyping” that I did for my MA thesis ages and ages ago (back in the stone age).
YET I am still shocked on the depth of the hatred — early in 2008 there was a YouTube video posted which spliced all the on air news media talking heads misogynistic remarks about Hillary Clinton. A similar video with Palin as the target could be spliced using the garbage out of the mouths of idiots.
These venom dripping talking heads have mothers — and female relatives — sisters, wives etc. Are women in their lives so damned stupid that they don’t clue in these misogynistic monsters that what they are doing is violating the human rights of 50 % of the human population?
I cannot bare to watch tv — nor do I even listen to the radio — because now that I am sensitized again to the sexism and misogyny I refuse to allow it into my home.
My question is how far down this path of women hating will this nation go? Are we headed for another dark ages of repression and even witch burning.
What’s happening now is far worse than in the 70s — because it is everywhere. How far will this hatred of one half of the human race go?
-
Jamie W. says:
My theory: some of this Palin-hatred is being fed by the Romney 2012 campaign. Mitt has not given up on being president, and nice Mormon that he may be, he is utterly ruthless. Wait and see — I’ll betcha you’ll find a lot of the old McCain staffers working for Mitt in a couple years.
I really feel for Governor Palin; what she found out last year is that she can’t trust anyone except people she knows, and she only really knows people from Alaska. She has GOT to get over that.
-
Jamie W. says:
BTW, O/T — and posted here cause I can’t figure else where to go with it, sorry — did anyone see this Hillary-and-Obama snippet?
http://washingtontimes.com/new.....ran/print/
Just the first part, before it breaks for another heading — fascinating, the lack of respect this demonstrates. I wish I knew what else was going on behind the scenes.
-
Briar says:
Don’t underestimate the hatred felt for Palin and other women by those feminists and lesbians who may not want to sleep with the enemy (allowing him to abuse you) but who nevertheless want to *be* the enemy (presumably so that they can abuse other women). Women craving a power rush who identify with male behaviour, values and attitudes are also the enemy.
-
soopermouse says:
look at me being unsurprised.
The lies and smears of the generals are alive and well aren’t they?
Even Twisty/Jill, you know, had the audacity to attack Palin at IBTP without een knowing that she knows what the fuck she’s talking about wrt Palin.That was painfully elightening. The fucking class privilege that ooze through Twisty’s comments have literally made me sick.
I hate people
-
Sameol says:
There’s speculation all over that Obama is cutting Clinton out and setting up Axlerod as defacto SOS. If he outright fires her or maneuvers her into quitting, she has no place to go and the Democrats are rid of any last vestiges of the potential ladyparts menace. Crisis averted.
If it happens, it was totally predictable considering the way Obama operates. I would never have given up my seat and placed myself under his power.
-
Mel says:
THANK YOU!!!!! I’ve been waiting to see your response to this piece of garbage. I can’t tell you how great it is to find a site that has actual consistent feminism.
-
RKMK says:
Nailed it. Thanks, Violet.
-
anne says:
Shorter article - “Some people don’t like Palin”. Not exactly unusual in a politician.
Mind you there were a few little gems in it, like this one:
“At least one savvy politician—Barack Obama—believed Palin would never have time to get up to speed. He told his aides that it had taken him four months to learn how to be a national candidate, and added, “I don’t care how talented she is, this is really a leap.” ”
Four months to learn and now he’s president, yet still nobody is worried about Obama’s lack of experience. My theory is that the rabid attacks on Palin’s so-called inexperience were displacement of his supporters’ real fears of such an inexperienced man becoming president and she was just the handy female scapegoat to attach them to.
I think the other thing that these sorts don’t like about Palin is that she actually thinks she can do the job. She’s not a frontwoman in the style of George Bush, there to follow orders from the men in the background. They like to think they are running the show, and someone like her shows them they aren’t. Of course if she was a man with that attitude, they’d admire her.
-
yttik says:
“There’s speculation all over that Obama is cutting Clinton out…”
I’ve thought about this, but you know what? Obama isn’t smart and new, he’s the SOS women have had to deal with for centuries. Hillary has been around, she’s probably an expert at working with narcissists who want to take credit for her work, who want to disrespect her and keep her out of the loop, who want to be the first in line to blame her when things go wrong. She’s way too experienced to get played by the likes of somebody like that.
-
Sis says:
The media will do the job for hom if he gives the nod. The media has completely lost their way over him. That’s partly — the sexism the other part — what interests me, a Canadian, about your election and politics. Even here, the media has become an enabler to Obama and his political machine, with little censure.
-
SweetSue says:
Good essay, Dr.Socks. Thanks for writing it.
Sometimes, I think I’m losing my mind.
The naked sexism and classim demonstrated by our opinion shapers is worse than it’s been since the 1960’s.
Yesterday while commenting on the Purdum hit piece, David “Isn’t Hillary pimping out Chelsea?” Schuster said “anyone close to Palin is going to be hurt.”
Was that a prediction or a threat?
Can you imagine any other mainstream journalist saying that about any other pol? Schuster never said that about Dick Cheney even when he shot poor, old Harry Whittington in the face! -
Monchichipox says:
He will continue to work because he is a Romney supporter now. The attempted taking down of Sarah Palin is no longer being done by the Democrats for the Democrats it is the beginning of the fight for the Republican nomination.
I first believed that Republicans weren’t going to care who they nominated and let Sarah Palin have it as the sacrificial lamb. Now I believe it barely matters who the Republicans nominate Obama will have a one term presidency. So now I’m beginning to think that Obama was the true sacrificial lamb that the Republicans let win so they could quickly lose the blame for this mess that is going to take a long time to get over.
As for Hillary every bone in my body wished she had told Obama to shove the job up his ass.
-
BabeinLA says:
Fab. article, great comments. It’s a lot of hatred and dickism to keep putting up such articles on a woman who by their owon estimation is brainless, a nobody, a baby machine, a bit of fluff, and therefore, above all, no longer a threat to them. (????)
Why the fear, if this is the dick logic? Then why bother with her?
I belabor the obvious.Above all, these vile articles on Palin are becoming so deja vu as to be numbifying, even though we must be alert to them and speak out.
-
Puma for Life says:
Thanks for this great article. As far as Hillary goes, I thought the only reason he offered sos to her was to shut her up, get her out of the senate, and then get rid of her. I think he will force her out…although, if he does, that puts her in the position of being able to run against him.
-
run_dmc says:
First - make no mistake about it, it was John McCain who lost the election for John McCain. And, not necessarily for bad reasons. He just didn’t inspire the turnout among the number of Republicans he needed because he is not a right wing wackjob like W and he holds beliefs heretical to many conservative republicans (or at least not far right enough for them). Palin, although also not quite the right wing zealot people painted her to be, had the amount of ultra-conservative bona fides and down-to-earth “middle Americaness” that was the reason McCain did as well as he did. Believe me, Schmidt and the rest of that bunch know that if Palin hadn’t been on the ticket, McCain would have lost embarrasingly and certainly wouldn’t have gotten the 52-48 split that he ended with. They clearly fear - rightly so - that most Republicans realize this and they hate Palin for that.
Second, as a 10+ -year subscriber to Vanity Fair, this is it for me. I’ve withstood a lot of crap from them because I love their high-culture articles, their (real) humorists and their ability to uncover hidden gems of stories from decades ago about fascinating people in days gone by. No more. I’m tearing out the Purdum story and fedexing it to Graydon with a note that I’m cancelling my subscription. And, I’m cc’ing their major advertisers. I’m also going to note that I’m ashamed I didn’t cancel months ago after the hit piece on Clinton and the “dry pussy” comment about Hillary. But, the over-the-top misogyny combined with incredibly sloppy, strike-that, incompetent journalism has just piled on too much at this point.
If people follow my lead, maybe we can “Letterman” Todd Purdum.
-
Level Best says:
“The naked sexism and classim demonstrated by our opinion shapers is worse than it’s been since the 1960’s.”–SweetSue
Yes, SweetSue, as an older woman it’s been alternately depressing and frightening for me to see attitudes towards women actually rise and later DECLINE in my lifetime. I can only hope this is a last hurrah of misogynists before things get better for us. The only thing that will turn things around is election of as many women as possible. The Suffragettes’ motto of “Votes for Women” is still relevant, when you come to think of it, right? Whether there is an official women’s party or not, we need to concentrate on electing women.
“[As] a 10+ -year subscriber to Vanity Fair, this is it for me.”–run_dmc
This is another tactic for us to use. Cost sponsors of sexist tripe actual cash money by not buying their stuff and TELL THEM WHY. I didn’t renew my VF sub after all of their disrespect for HRC during the election year.
-
angienc says:
Great post VS! You always capture it so perfectly.
run_dmc — I canceled my VF subscription when you should have (Hillary “dry pussy” article). My only regret is that I can’t cancel it again now. :-)
-
SarahG says:
There’s at least one reporter who isn’t drinking the Obama Kool Aid. Did everyone get a load of Helen Thomas? (about 2:45) I love that woman. And Gibbs is such a tool, trying to laugh her off like a crazy old lady. But she totally skewered him.
-
Sis says:
Helen Thomas. What? What? I love her.
-
Jamie W. says:
Monchichipox said:
“I first believed that Republicans weren’t going to care who they nominated and let Sarah Palin have it as the sacrificial lamb. Now I believe it barely matters who the Republicans nominate Obama will have a one term presidency. So now I’m beginning to think that Obama was the true sacrificial lamb that the Republicans let win so they could quickly lose the blame for this mess that is going to take a long time to get over.”
I can tell you as a Republican that this was EXACTLY the line of thinking of many of them — they were too dumb to realize this put Democrats in the position of having all of Congress overwhelmingly as well as controlling executive office. They are now realizing that this was Not So Bright.
-
Jamie W. says:
This is an annoyingly ad-heavy site, but it has a link to the YouTube clip of Helen Thomas clipping Gibbs’s wings as well as the transcript of the exchange and a reference to an interview she did later. This is one old lady who is not done with the Gibbser yet.
Watch in the clip as Reid gets his head nodding to everything Thomas says!
-
Jamie W. says:
Also in that clip — something I missed in my first hearing and reading:
______
GIBBS: We’ve had this discussion ad nauseum, and uh…
THOMAS: Of course you would, because you don’t have any answers.
GIBBS: Uh, well, because I didn’t know you were going to ask a question, Helen.
THOMAS: Well you should have.
GIBBS: Have you emailed your question today?
THOMAS: I don’t have to email. I can tell you right now what I want to say.
_______
Have you EMAILED YOUR QUESTION? this is how Gibbs decides who to call on, by the question he knows they’re going to ask? No wonder he gets softballed!
You go, Helen Thomas! Spank his butt!
I also find it lacking in respect to call a woman of her age by her first name, particularly when you are disagreeing with her. Maybe that’s just the way I was brought up.
-
Sis says:
However, his response to her was very patronizing and sexist. Talking to her like she was a child.
What a prick.
The only redeeming thing about that “open house” was that his manner and responses were YouTubed.
-
SarahG says:
Sorry, forgot the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fh5vzOAEQ-A
Helen Thomas chimes in around 2:45
-
SarahG says:
Sis, his response to her was the very definition of patronizing and sexist. AND SCARED. I swear, I have less respect for that guy every time I see him.
-
cellocat says:
What a nasty patronizing smirk. I LOVED hearing her say, “you don’t have any answers” to Gibbs, poking his class-clown-to-be-popular act. The guy is insolent.
-
Monchichipox says:
After Hillary and Sarah, despite her age, I’d still pick Helen to have my back in a barroom brawl any day. She’s forgotten more than Gibbs will ever know. I hate Gibbs more than Obama himself. I just want to send him to the store to pick up a box of tampons that needs a price check.
-
Toonces says:
It’s almost weird/uncomfortable to see someone with so much integrity in the public sphere (Helen). She’s a badass, pure and simple.
-
Nora says:
What are we going to do about it? I admit I don’t know, but unless we do something loud, public, and that costs somebody some money, no benefit will come of this. If this article was rac*ist it would be all over the news. We need a way to get folks that have, or can get, TV face time to go public screaming about the misogyny. We need a way to get women angry, I think.
-
RKMK says:
I’m 28 years old, and it times like now that I really don’t understand the “youth” fetish so many politicians spout. “Get the youth involved!” “The young people know how to use the Twitter!” “Blah blah youth blah!” But when you get youth, you get asshats like Favreau. Pfft. I’d rather have tough old broads like Hillary Clinton and Helen Thomas running things any day.
I can’t wait to be a tough old broad myself.
-
soopermouse says:
Actually, the recession won the elections for Obama and some people believe that’s why it happened when and how it happened.
When teh recession hit, Obama’s numbers were starting to go down. -
Sis says:
RKMK you can start anytime.
-
Bella Donna says:
Is it just me or did that article whiplash wildly between
“We were all constantly talking behind her back (and to the press) about how we thought she was stupid, unqualified, and possibly crazy”
And
“She wouldn’t take advice from anyone, it’s like she didn’t think she could trust us.”
And I can’t imagine anyone talking about a male politician like this.
“she should go home, keep her head down, show that she could govern effectively, and quietly educate herself about foreign and domestic policy with the help of a cadre of experienced advisers”
The writer also seems disgusted that she trusts her husband more then a bunch of back-stabbing advisers.
-
Sis says:
They ridicule northern people. Do they think Palin and her family are the only ones who live the northern life? That somehow, the rest of those voters in Alaska aren’t going to read this and other articles like it and think “That’s me. They’re mocking me.”
-
djmm says:
Thank you for the excellent post, Violet. The comments are also very thoughtful. I am disgusted with “liberal” sites which applaud articles like this one in VF.
I would find this irrational hatred of women pitiful — but we cannot afford to pity fools like these. It is going to be another long decade.
djmm
-
shoes says:
So you were a circus performer… trapeze or lion tamer.
-
myiq2xu says:
I started the read the VF article but I stopped after a couple paragraphs.
The National Enquirer has higher standards for their articles.
I was over at Hullaballoo earlier and they had two posts bashing Palin - one by Digby and the other by Tristero.
BTW - since when is holding your child in your arms “using him as a prop?” What is she supposed to do, keep him hidden?
-
Amy K. says:
BTW - since when is holding your child in your arms “using him as a prop?” What is she supposed to do, keep him hidden?
This is one of those things that shows you these people are not rational. Every other politician is allowed to bring his/her children onto the stage without being accused of using them as props. They would also excoriate anyone who then accused any of these other politicians as using them as props and declaring them fair game.
But if she didn’t bring out her son, they would call her a hypocrite and accuse her of being ashamed of her son.
The deeper reason for this (in my opinion) is that they are extremely uncomfortable with special needs children and cannot fathom a family that doesn’t think it’s a big deal and accepts their Down Syndrome child as just another member of the family.
Also, I think a lot of them have either aborted a Down Syndrome child, know someone who did, or believe they would abort one if they found out they were carrying one.
-
Unree says:
The deeper reason for this (in my opinion) is that they are extremely uncomfortable with special needs children and cannot fathom a family that doesn’t think it’s a big deal and accepts their Down Syndrome child as just another member of the family.
It wasn’t just the baby: our fratboys said that Palin was using her other kids as props by putting them onstage at the RNC. Obama’s exact same act at the DNC proved he’s a loving and attentive parent, of course.
Cf. Hillary “pimping out” the articulate adult who chose to help with her mother’s campaign. Having a child shows the unfitness of women, and the fitness of men, to be leaders.
-
myiq2xu says:
I like this line to explain PDS:
“Nobody boos a nobody”
-
Sis says:
I get so angry at the way the media treats women. Here, kind of OT, but as example.
This young woman saved the lives of people whose canoe had capsized in a frigid mountain lake. She swam 45 minutes in that water TOWING THE CANOE with the hypothermic people back in it.
She barely got a 10 incher in her home town newspaper which is swamped with a similar story of two young men who saved people in another mountain lake near drowning.
She received the Carnegie medal for heroism. But barely a 10 incher in the Canadian media, and that obviously from a Carnegie press release.
http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Go.....6-sun.html
I repeat: one young woman, alone, towing a canoe, saved people back in it, outboard motor dragging underwater, frigid mountain lake, 45 minute swim.
-
Susan Mayhew says:
Amen run_dmc - I sent my cancellation in as soon as I read the article. As we’ve seen misogyny is the underpinning of public discourse in America and its purveyors are never publicly criticized This article is more of the same. It’s all about woman-hating and it goes unchecked no matter how ill-informed or insane a recent example: - of Sotomayor, “..radio host G. Gordon Liddy had this to say: “Let’s hope that the key conferences aren’t when she’s menstruating or something, or just before she’s going to menstruate. That would really be bad. Lord knows what we would get then…”
The mind boggles. There’s no place for a powerful woman to hide. Any woman who’s offended the system by being better that the average man knows this from personal experience! -
ekittyglendower says:
Palin just stepped down.
-
Instapundit » Blog Archive » SARAH PALIN TO resign as governor? UPDATE: Thoughts from John Hawkins and The Anchoress. I do… says:
[...] to do with her decision, but she’s been subjected — along with her family — to more abuse than any other non-national-officeholder I can think [...]
-
Sameol says:
Just because someone chose to abort a DS child doesn’t mean they judge anyone else for making a different choice. Or that they regard DS children as lesser. I really, truly see no connection there.
-
MKM says:
OMG…that is too funny. Thank you for putting down the stupid political labels to call this what it is…stupid dicks!
-
Ed Driscoll » Gov. Palin: Resigning In Weeks? says:
[...] has anything to do with her decision, but she’s been subjected — along with her family — to more abuse than any other non-national-officeholder I can think [...]
-
Amy K. says:
Just because someone chose to abort a DS child doesn’t mean they judge anyone else for making a different choice. Or that they regard DS children as lesser. I really, truly see no connection there.
I agree with your first statement. And those people are not the ones making sick jokes and/or accusations concerning Trig Palin.
But there are many people who say terrible deranged things about that baby. Some of those people do.
-
GayPatriot » On Palin’s Intentions to Resign as Governor of Alaska says:
[...] as she, Glenn contends that she has been “ been subjected — along with her family — to more abuse than any other non-national-officeholder I can think [...]
-
Sameol says:
Well, yes, you have a point, these media and blogger types are sick deranged freaks.
-
Conservababe says:
Linked to you off a political site. Wow, you guys are great! It’s been driving me crazy, hearing Palin get blasted so extremely all these months, and I kept asking, “Where are the women??” I’m so glad to find out you’re here. I’ll definitely be back!
-
Violet’s onto something « bright line rules says:
[...] also: What We Can Learn from the Vanity Fair Hit Piece on Sarah Palin, which provides a handy set of rules for women who want to run for political office, starting with, [...]
-
nevermore_a_Dem says:
Lesson number two: The media is not your friend. Ever. They all hate you. Doesn’t matter if you’re a Republican or a Democrat, liberal or conservative, pro-choice or anti-abortion, brilliant or mediocre, young or old, pretty or plain. If you have lady parts, they hate you.
…unless your name happens to be Michelle Obama, in which case the media will slobber all over itself praising your exquisite fashion sense, your Jackie K-Onassis-esqueness, your grace and beauty, even if you’re as gawky, obnoxious, condescending, bitter and ungraceful as hell.
Yep, some people are more equal than others.
(I tried posting this yesterday afternoon, but the site kept freezing and refused to load the page, and my comment never saw the light of day.)
