Is Sarah Palin fully qualified as Republican Party candidate for Vice President?
Yes!
While controversy has swirled since her VP nomination over the question of whether or not Sara Palin is qualified, her recent performance and statements have done much to calm fears that she would not be able to step in immediately and be as effective as the current officeholder. Now the Alaska legislature has added the final piece of the puzzle and the naysayers have been vanquished.
While hard-core authoritarians, secessionists and Dominionists on the Right and neofeminists on the Left have needed no convincing of her worth, many Moderates and old-school Progressives have expressed reservations regarding Sarah Palin’s suitability for the office of Vice President in a Republican Party administration. Today there can be no doubt; Governor Palin is clearly ready to step in and be everything Dick Cheney has been to George W. Bush, and then some; like any woman in a man’s world, she has had to exceed expectations in order to make her way to the top.
Compared to Cheney, Palin’s abilities as a bald-faced liar are superior; where Cheney often struggled with keeping a straight face or lapsed into public displays of anger while lying, Palin lies as easily and smoothly as a bird on the wing, smiling and laughing the whole while. Where Cheney wanted to shrink the influence of government small enough so it could be euphemistically “drowned in a bathtub”, Palin is committed to literally destroying it completely. Where Cheney has reinforced Israeli military supremacy in Palestine and Galilee, Palin will round up all the Jews in the world and bring them to Jerusalem where by sheer force of numbers they will eliminate all other groups from the area. Where Cheney sought world-wide domination through the threat of military action, Palin would actually use American conventional and nuclear weapons to not just subdue but annihilate all who offer resistance to her fanatic sectarian will.
In spite of Palin’s best efforts to establish her bona fides as a real raging reactionary authoritarian by firing every city employee who had not supported her election as mayor of Wasilla followed by installation of fellow Dominionists in those positions, by repeated attempts to intimidate the town’s beloved librarian to agree to book banning, by her seizure of a seat on the local hospital oversight board to try and ensure that no abortions would be performed in Wasilla, by her open embracing and rejoicing in affiliation with a documented witch hunter who accused an innocent woman of witchcraft and fomented an entire village to drive her out of her home, by her enthusiasm for Cheney’s unconstitutional claims of extraordinary powers, and by her open embracing and statement of common cause with the treasonous aspirations of the secessionist Alaska Independence Party, she still fell short in many people’s eyes of Cheney’s despotic record.
No more, though. Thanks to a bipartisan finding from the Alaska state legislature the days of penny-ante local authoritarianism are behind her, serving now not as a clear statement of dominationist credibility as some – including myself – had claimed but rather as merely a preface, an introduction, an overture as it were to her greater work.
While taking no time away from her full-effort demands as Top Republican Demagogue, driving the themes of Obama is not a “real” American but a mysterious creature “palling around with terrorists”, she single-handedly rebuffed the best advice of the McCain campaign team who had cautioned silence and turned loose her sycophants and her husband to give the testimony she needed to establish her Executive Bully credentials.
Based on that evidence, the Special Counsel hired and supervised by a bipartisan committee acting at the unanimous direction of the representatives of the people of Alaska determined that:
…Governor Sarah Palin abused her power….
And there you have it. Palin has achieved yet another distinction that exceeds Dick Cheney’s accomplishments. While he has often been accused by his critics of abusing the powers of his office, no legal entity has found him formally culpable. Once again Palin has had to surpass Cheney in order to be considered his equal at mendacious authoritarianism, but with this accomplishment there can be no doubt.
The neofeminists who have been defending her must be brimming with pride at this latest demonstration that any woman can be as evil and cunning and abusive as any man. What a tremendous accomplishment and all the more reason to celebrate her as the epitome of feminist achievement.
What more of a role model could there be for young women and girls to look up to and emulate than an adult woman who argues against equal pay for equal work, who aggressively campaigns against the right to an abortion even in cases of incest and rape, who speaks favorably of an organization dedicated to seceding Alaska from the Union, who as mayor turned a small town with a balanced budget into a small town with a public indebtedness of $3000 per person, who lies as a matter of course and who delights in the actions of a witch-hunter?
Who could object to wanting our daughters to be able to grow up and have the ability, nay the right, to reach such dizzying heights of feminist accomplishment?
So rise up, neofeminists, and unite to throw off the outdated bounds of feminism’s past.
It is time to replace those faded and equivocal calls of yesteryear, for equality based on mutual respect and equanimity between the genders. Look instead to the neofeminist future, where any woman no matter how vile or perfidious can expect to achieve the same distinction as any vile and perfidious man. A world where the only thing that matters for allegiance is possessing two X chromosomes, that being the key to automatic respect and defense regardless of the actuality of a person’s political or moral or philosophical positions and no matter how reprehensible their actions. With the accomplishments of these brave new women as a feminist agenda roadmap, what glory lies ahead!
- bringiton's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Front page
Comments
Whoa! Ease up there.
So, you're saying that she cooperated with investigators and this is a bad thing? What she is accused of doing is pretty mild. Yep, probably shouldn't have done it but nobody is feeling the least little bit sorry for the trooper. I chalk it up to letting her familial attachments get the better of her. It certainly wasn't for political gain.
Hey, why aren't you so concerned with the way Obama "won" the caucuses by means that may turn out to be more systematic, corrupt and illegal and FOR political gain?
Or does it not count if you have a law degree from Harvard?
As to Troopergate: We. Don't. Care.
Come together at The Confluence
Come together at The Confluence
No, goldberry, I'm not making that argument at all
This is written from the neofeminist perspective - no better way to understand a philosophy than to adopt the POV and argue from it.
If you'll recall, Palin initially agreed to cooperate with the legislature's investigation and she and her allies and her hubby all refused to honor subpoenas only after she was nominated for the VP job and came under the sway of the patriarchal misogynist influence of McCain. But our brave Sarah saw through their nefarious plot to keep her down and rebelled, sending her husband and her
lackeyssupporters to give testimony regarding her accomplishments.My argument is that only in this way could she be certain that the people could see her as she is, and it was a bold and masterful political stroke to make. How can she be respected as a qualified Republican Vice President unless she is seen as just as capable of abusiveness and vileness and nastiness, just as deceitful and vengeful and petty and vicious as Dick Cheney or any of her political rivals on the Radical Right? Like every woman today, she has to be evidently More Than just to be seen as equal.
[Stepping into my normal character for a moment: Maybe you don’t care about Palin’s abuse of power but I do, and so does the Alaska State Legislature and the State Personnel Board. That Board investigation isn’t going well for Palin either, now that the political winds have shifted and everyone sane in the state has caught a whiff of her true being. There’s a much larger mountain of corruption under that sweet smile and those Innocence glasses; give it time, and our fair Sarah will be seen to be just as foul and repulsive as any man in politics today. You want me to Whoa! and ease up? Not happening.]
More feminists you don't know
Thanks to Cannonfire
and
I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'....
-----------------------------
Around these parts we call cucumber slices circle bites
-----------------------------
I'm not such a bad guy once you get to know me.
If you have something to say, herb, spit it out
I’m not sayin’, I’m just sayin’….
Say what?
Sarah Palin is being (un)favorably compared to Cheney?!
I had no idea she was so eeeeevil. Thanks for letting us all know.
Oh, Palin is evil
Extruded up out of the pit, formed and nurtured and fed and encouraged by the worst people in our nation. Big mistake to encourage this vileness; it is a public duty to keep pointing that out, no thanks required.
Excellent.
Here:
Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Hoyer, Reid, Frank, Schumer, Brazille, Dean, ..., Ayers, Dohrn, Farrakhan, Wright, Pfleger, Caldwell, McClurken, Daley, Lippert, ..., Rezko, Blagojevich, Auchi, Al-Monsour, Johnson, Khalidi, Raines, Odinga, Pritzker, Groelich, Axelrod, Gibbs, Dunn, (Susan)Rice, ....
nurtured and formed and fed just like Obama
--or was his political career and actions and non-actions simply his work all alone, and not the work of the filthy Chicago machine and then the DC Village
?
Much more than that for Obama
The Chicago machine, no dirtier than any other political machine, was just the vehicle. Obama is an extrusion of the very center of American politics, a mix of the very worst and the very best of that particular slice of the populace. His politics are what is at the heart of America in this moment, and that is both sad and promising.
Unlike Sarah Palin, who is an extrusion of the Far Right Repressive Reactionary Dominionist fringe and all about destruction and domination and submission, Obama is the gentler face of authoritarianism that always accompanies conservative thought. By its very nature, conservatism requires authority to thwart progress as Progressives require subversion to overturn the established order; it is the way the two philosophies relate. This isn't anything new, or horrible or - for me anyway - frightening. Rather, it is the necessary step away from governance by a criminal gang operating through a Radical Reactionary and Theocratic cabal called the Republican Party.
It is in my view perfectly natural that to get from where we have been to a Progressive culture we will have to traverse the Center. Either Obama or Hillary would do that for us, equally well, and so I lose no sleep over which one serves as a transition figure.
"the gentler face of authoritarianism"
and you really don't see the problem with that, as opposed to an unconcealed face of authoritarianism?
Reagan vs. Pat Buchanan, for instance?
it's "the gentler faces" that succeed more, and that's far far more problematic and damaging to all of us than the others.
I see serious problems with that
which is why I wrote it as I did. Given the choice, however, as we are in this election between a gentler authoritarianism and a harsher version, I'm going to go with gentler.
And no, not Reagan vs Buchanan but rather Reagan vs Clinton. I expect Obama will tend to be very much like Bill Clinton in his approach to political triangulation, but hopefully having a largely Democratic Congress to work with. He can't say that, of course, since he ran against Hillary whose politics are so very similar to Bill's and the last thing he needed to do was confuse his positions with either of them.
in my analogy Obama is Reagan,
and using your pegging--Palin is Buchanan.
there's no way Obama will be Clinton---or even Nixon, who expanded social programs enormously.
Well, I keep hearing he'll be FDR
And since FDR, before he was FDR, wasn't FDR, that's plausible intellectually.
It's just that nothing Obama's done or said makes me think it's likely -- and simply "hoping" that he will be doesn't strike me as a recipe for making him become so. Listening to liberals (as opposed to, say, working the phones for the bailout or taking time off from campaigning to talk to the Blue Dogs) doesn't seem to be high on his list.
[ ] Very tepidly voting for Obama [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
Palin makes Buchanan look good
Guess we'll see what Obama does if he gets elected. At this point he is to me clearly the better choice, the only acceptable choice, and the election outcome is my main focus. Not much sense it seems to me to argue about what might be beyond that.
bs, bio--
and she's only VP candidate anyway, which makes whatever wild accusation you make useless anyway. McCain would be in charge, and he's no Buchanan or Palin.
either way, we have 2 Republicans at the top of both tickets.
Well written bringiton. Although I disagree w/ the heavy handed
feminist view. Do we really need to look through any other glasses than those of an honest person? Whether a man, woman or toad, the actions and convictions of this VP candidate don't jive with mine.
I love this job!
I love this job!
Yeah, I'm working on that
The light parodic touch has always escaped me. Maybe another 50 years and I'll get a handle on nuance.
Thank for the compliment, and yes we agree; straightforward honest humanism is the better window through which to evaluate politicians and people in general.
HUH?!?!
May I put a name on "the outdated bounds [SIC] of feminism’s past?"
Gloria Marie Steinem, Bella Savitsky Abzug, Sandra Day O'Connor, Shirley Anita St. Hill Chisholm
Even if you had a valid and meaningful argument, it and your credibility were blown there.
I suppose 'bringiton' has been touched by Obama. But, everything that Obama touches turns to shit.
You really have no taste for parody, do you?
Blown credibility in what way? Don't be so lazy; make an argument, not just a bald assertion.
Then of course comes the ritual invoking of Teh Scary Obama, the boogyman of the disconnected Left, and in this case immediately followed by characterizing me as shit, an equally intelligent and meaningful line of argument.
Well done,cryptically-named person; I couldn't have penned a better parody of the emptiness of your positions myself.
The parody escapes me.
I went back a fourth time and searched for it. I read the other comments for a clue. Nope.
Rather than grope around for a literary device, putting names on the four photographs ought to be sufficient for a rebuttal.
Bet this isn't the first time
What is it you're rebutting, and what is your rebuttal?
Those are the missing links here. Clearly you have some disagreement with something I've written; the animosity – and calling me shit – gives that much away. Fine, but what is it?
Take your time, no rush. Think it through, I'll be around.
And the clue you couldn't find? There are many, but how about the one you chose to highlight? How about four real feminists, brave tough strong righteous people well worth respecting, portrayed in black-and-white to represent "old-feminism" of the past in contrast with four anti-feminists shown in glorious full color to represent the future consequence of neofeminist thinking? Not over-the-top enough for you to notice? Best I can do, sadly. I could apologize, but I won't.
Celebrating Sarah Palin as a feminist success story is about as self-destructive a position as can be imagined. It is like coming across a "Jews For Hitler" movement in 1930's Germany, or the Jews for Jesus movement now. Dealing with it head-on here has gotten me nothing but anger in return; this absurdist parody is just a change of pace in terms of style, not in substance.
[SIC] yourself
bounds
She's not in Cheney's category
Let's not exaggerate.
No, I don't see this as being that important in the whole scheme of things. And, like I said, it is going to be really hard to generate sympathy for the trooper considering his past abusive behavior.
Did she expose a spy? Lie about a war? Give no-bid contracts to her former company? Plan to rape and pillage the oil fields of the middle east? Subvert the Department of Justice?
Let's get some perspective here. What she did was make some phone calls to see if she could dismiss a state trooper. And let's be honest here, without a job, he would have been pretty useless to Palin's sister. So, whatever he did must have paled in comparison.
Yes, it's probably technically an abuse of power. Given the cirmcumstances, most of us would be hard pressed to not use the power of our office to do something. But does it rise to the level of compromising our national security? Hardly.
OTOH, Obama's actions could do real harm to our ability to hold legitimate primary elections. If he gets elected, that will be the signal for the party to rig primary votes however they like. Might as well go back to the smoke filled rooms. And who would stop the next Mayor of Gary, Indiana or the next candidate who wanted to throw his opponent's voters out of a caucus site? Who would stop the intimidation and threats made to delegates? In the end, Palin's indiscretions seem really mild to Obama's. But you're not hysterical over Obama's bad deeds, which can affect you more directly and for a long time. And what is this conflation with feminism anyway??
I don't see the connection. Women have been bad since time immemorial. Sarah doesn't even rank on the list of historical worsts.
Come together at The Confluence
Come together at The Confluence
No exaggeration, goldberry?
Well that'll be dull. Here at Corrente as well as at The Confluence, exaggeration to effect is an accepted tactic; I'd hate to see it lost at either place.
But in this case I'm not exaggerating. The only thing that has held Palin down is the size of the stage she's been working from. Her scorched-earth approach to government in Wasilla was just as broad as anything Cheney has done in DC and as a percentage of employees more exhaustive; her bankrupting the town was to the same level of encumbrance as BushCo has done nationally; her active suppression of women's rights in Wasilla was for a time more successful than anything BushCo has accomplished; her support of secessionists is at least as treasonous as Cheney's compromise of national security and her ultimate goals are far more ambitious than invading Iraq for oil and revenge - she would, if she gets the chance, destroy most of the world to try and bring about the appearance of her sky-god; even Cheney isn't that disconnected from reality.
The connection with feminism is that in criticizing Palin I've been rebuked on the pretext that Palin is being held to standards that men are not. This little essay aims to put that aright, and show that I do believe that Palin is every bit the evil creature that Cheney is, if not more so. Having done that, hopefully I will be able to condemn her as thoroughly as I would any man with the same positions and deeds. May not work, but I do what I can.
[Try as you might, I'm not going to bite on Trooper Wooten; he is not the subject of this post. He is surely a horse's ass, but there is no evidence to support the worst of the claims that Palin and her family have made about him. The family court judge, the State Police investigators, former Director Monahan and the legislative Special Counsel all looked at the claims and all have agreed that Palin was largely lying, and that eventually she abused the power of her office in pursuit of an unjustified personal vendetta. That's the issue here, not some yahoo of a cop. If you want to go after him put up another post and we'll have that discussion.]
[I'm also not interested here in rehashing the delusion that primaries are actually democratic, or the daydream that they ever will be. Closing down the smoke-filled rooms gave us McGovern, and as decent a man as he is his nomination did not advance the Party's interests or those of Progressives in general. Immediately thereafter the back-room political power brokering was re-established and I suggest that it will not be changed for a very long time if ever, but that again is a distinct argument from what I'm asserting here. By all means, if you want to talk about it put up a post and we'll engage. I am very set in my opinions on the matter, but I would certainly enjoy exchanging views with you; who knows what we might learn?]
I've been stewing over Palin's "untouchability" for awhile, and
I think what bringiton says here is spot-on.
Our betters in the media and the Village
have decided that Sarah Palin is the next "It" girl, and must be given unswerving deference lest we be seen as uncouth and uncivilized. How dare we, after all, ask a woman the same questions we'd ask a man looking for the same position?
Well, how dare we NOT, I say?
And yes, in light of the work done -- but now being cheerfully undone with the glib lip service so typical of the 'liberal' media -- by the pioneering women our betters find so parochial, so old-school and so readily dismissed in favor of the 'naughty librarian' with the 'folksy vibe' and the vapid venomous vacuity of Coulter, Rice, et. al., I think it's time we did pause, consider -- and reconsider. Time perhaps even to stand up for the women who are doing the right thing for our future.
All of them, from Darcy Burner to Olympia Snowe.
We can admit that we’re killers … but we’re not going to kill today. That’s all it takes! Knowing that we’re not going to kill today! ~ Captain James T. Kirk, Stardate 3193.0
1 John 4:18
We can admit that we’re killers … but we’re not going to kill today. That’s all it takes! ~ Captain James T. Kirk, Stardate 3193.0
1 John 4:18
So you're against intellectual exercises, old 91A10?
as well as irony?
Look, whatever else you may have thought, Corrente is about the writing, first and foremost.
Bringiton's writing, here and in his other post on the same subject today, is thought-provoking and pitched persuasively, as well as asking the reader to do more than sit and stare at the screen as if taking in just another teevee rerun, ho hum.
That's not unusual for bringiton.
If it discomfits you, maybe you ought to relax and try broadening your perspective, eh?
We can admit that we’re killers … but we’re not going to kill today. That’s all it takes! Knowing that we’re not going to kill today! ~ Captain James T. Kirk, Stardate 3193.0
1 John 4:18
We can admit that we’re killers … but we’re not going to kill today. That’s all it takes! ~ Captain James T. Kirk, Stardate 3193.0
1 John 4:18
Not.
It's interesting, but not amusing, that you derive 'against intellectual exercises' from any of my words.
Irony. Parody. Call it what you will, but in this case the device and content failed. I suppose that 'light parodic touch has always escaped me'.
Heh Heh Heh. She said "broaden".
Yawn.
BIO historically carps about invisible armies of "PC" Police who are harshing his mellow, and then puts up two posts in a row which rely on the reader harboring somewhere deep inside agreement with the idea that feminism as we know and practice it is old and outdated - a relic of a poisonous past.
Now, apparently, we need to be Up With People and make way for an army of superachievers in our gender-blind post-feminist meritocracy.
I suppose the "SARAH PALIN IS A C__T" tee-shirts are also a deeply ironic post-feminist joke which some of us are too old, wrinkled and hairy to find funny, but the confirmed O-bots who wear them do so in the context of months of utterly unhinged misogyny. An experienced (or, OMG! totally old) person might look at the history there, and decide that what's on offer on those brightly colored tee-shirts isn't worth examination.
Likewise, BIO's posts today are in the context of months of bitterness toward his "PC" oppressors who apparently screw everything up.
So make it easy. Just tell us how much time we're supposed to spend peeling away at the multiple layers of deep depth of this sophomoric twaddle. We'll give it a go, throw up in our mouths, and politely walk away saying we don't understand.
"She's not in Cheney's category"?
No, she's his mini-me. Give her time.
The scary part is that Cheney actually looks and sounds as evil as he is. Palin puts a pretty face on all the demogoguery.
Excellent post bringiton.
The appearance of evil
Satan does not always manifest as the easily recognizable monstrous beasts of Dante's imagination but often and more dangerously as described by Milton, "an angel of heart-stopping beauty" or one of his minions who appear as does Belial, "with honeyed speech and appearance pleasing, persuasive arguments to make." [that last is paraphrased, I'm afraid, memory not being what it once was.]
Or, in the words of Waylon Jennings, "Be careful of something that's just what you want it to be."
Appreciate the compliment, darrow.
that's right--mini-me is a joke--
and an adornment who does not have or wield power--created not to do so in fact.
Sure, let's make it easy
Go ahead, throw up in your mouth right now.
I'll consider that result a good day's work well done.
A cowboy's work is never done.
Oh, good - we wouldn't want you spending the next 30 years like William Ayres - wishing you had done more.
I've always been more effective than Ayers
Good to see that recognized.
Now swallow that vomit, Tony, before any more chunks spew onto your keyboard.
Write more good.
N/T.
Think more better
N/T
these 2 funny
N/T
feminism was never just for liberals--
even tho it is a liberal stance. It's always been for all women--and for all of society.
bingo
hard for some folks to wrap their heads around this.
Evil, alas
doesn't fall neatly across partisan lines -- as we all thought, back in the happy, innocent days of the Bush regime. And it's the lesson of the Stanford Experiment -- heck, it's the lesson of history -- that the capacity for evil resides in all of us. If doing evil had no survival value, it would never have arisen in nature.
I like Palin as Cheney's Mini-Me -- that's pretty funny.
[ ] Very tepidly voting for Obama [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
Palin = Mephisto
She's simultaneously an air-head and an evil genius. She can't be both, and it's getting more amusing by the day to watch folks try and fumble around in the darkness for the most ridiculous narratives and devices to discredit her.
I oppose her because I disagree with her on most everything. It would seem that'd be the most easy wrote of take her down on a progressive blog like this one. That so many are going all through the grass to make silly, irrelevant points makes me think that this isn't really about her, at all; it's about something much more deep and personal. Someone's got some major 'mommy issues'...
But, we've always been at war with Eastasia...
What I had to say, BIO
although stymied by my ability to carry it out by improperly "htmling" the images, is showing the disgusting images which also shown at cannonfire (which if you had clicked on the link you would have seen for yourself) of erstwhile "progressive liberals" proudly posing in their T-shirts saying "Sarah Palin is a Cunt!", and cartoons of Palin getting teeth punched out of her face.
Your post is clearly coming from a place of guilt. She isn't a "real feminist" and so she shouldn't be defended by feminists against sexist attacks. Your post says Palin is bad, ergo, nothing sexist said about her can be bad because we are just trying to save the world from a bad person. And anyway, since she is bad, how can you defend her against any attack? Do you approve of this bad person? Her anti-feminist stances? Lay back and enjoy it!
Sure, Palin=bad, we get it (though she is VP and McCain as P would presumably be 1000 times worse and few people are spending as much time making that argument on the merits, or that Obama will be any better, but....), but none of this attack is new, this is typical Karl Rove playbook of "you kick in the balls; I don't and pretend it never happened and we walk away winners". But apparently this is now sold as "Progressivism", or the "New" progressiveism. One clearly built on the worst of people's natures. One clearly NOT built on the concept of social justice, but rather on ignoring any truthy affront to social justice as long as performs its service towards some goal. Not a well-defined goal, but trust (Obama) that it is "progressive".
What many "liberals" are doing now, I hope they are deeply ashamed of later. No-one really seems very interested in answering Lambert's question of how a "Progressive" movement can be built on this basis.
BIO, why don't you start with that one? Although you have to try better than saying "First we get rid of the Republicans, by whatever means necessary", or at least have higher standards of fair combat,, because if that is the only criteria, there are quicker solutions.
-----------------------------
Around these parts we call cucumber slices circle bites
-----------------------------
I'm not such a bad guy once you get to know me.
And still I have no idea what it is you're trying to say
There are photos at Cannonfire, which link indeed I clicked on. So what? You have to use your words, herb, not just throw up a link and hope people understand what you might mean.
And still, now that you've written something, it is so far off the mark I remain confused. Well, not so much confused as still empty-handed. I made none of the allegations you seem to be exercised about. My argument is that it has been asserted by some here, in multiple threads following posts by several different authors, that Palin is being mistreated and subjected to sexism simply by examining her acts, her thoughts, her philosophies and her motivations. I dispute that restriction. I say it is perfectly proper to question anything and everything about Palin, just as I would with anyone else - man or woman.
HtV: BIO, why don’t you start with that one?
As much as you and your cohort want to give me direction on what I should and shouldn't write, I'll keep my own counsel on that thanks anyway.
Although you have to try better than saying “First we get rid of the Republicans, by whatever means necessary”, or at least have higher standards of fair combat,, because if that is the only criteria, there are quicker solutions.
Perhaps you'd like to expand on that, the "quicker" solutions?
Herb the verb bingo alert.
THANK you.
That's exactly it.
Mountains of sophomoric bilge and it just boils down to rationalization for silly, stupid, immature people to continue the violence they've spent 18 months growing quite accustomed to.
Yes, quicker ...
... and FINAL solutions.
We can be so proud.
Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com
Your framing = you own it
You are the one who is jumping the shark with the title of this post, not me, it is your's to defend.
Here: I find it possible to do two conflicting things (no, wait, THREE, no FOUR things!) at once:
1. Find Sarah Palin a poor/unacceptable choice for VP and therefore (more importantly) a reflection on how weak a candidate McCain is (and luckily McCain has as much chance being voted President as you or I do), and still defend her against sexist attacks.
2. Find most framing of the arguments against Palin as despicably sexist, especially when they "innocently" bring up how it is somehow reverse sexism to defend Palin against sexist attacks since she is against "feminist" causes, and yet hope that she is never elected to higher office.
3. Hope that her philosophy of government is never implemented yet at the same time believe that being treated with equal respect vis a vis your gender is not a privilege, but a right, in other words, she doesn't need to be "worthy" in any sense whatsoever in order to be affirmatively defended against sexist and misogynist attacks by anyone, friend or foe.
4. Be pleased that at least one of the major parties is running a woman for the (second) highest office in the land, and also be pleased that one of the major parties is running an African-American for the HIGHEST office in the land, but also be absolutely appalled that it is erstwhile DEMOCRATS not REPUBLICANS that are running a rat-fucking Rovian campaign with T-shirts that have the basest, most reprehensible "identity politics" epithets, and nobody in the SCLM
or even the SCLBS (so-called liberal blogosphere) can even bother to say "that's bad". Rather it's "so what, she's not a feminist anyway. Besides, Hillary lost and there's no such thing as "wimmin voters" anyway.
If you reread your comment in reply, you may notice that although you said you saw those pics, you can't even bother to say "That's bad.".
It's a shoulder shrug for you, got it, understood.
-----------------------------
Around these parts we call cucumber slices circle bites
-----------------------------
I'm not such a bad guy once you get to know me.
shoulder shrug for the whole line of commentary
hope that's understood
Oh, it's understood completely
Both in detail, and the big picture.
[ ] Very tepidly voting for Obama [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
"those faded and equivocal calls of yesteryear..."
Those would be the battles of the 60s, again?
I was hoping the rhetoric of the Obama campaign would dissipate once he was elected, but if this post is any guide, it's going to become more pervasive (as in this other example of revisionist airbrushing).
There seem to be two emerging rhetorical strategies for self-medicating the cognitive dissonance that results from running a misogynist and sexist campaign while claiming to be progressive. One is to claim they never happened in the campaign; the second is to frame them as outdated and no longer relevant battles. It never ends, does it?
[ ] Very tepidly voting for Obama [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
"Marry Me"-level bingo.
Now THAT ONE, my friends, can write.