Santorum Chastises ‘Feminist Community’ For Not Embracing Palin
Santorum Chastises ‘Feminist Community’ For Not Embracing Palin
Yesterday, former right-wing senator Rick Santorum heaped lavish praise on Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK) on Laura Ingraham’s radio show. To explain why “feminists” haven’t jumped on the Palin bandwagon, Santorum declared that she is “the Clarence Thomas for feminists,” whom Santorum said African-Americans and civil rights groups “obviously” should have supported:
SANTORUM: Sarah Palin is the Clarence Thomas for feminists. The civil rights community, the African-American community obviously should have rallied behind Clarence Thomas an his achievement, but they hammered him because he was a conservative. And the civil rights establishment was first and foremost liberal and then for the liberal rights of — as liberals saw it, what blacks should have in this country. And the same thing with the feminist community.
Listen to it:
Since Santorum feels that all African-Americans should “obviously” have celebrated Thomas’ “achievement,” it’s unclear whether he realizes Thomas was not, in fact, the first black Supreme Court Justice. That “achievement” was made by the far more progressive Thurgood Marshall. Of course, neither is Palin the first female vice presidential candidate, that spot being taken by the progressive candidate Geraldine Ferraro.
Santorum finds it shocking that black Americans could have possibly opposed a black candidate for the Supreme Court — despite Thomas’s long history of standing in the way of civil rights. Not only is Thomas a well-known opponent of affirmative action, but also, while working at the Department of Education, he made it more difficult to file class action lawsuits for racial discrimination, which angered many civil rights groups.”
What’s more, Santorum’s praise for Palin’s so-called feminist perspective is bizarre, considering his own traditional opposition to working mothers. In his book, “It Takes a Family,” he blames “radical feminists” for refusing to acknowledge “the essential work women have done in being the primary caregivers” of children, and he rails on the selfishness of working parents:
In far too many families with young children, both parents are working, when, if they really took an honest look at the budget, they might confess that both of them really don’t need to, or at least may not need to work as much as they do… And for some parents, the purported need to provide things for their children simply provides a convenient rationalization for pursuing a gratifying career outside the home.
Topic Cloud
Yeah, just like he’d like to “embrace” her.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:15 pmPalin goes some distance in debunking the idea that Republicans or conservatives wouldn’t vote for a woman.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:16 pmSantorum declared that she is “the Clarence Thomas for feminists,”
- - Dontcha love it when the Right wing is so tone deaf and irony deficient? Or maybe Santorum is now a writer for The Colbert Report.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:18 pmLeave it to Laura Ingraham to put a microphone near the lying lips of this fascist mysoginist pig.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:19 pmPalin is to feminism as
Clarence Thomas is to jurisprudence.
A colossal failure.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:20 pmDamn, just when I forgotten all about this clod…
September 9th, 2008 at 7:20 pmCaption contest:
A prostate check up? Here?
September 9th, 2008 at 7:21 pmRick you need to buy a clue. “Feminists” are not supporting Palin because she is the antithesis of what the feminist movement was and is about.
Sarah Palin will not be supported by women simply because she is also a woman. If she is supported it is because she has earned that support due to who she is and what she stands for. Likewise, if she is not supported it is because she has not earned that support due to who she is and what stands for.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:23 pmI disagree with Palin on social issues, but I think it’s great that more and more women are vying for seats of power.
Feminists obviously wouldn’t support Palin for her pro-life stand. But, feminists should consider that it is in large part because of their efforts that Palin is in the position she’s in.
20 years from now, the idea that Palin was picked, only because she is a woman will be as ridiculous as the notion that Obama was only chosen because he was black.
Women will have more and more equal representation throughout all aspects of life. Palin’s nomination shouldn’t be frowned upon, but a realization of the goals of feminism.
That being said, feminists should fight her tooth and nail, if they don’t like her positions on the issues.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:23 pm“The Clarence Thomas for feminists”?
Clarence Thomas isn’t even the Clarence Thomas for Clarence Thomas.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:24 pmSo santorum and the republicans think women should vote for Palin because she is a woman, but that it would be wrong for blacks to vote for Obama because he is black. Interesting dichotomy they have there.
Beyond that nothing about Palin even remotely comes close to the feminist agenda except for the fact that she has attained a nice career for herself.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:25 pmDid someone mention something about men and dogs? I thought so.
Even a nstrongly conservative base of Pennsylvania voters refused to send this dimwit back to the Senate for another round. The chapter on Senator Santorum should long ago have closed.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:25 pmThe Republicans seem to have such a token approach to the inclusion of minorities into their party. Less than 2% of their delegates were black. That does not mean that there are not exceptions such as Colin Powell or Rice. However, these seem to be few and far between and often done to showcase that they are not really racist. Unfortunately, the party of Lincoln is racist and took control of the South through taking that mantle just as we saw Willie Horton or, now, uppity Obama references from their party.
Indeed, the Republicans seem to be the first to play the race card when one of their extreme and out of the mainstream candidates is a minority and opposed.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:26 pmEveryone is talking about Sarah Palin. By the way, who is that shaky old pig following her around?
September 9th, 2008 at 7:27 pmAnd just who ever advanced that “idea”, backup?
September 9th, 2008 at 7:30 pm“…former right-wing senator Rick Santorum…”
TP,
Why waste your time and ours with these has-been ash-wholes?
Who gives a pheminist phlying phuck what this fhormer phool thinks? Post something constructive that will help us put all these lying bastards away for the rest of my life, at least.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:32 pmExcept Obama wasn’t “chosen” the same way Palin was “picked”. He was chosen by millions of primary voters and out polled several other excellent candidates in dozens of primaries and caucuses.
Palin was chosen by a single, desperate old man.
Big difference.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:33 pm“… for the liberal rights of — as liberals saw it, what blacks should have in this country.”
o. my. gawd.
as opposed to how “conservatives” saw it, what “rights” blacks should have in this country?
yeesh.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:33 pm**You mean the need to provide things for their children like food, housing, health care? Or are you just so used to pulling things out of your a$$ you really don’t think first?
And what, women need to support other women jusy because they have vaginas? Do you really think women are that shallow and stupid or is it just you who is that shallow and stupid? Talk about repukes who just don’t get it. All this coming from the jerk who passed around the miscarried fetus to his kids to hold and kiss. This guy really creeps me out.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:34 pm#15.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:36 pmHey ralph isn’t it rude to bring attention the false premises of others when they are busy trying to disquise them?
Backup,
“But, feminists should consider that it is in large part because of their efforts that Palin is in the position she’s in.”
No, Palin should consider that it is in a large part because of feminists’ efforts that she is in the position that she’s in. But I doubt she will.
The suggestion that feminists should be taking some kind of comfort in the fact that their efforts may have contributed to this situation is a bit of a reach to say the least.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:36 pmSantorum is an idiot….
September 9th, 2008 at 7:36 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
backup Says:
Palin goes some distance in debunking the idea that Republicans or conservatives wouldn’t vote for a woman.
And just who ever advanced that “idea”, backup?
Hmm, maybe it was Maggie Thatcher.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:38 pmWrong again b-kup. Sane people, whether they are “feminists” or not, will run from Palin as soon as they realize that she’s bat-scat crazy. Check out this video about her and the church she proudly claims as her own.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5K_1Eit0pxM
September 9th, 2008 at 7:38 pmSantorum is nobody of import. Not even a man behind a screen.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:39 pmbackup Says:
Feminists obviously wouldn’t support Palin for her pro-life stand. But, feminists should consider that it is in large part because of their efforts that Palin is in the position she’s in.
You think abortion is the only issue on which feminists and Palin part ways? Are you kidding?
As to your other comment, Mary has covered it well. People like Palin and other women who seek high office while snarling about feminists are the ones who need to consider how they got there.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:40 pmSantorum
;)
September 9th, 2008 at 7:41 pmbackup’s view of the feminist thought process:
I’m a girl.
Girls need to get ahead in our society.
I plan on voting.
Palin is a girl.
No need to think further.
I’ll vote for Palin.
backup is a dumbass.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:43 pmTo feminism in the US, Palin represents taking one step forward, to be set nearly 10 decades back.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:43 pmIt’s funny, because TP didn’t highlight the one thing Santorum got right: “And the civil rights establishment was first and foremost liberal and then for the liberal rights of — as liberals saw it, what blacks should have in this country. And the same thing with the feminist community.”
Yep. That’s right, Ricky. Civil rights movements and the feminist movement are first and foremost liberal. Funny how that works, and that “conservatives” are always the one in resistance.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:45 pmmary Says:
Backup,
“But, feminists should consider that it is in large part because of their efforts that Palin is in the position she’s in.”
No, Palin should consider that it is in a large part because of feminists’ efforts that she is in the position that she’s in. But I doubt she will.
The suggestion that feminists should be taking some kind of comfort in the fact that their efforts may have contributed to this situation is a bit of a reach to say the least.
I would think that feminists should be dismayed by this “pick”. She’s as feminist as Santorum.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:46 pmPoll shows big shift to McCain among white women
RIVERSIDE, Ohio (Reuters) - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama on Tuesday brushed aside a survey that showed him losing support among white women voters to John McCain since the Republican standard-bearer named Sarah Palin as his running mate.
LINK
Personally, I don’t think they care about the feminists.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:49 pmSounds like a valid comparisonto me!
Clarence T was a Repug Anti-civil rights TOKEN Black, Palin is an anti-Feminist TOKEN female. Phonies, both of them, who owe their positions to the Right-Wing-Welfare Machine.
Clarence adjudicates exactly the way his Masters tell him to.
September 9th, 2008 at 7:50 pmPalin may kick the traces a bit, but will settle into the Puppet mode in reasonable time.
Zooey Says: #27
Gross, yet appropriate!
September 9th, 2008 at 7:50 pmPalin is not a feminist. She’s the antithesis of feminism - instead of a powerful woman, she’s a mean girl. Whole ‘nother thing.
Evidently, to Santorum, we all look alike…
September 9th, 2008 at 7:50 pmZooey. Did I say that feminist should vote for Palin?
September 9th, 2008 at 7:56 pmbreaking my own rule, again… can’t resist…
backup Says:
I disagree with Palin on social issues, but I think it’s great that more and more women are vying for seats of power.
gee, that’s mighty white and male of you… thanks!
Feminists obviously wouldn’t support Palin for her pro-life stand. But, feminists should consider that it is in large part because of their efforts that Palin is in the position she’s in.
you have to take the bad with the good, it’s true…
but it is palin that should be thankful…
20 years from now, the idea that Palin was picked, only because she is a woman will be as ridiculous as the notion that Obama was only chosen because he was black.
you mean ‘in SPITE of being black… AND he was ELECTED.
AND, the idea that she was picked because she was a woman AND mcPANDER was desperate is already a given… don’t have to wait 20 years…
but i guess that means it wasn’t ONLY because she’s a woman…
Women will have more and more equal representation throughout all aspects of life. Palin’s nomination shouldn’t be frowned upon, but a realization of the goals of feminism.
you NOTICED! but, those goals are for QUALIFIED women…
not posers.
That being said, feminists should fight her tooth and nail, if they don’t like her positions on the issues.
pretty sure we’re working on that…
September 9th, 2008 at 7:58 pmthanks again for your approval.
Santorum, blah blah blah, frothy bullshiite, who cares?
BUT, have you seen the latest McStain ad?:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVLQhRiEXZs&eurl=http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/ 2008/ 09/ new_mccain_ad_badly_distorts_o_1.php
Now you tell me this isn’t painting Obama as the scary black child molester!
I am honestly shaking after seeing this, and if Obama won’t hit back, I say we go directly to the 527’s.
Phuck nuance and reason, it’s time to go for blood. Keating 5, dumping Carol for Cindy, show McStain eyeballing Palin a-ss during her intro speech.
Lie if you like. It’s not like honesty matters in this campaign!
I’m sick.
PEACE
September 9th, 2008 at 7:59 pmLet me repeat. Sarah Palin is a woman. Sarah Palin is no Feminist.
As Gloria Steinham said so eloquently a few days ago. Palin is a Phyllis Schlafly only younger. Except not even that is so, Schlafly was a lawyer. Palin is nothing of the sort.
Santorum is irrelevant.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:01 pmWell, there you have it.
One super creepy conservative speaking in tongues for another
even creepier super conservative, and an end-timer too boot.
All of this heavenly magic on the Laura Ingraham radio show no less…
God has most certainly blessed this United States of America.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:02 pmWhat more proof does one need?
For assholierthanthouers like ‘Sanctimonious’ Santorum, life begins at conception… and ends at birth…!
====
September 9th, 2008 at 8:02 pmTo explain why “feminists” haven’t jumped on the Palin bandwagon, Santorum declared that she is “the Clarence Thomas for feminists,”…
Oh, you mean the total incompetent chosen entirely on political fealty to extreme RW causes, and superficial or secondary physical characteristics? The token (and bought’n'paid-for) “minority”?
Cheers,
September 9th, 2008 at 8:03 pmZooey. I’ll help you, because yours didn’t make any sense:
Zooey Says:
backup’s view of the feminist thought process:
Here’s what I really said:
September 9th, 2008 at 8:03 pmDieNowForPeace Says:
Poll shows big shift to McCain among white women
RIVERSIDE, Ohio (Reuters) - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama on Tuesday brushed aside a survey that showed him losing support among white women voters to John McCain since the Republican standard-bearer named Sarah Palin as his running mate.
LINK
Personally, I don’t think they care about the feminists.
that’s not what he’s about, and you know it…
these white women voters and not moving from obama, they are repugs who had planned to stay home until palin came on…
they’ll figure it out, when the facts get out there…
and YOU’re not helping.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:03 pmAnna Quindlen Nails the Hypocricy of the Republicans:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/157543/page/1
“I never thought I would live long enough to see the day when the Republican presidential candidate would cite membership in the PTA as evidence of executive experience, when the far right would laud the full-time working mothers of newborns, when social conservatives would stare down teenage pregnancy and replace their pursed-lip accusations of promiscuity with hosannas about choosing life.
Her surrogates wanted the press to write about mooseburgers and ignore how the governor had once pursued the kind of earmarked federal funds she now insists are anathema to her. Conservatives have probably used the word “sexist” more in the past week than they have in the past 50 years.
The governor has talked about the choice she and her pregnant teenage daughter have made, but would deny other women the right to make their own choices. She talks about fighting the old boys’ network and corrupt politicians, but would turn over the private reproductive decisions of American women to both. This is not choosing life. It is choosing unwarranted intrusion into the family lives of women. Which, ironically, is exactly what the Republicans accused the press of doing in the case of Governor Palin.”
And that Personel Chef Gov. Palin Fired… well turns out the Chef position was just recategorized and is still cooking for the Governor.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:04 pmNo b-kup. You didn’t say anyone should vote for anybody. However, your constant defense of the indefensible has grown tiring and you continue to parrot party propaganda.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:04 pmSantorum is not unlike a case of the crabs.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:05 pm“Public school monopoly?”
September 9th, 2008 at 8:05 pmlivelongandprosper Says:
I would think that feminists should be dismayed by this “pick”. She’s as feminist as Santorum.
Is that what’s been causing that pain I’ve been feeling since last week? Dismay? I thought maybe it was due to some kind of mean-spirited cosmic joke or something.
When I feel tempted to react negatively I get the sense that I’d be playing right into the bahstards hands. Then they’d be able to point and say, “Look, one of those bitter, elitist feminists. Tsk, tsk.”
September 9th, 2008 at 8:09 pmbackup Says:
Here’s what I really said:
That being said, feminists should fight her tooth and nail, if they don’t like her positions on the issues.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:03 pm
So?
September 9th, 2008 at 8:09 pmWhat is the indefensible here?
I’m glad women are vying for seats of power?
I disagree with with Palin on social issues?
Feminists should fight Palin tooth and nail, if they disagree with her?
Feminists should see Palin as a realization of their efforts - women in postions of power?
Maybe you’re not reading my posts or maybe you can enlighten me. What exactly is so indefensible about my post.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:09 pm[”Man On Dog” Santorum]: The civil rights community, the African-American community obviously should have rallied behind Clarence Thomas an his achievement,…
Right. Santorum thinks blacks should base their views of a person based on the colour of their skin, not the content of their character. Thus, there’s no difference between Thurgood Marshall and Clarence Thomas; they are fungible. Hell, you seen one black, you’ve seen ‘em all….
Same applies to those things with two tits and a vagina. As long as they have the essentials, there’s no need for further inquiry; in fact such is discouraged….
Cheers,
September 9th, 2008 at 8:11 pmThe polls are fudged, biased, wrong! There are a lot more Dems than Republicans, Independents are a minority. The polls are being taken 50/50 Dem/Repuke, so the results are meaningless. Repuke women and some “Indies” may be influenced by Sara-Nowherea, but no real feminist.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:14 pmbackup:
September 9th, 2008 at 8:15 pmI notice you cite only your disagreement with Palin on “social issues”. I can take this to mean that you have no problem with her made up story about being a reform antiporm earmark crusader?
And how is saying that feminists should fight Palin tooth and nail if they disagree with her, somehow ‘parroting’ party propaganda?
Is it somehow very similar to ‘feminists should embrace Palin’?
’should fight’ = ’should embrace’
Explain that to me, when you get a chance.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:16 pmMary: “… Then they’d be able to point and say, “Look, one of those bitter, elitist feminists. Tsk, tsk.”
Let ‘em. Speak the truth. The braying jackasses will hee-haw no matter what you say. It’s what they do best.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:18 pmHis reasoning is flawed. Just because they’re minorities that are conservative republicans they should be celebrated and/or embraced. However, the republican ways do nothing to promote more equality for women or woman’s rights. Why would any smart woman support Palin?
September 9th, 2008 at 8:18 pmantiporm? pork, pork, pork!
September 9th, 2008 at 8:19 pmSara-NoWhere-A. I like it.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:19 pmbackup Says:
Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews are to progressives as O’Reilly and Glen Beck are to conservatives.
Mathews Compares Palin To Fictional Union Organizer Norma Rae
Will Mr. backup please claim his order? The cooked crow’s smell is beginning to offend the other customers…
And this:
Palin goes some distance in debunking the idea that Republicans or conservatives wouldn’t vote for a woman.
… sounds like you would like another helping. Sorry, you must first finish what’s on your plate.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:20 pmBy Santorum’s “reasoning” (most Repugs are stimulus/response), all Hispanics should support Gonzales, All Italian-Americans Scalia, Ect. Ect. and so on. And all crazys should love him.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:21 pmIt’s not the post, b-kup, it’s the subject. Ms. Palin herself is what, I should say who, is indefensible. Here’s the deal, one more time.
1. Ms. Palin is unqualified on intellectual and ethical grounds.
2. Whoever has picked her is unqualified for picking her.
3. Even if he didn’t personally pick her, Flippy McSpin is unqualified for keeping her on the ticket.
Anything else on the subject is just venting or BS, depending on point of view.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:21 pmZooey. Here’s me:
Here’s your interpretation of my position:
Assuming that you are not merely a partisan that doesn’t bother to read or think, how do you get one from the other?
September 9th, 2008 at 8:21 pmDing! ding!
Order up!
Ding! ding!
September 9th, 2008 at 8:23 pmThe voters of Pennsylvania rejected Ricky, let’s all do the same!
September 9th, 2008 at 8:24 pmTwo issues here:
Senator Santorum supports an economic policy that forces a family of four to work three minimum wage jobs to earn above the poverty level. Talk about a no win.
Guys just like Santorum have controlled the Congress and the White House for years. Oh my God! The conservative agenda is going to ruin this country.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:26 pmWhat’s the matter, backup? Isn’t the crow fresh? I’m sorry, but you’ve been ducking the waitress since last night, so of course it’s going to taste funky.
Bon apetit.’
September 9th, 2008 at 8:27 pmbarfly. In a world were you insist that everything republican is evil, without giving it any thought, I would concede that my saying that the nomination of Palin helps debunk the idea that Republicans wouldn’t support women leadership.
In the real world however, it’s an objective claim, that’s valid, if you give it some thought.
And you may not think that Olbermann and Matthews are partisan (as Beck and O’Reilly are), but the producers over at MSNBC do.
Save that crow for yourself, it might help you build some strength.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:28 pmbackup:
September 9th, 2008 at 8:31 pmI see you have your hands full but other than social issues, do you have any other concerns regarding Ms. Palin?
backup Says:
Assuming that you are not merely a partisan that doesn’t bother to read or think, how do you get one from the other?
September 9th, 2008 at 8:21 pm
Just having fun at your expense, Captain.
I think katy says it best at #42.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:31 pmWillowOrchid Says: “The polls are being taken 50/50 Dem/Repuke…”
According to my irrefutable source, Granny, the polls are taken from 100% registered Republicans. This would put Obama at 75% and McLoser at 25%. Given the fudge factor of +/- 2% we have the true McSame following of 23%, give or take, that always follows Chicken George WTF and now CGWTF, Jr. AKA The Hanoi Soprano.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:32 pmAnd you may not think that Olbermann and Matthews are partisan (as Beck and O’Reilly are), but the producers over at MSNBC do.
Please. Your insane monkey chorus has been gibbering for their removal. It has nothing to do with their “biases,” and everything to do with “working the refs.”
How’s the crow? Not too spicy?
September 9th, 2008 at 8:32 pmZooey. Well, it’s an honest answer. And you’re right, katy says it better.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:33 pmShe’s a real EarMark Girl
September 9th, 2008 at 8:34 pmLiving in a Earmark World
Building all her Earmark Bridges
To Nowhere.
Has a dumb philosophy
Fires those who don’t agree,
McPOW says she is just like He
And Everybody.
She’s wants to be your Vice Pres
But Hides away from the Press
Tells a lie with every breath
To Everybody.
I would concede that my saying that the nomination of Palin helps debunk the idea that Republicans wouldn’t support women leadership.
Because of… what? The convention? Those folk are desperate, and since McCain threw them Palin, they are grasping at her candidacy like it was their last hope.
I don’t think independent women are so desperate.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:35 pmRepublicans have no shame whatsoever. Callking Palin a feminist is an insult to all feminists & all intelligent, forward-thinking women. Feminist?? She is against women’s rights, believes in creationism, denies global warming, cuts funding to women’s issues, & thinks the Iraq war is God-driven. No femininism there. Frankly, it’s also an insult to all men who respect progressive, independent women as well.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:36 pmbarfly. you’re ‘crow’ thing is a little creepy, but you seem to enjoy it.
dbadass. you’re right. Hands full. I don’t agree with the Christian views.
I like the idea of someone who fights corruption. Someone willing to fight their own party. I like the idea of a woman in power. I like the idea of someone from outside of Washington. I support gun rights. And Palin has some experience with energy issues in Alaska. And relative high approval there.
Obviously, if the claims are false, it changes my impression. I not confident that those claims are false. I’ll be paying attention over the next 2 months.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:40 pmI would concede that my saying that the nomination of Palin helps debunk the idea that Republicans wouldn’t support women leadership.
Then why not annoint someone more experienced, like Kay Bailey Hutchins?
Oh, that’s right: she’s not very telegenic, and standing next to McCain, they’d look positively antiquarian, together.
Better to have a pretty woman beside him - because we know that’s the real reason they’d vote for her. Image uber substance.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:42 pmbackup Says:
barfly. you’re ‘crow’ thing is a little creepy, but you seem to enjoy it.
That’s twice now.
You’re getting in a rut…
September 9th, 2008 at 8:44 pmDASM, I’d be all for callking Palin, as long as it’s her screechy mouth that get’s callked up
September 9th, 2008 at 8:46 pmSo why didn’t McIIIrd pick a qualified female senator?
Oh, right.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:46 pmWell, I’m out.
My job here is done. But rest assured whenever backup starts making ridiculous and unsubstantiated statements, I’ll be right there, ready with my apron and trusty spatula, to serve another helping…
September 9th, 2008 at 8:49 pmI have yet to see any evidence of corruption fighting. Is it just me? This seems like marketing… I feel like chicken tonight…
September 9th, 2008 at 8:49 pmI’d sure hate to be Sanrotum’s dog.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:51 pmdbadass ~ Bwaaak!!
September 9th, 2008 at 8:51 pmNow we’re getting close to the real issue. “If the claims are false” (about Palin’s accomplishments) is very telling.
Here’s a claim that is true, and well documented on several websites:
Virtually every point Ms. Palin made in her acceptance speech, aside from the family prattle, was misleading or an outright lie.
Just one example is “my opponents would rather do nothing” about energy independence. That’s a lie, and a stupid one at that. And she said enough similar things in her first national speech to convince me that she is dangerously dogmatic, partisan, and dishonest. Once again, she disqualified herself before her political views even enter the discussion.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:57 pmAnyone know how the appeal of the Juneau Superior court’s rejection of Alaska House bill 149 ever turned out and where Palin stands on that whole thing?
September 9th, 2008 at 8:58 pmWe ALL like those ideas, backup.
Thing most people are missing, especially Republicans, is that right now Sarah Palin is an empty vessel, a blank canvas onto which they can project their most treasured fantasies, much like Obama was for a lot of progressives twelve months ago.
We’ve since found out that Obama is not as progressive as many of us would like, but we’re excited about his candidacy nonetheless.
Sarah Palin’s effectiveness is based largely on the fact that she is an unknown quantity right now. The McCain campaignj can say anything it wants about her, and desperate Republicans will buy it. The press will repeat it.
We have two months to really get to know who Sarah Palin is, and the early indications are that she’s not all that. She IS from outside Washington, that’s true, and she is a woman in power.
But her reform credentials are beginning to look more like the fake town of Rock Ridge that fooled Black Bart and his band of outlaws and ne’er-do-wells in Blazing Saddles. Her veracity, sadly, seems to be about average for a Republican pol, and her old-school way of wielding power has landed her square in the middle of an abuse-of-power investigation, which the McCain campaign is striving to derail.
John McCain is hoping to sneak by, using the Republican tendency to project its fantasies onto shallow figurines to goose his electoral performance. We have two months to get to know Sarah Palin, and I fear we can’t really depend on the media to help us.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:59 pmFinally the truth comes out about why Failin Palin was picked. Jane Fonda refused to run with the Hanoi Soprano.
September 9th, 2008 at 8:59 pmbackup Says:
Obviously, if the claims are false, it changes my impression. I not confident that those claims are false. I’ll be paying attention over the next 2 months.
The information is available now, mantastic. Your faux even-handed a n a l y s i s has gotten old and moldy. The cracks are showing.
I like the idea of someone who fights corruption.
So do we all. The evidence that this label fits Palin is slim and rapidly rubs off. How do you feel about community organizers, actually helping disadvantaged people improve their lives?
Someone willing to fight their own party.
To what end? Is this more of that faux even-handed b.s.? Is there some critical symbolism to voting on the other side of the aisle? You must be crazy about Lieberman.
I like the idea of a woman in power.
So you voted for Hillary? I’m amazed. I’m glad to hear you would have supported her if she’d gotten the nomination.
I like the idea of someone from outside of Washington.
So you support Obama? He’s from Illinois, and all the right wing goofballs like to remind us he hasn’t been in Washington very long. You might want to consider supporting someone on the basis of their principles and their social record rather than geography, though.
I support gun rights.
Yippee.
And Palin has some experience with energy issues in Alaska.
Indeed. Anyone living in Alaska has “some experience” because they live off the gas and oil revenues.
And relative high approval there.
See above. They love it when people send them nice big checks and bring on the pork.
September 9th, 2008 at 9:01 pmpete:
September 9th, 2008 at 9:02 pmThe problem I have with the “if the claims are false” quote is that it implies a predetermined mindset that they are not false. In light of the Bridge to Nowhere nonsense and the clearly documeneed half truths read by her in that speech, I think an objective individual might start from the point of seeking evidence to prove these claims rather than suggesting they have to be disproved. Sure giving someone the benefit of doubt is nice and all but still…
ralph. If she’s an empty vessel, Americans (and I) will figure it out, and she’ll be a liability, not an asset to McCain.
But, I suggest that verdict is not out.
Progressives here tell me that everything she says is a lie, but they also told me her choice proves McCain has poor judgement. That women felt patronized. That Palin’s baby is not her own. That her selection would be withdrawn before the convention. Then he got a 10 point bump in the polls. That’s a disconnect.
I listen to what progressive have to say. I’ve read every word of the kilkenny letter. But, I’m not going to take it as fact (until it’s verified through other sources). You wouldn’t take the word of a conservative about his Obama research.
It will come out. 2 months is a long time. I feel comfortable keeping an open mind until November.
September 9th, 2008 at 9:09 pmYo, Backeroo, here’s a nice article that might shed some light for you
September 9th, 2008 at 9:14 pmMichael Kinsley, Time Magazine
Sarah Palin’s Alaskonomics
WillowOrchid @61 Says:
Let ‘em. Speak the truth. The braying jackasses will hee-haw no matter what you say. It’s what they do best.
Don’t get me wrong. I’ll let people know why I don’t like her issue-wise etc. when given the chance. But, I dislike her in other ways that I’m still coming to grips with. I’m thinking that it has something to do with her jaw. Seriously. She sets it like a little kid about to be a brat or something.
September 9th, 2008 at 9:14 pmbackup, you clearly misunderstood what i meant by an “empty vessel”. The fault is probably mine.
I didn’t mean that there’s nothing there. I meant that, since she’s not well known, Republicans desperate for a hope are willing to assume she has everything they’re looking for. They don’t see the cracks in the facade, the just see the shiny surface right now.
In fairness, Democrats are willing to assume that she’s as corrupt as the rest of her party.
I suspect, given the evidence we’ve seen so far, that the truth lies somewhat closer to Democrats’ assumptions, but whether the voters will figure that out remains to be seen.
September 9th, 2008 at 9:14 pmTrue db. However,a doubt that I give some benefit to is the profound wish of people to think well of their leaders. Some years ago I would not have admitted the possibility that a new VP candidate would lie to America for 40 minutes. Now? A few minutes of “Googling” makes it possible to fact check virtually every public remark a person ever utters. Her words have been judged, and found wanting.
September 9th, 2008 at 9:15 pmbackup:
September 9th, 2008 at 9:16 pmJust becuase many Americans think Applee’s is cuisine, doesn’t make it so. You are talking a bout a system which put Perot and Stockdale on stage to the embarassment of an entire nation. We will indeed see but please do not patronize me with the idea that an empty vessel can not be sold if it is marketed properly.
Oh, and backup… 2 months is NOT a long time to get to know a public figure, especially when the campaign is keeping her under wraps and tightly controlling access.
To make matters worse, the necessary media appetite for news and information will make it look like a frenzy (as we’ve already seen) and Republicans will try to spin that to their advantage (as we’ve also already seen).
The best hope we have of squeezing out some truth is if the press gets pissed off at the BFF John McCain and start doing their frickin’ jobs.
September 9th, 2008 at 9:22 pmbackup Says: “But, I suggest that verdict is not out.”
The cliche to which you have reference originated with the Jury Verdict in a Court of Law. The proper usage of the term is “The verdict is still OUT” meaning the jury has not reached a decision, or “The verdict is IN meaning the jury has reached a decision. In the case in point the true “verdict” will be “in” on the evening of November 4. Until then your illiterate ramblings are indicative of the ignorance of the entire Rethuglican horde. The crowd is in no way to be considered a party with the positive connotation like the PARTY the Democrats will have just shortly after the verdict is no longer out.
September 9th, 2008 at 9:23 pmIf I was at a party with you all I’d have a hard time deciding who to talk to!
But Pete - thanks for highlighting the fact that Palin lied her caribou barbie butt off the other night and continues to spout crafted lies at every opportunity. She can set her jaw all she wants but it doesn’t make her lies any less duplicitous.
September 9th, 2008 at 9:26 pmDamn. My keyboarding sucks. Apparantly so does my googling as I have yet to find Palin’s stance on Alaska House Bill 149. My gut feeling is that she may have been wise to not upset the applecart. My experiences in Alaska led me to belive that it was unwise to F with the oil rebates, the excess dough ranked in from the feds, and definately not the weed.
September 9th, 2008 at 9:28 pmwise enough not wise. No disrespect intended to Ms. Palin but she doesn’t strike me as wise in the wisdom sense.
September 9th, 2008 at 9:29 pmThis guy is a non-entity and should get absolutely no coverage. He is a man-dog sex pervert.
September 9th, 2008 at 9:34 pmA shout-out to Ali for heading this thread under the banner:
Radical Right-Wing Agenda
Thanks for calling it like it is!
September 9th, 2008 at 9:37 pmSarah Palin is the Clarence Thomas for feminists. The civil rights community, the African-American community obviously should have rallied behind Clarence Thomas an his achievement, but they hammered him because he was a conservative.
So a bigoted white male is going to tell women and African Americans who they should look to for leadership. I can’t decide whether this is a greater display of arrogance or stupidity.
http://progressiveworldreview.com
September 9th, 2008 at 9:43 pmI’ll take that as a compliment, mary. And you are welcome. But, it doesn’t take any particular virtue to recognize what Ms. Palin (BTW. I refer to her as Ms. Palin because I’m certain it would make her grit her teeth and say, “Missus”!) represents. And to a perceptive person like myself, nothing she’s ever said passes the smell test.
September 9th, 2008 at 9:46 pmCrusty Old Bastard. I stand corrected. I meant ‘I think the verdict is still out’.
Thank you.
Good night.
ralph. you’re ‘empty vessel’ was good, I just didn’t get it the first time. I do disagree that 2 months isn’t enough.
That is assuming that Palin gets out for some interviews.
Good crowd. See ya.
September 9th, 2008 at 9:58 pmGreat topic. Shows the republicans for what they think and are. Great comments. There is hope and the evidence is displayed here!
September 9th, 2008 at 10:14 pmIdiocy knows no bounds in the Republican-Nazi Party.
September 9th, 2008 at 10:17 pmdbadass Says:
…..please do not patronize me with the idea that an empty vessel can not be sold if it is marketed properly.
September 9th, 2008 at 9:16 pm
Exhibit A: Paris Hilton
September 9th, 2008 at 10:24 pmRick Sanitarium is merely the most glaring example of what a GOP politician and their imbecilic backers are all about.
Race , creed , color , gender ,political party affiliation , religious belief(s) and the like , takes precedence over everything , up to and including competence and qualifications ; hence , the last 8 sorry years here in the US.
September 9th, 2008 at 10:26 pmHi Zooey. Exhibit B: Zima. Hope you are well
September 9th, 2008 at 10:32 pmHey Zooey. Exhibit C: George W. Bush.
September 9th, 2008 at 10:46 pmD: Ronald Reagan
I think I started something. ;)
September 9th, 2008 at 10:49 pmExhibit E: “Reality” TV.
September 9th, 2008 at 10:49 pm119:
September 9th, 2008 at 10:50 pmYes there seems to be something about you that way…
backup Says:
20 years from now, the idea that Palin was picked, only because she is a woman will be as ridiculous as the notion that Obama was only chosen because he was black.
____________
Yet again another blatant lie. YOU don’t have some sort of “special insight” that makes your opinion more valid than anyone else here. Just because you’re silly enough to wear epaulets on a smoking jacket, and now… medals, too… I see… it doesn’t imbue you w/ some omniscient authority.
September 9th, 2008 at 10:52 pmZooey Says:
——————————————————————————–
I think I started something. ;)
September 9th, 2008 at 10:49 pm
Crabs Across America (and everyone’s genitals) ?
LOL……………I’m KIDDING …………………
September 9th, 2008 at 11:00 pmHey Rick, you TRAITOROUS scuzzball..
They don’t share her VALUES…
YOU always TALK about “values”, but you scumbags have NO MORALS and so no “values”.
September 9th, 2008 at 11:08 pmSantorum, like many right-wingers, expect women to be dumb!
September 9th, 2008 at 11:33 pmLittle Ricky, still trying to be relevant.
September 9th, 2008 at 11:36 pmJust who I want advice from on blacks and women, another middle aged rich white guy….
September 9th, 2008 at 11:38 pmMay I sneeze in his face then say F you a$$hole.
Thank you, I just did.
September 9th, 2008 at 11:40 pmDamn , my last post went over about as well as a lead balloon……….
I SAID I WAS KIDDING
BTW Trolls
If you ever try to accuse my gal of any sexually transmitted disease , it will be the sorriest (and probably last) comment you ever make………..
September 9th, 2008 at 11:41 pm#backup Says:
Palin goes some distance in debunking the idea that Republicans or conservatives wouldn’t vote for a woman.
If it were not for Hillary Clinton, Sarah Palin would not be on the ticket today. The only reason why Republicans are willing to vote for a woman is because they are desperate and they see it as their only way to hang on to power.
backup - you are too stupid for words. Too bad you can’t cure stupid.
September 9th, 2008 at 11:42 pmIt’s much more difficult to get the crabs if you shave that area. I wonder if Palin has it shaved?
September 9th, 2008 at 11:45 pmForTruth Says:
——————————————————————————–
It’s much more difficult to get the crabs if you shave that area. I wonder if Palin has it shaved?
September 9th, 2008 at 11:45 pm
Who gives a shit ?
She doesn’t compare to my Zooey ……….
September 9th, 2008 at 11:47 pm“neatly trimmed” is more sophisticated than shaved
September 9th, 2008 at 11:50 pmbackup hearts eva braun.
feminist.
nazi.
the republicans.
:)
good luck.
@
September 9th, 2008 at 11:50 pmDieNowForPeace Says:
Poll shows big shift to McCain among white women
Anyone who believes the polls these days is nuts. Before the Republican convention the pollsters broke the people they polled up into groups of Democrats, Republicans and Independents depending on voter registration percentages. This could be considered to be somewhat equitable. Since the Republican convention they have started polling equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans and leaving independents entirely out of the equation. It’s no wonder the polls are looking so screwy.
In case you missed my prior posts, this is a great read on how polls can be skewed:
http://www.usnews.com/ articles/ opinion/ 2008/ 08/ 29/ pollsters-schizophrenia-and-the-convention-bounce.html
David Moore used to be a VP at Gallup so he knows what he’s talking about.
September 9th, 2008 at 11:51 pmI would hate to think that the larval stage of the decapod crustaceans such as crabs might be being confused with the honorable Zooey. To the best of my knowledge no phylogenetic relationship exists…
September 10th, 2008 at 12:00 amOy, I really did start something. :-D
MCMetal, you’re just so damn sweet. Heh.
September 10th, 2008 at 12:04 amdbadass,
Huh?
Truth,
Long time, no read. Nice to see you as always.
Goodnight, all. ;)
September 10th, 2008 at 12:06 ama zoea is something entirely different.
September 10th, 2008 at 12:09 amOh Ricky, crawl back in the closet. You are irrelevant. The voters in Pennsylvania told you that you were irrelevant by kicking you out. Pennsylvania replaced you with a much smarter person in Bob Casey Jr.
September 10th, 2008 at 12:12 amOff Topic: Our media at it’s worst. A guy gets caught in a blatant lie and the “host” lets him off the hook. But hey! At least someone is calling liars, “liars”.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/ 2008/ 09/ 09/ paul-begala-rips-msm-republican-operative-for-flat-out-lying-about-palins-record/
September 10th, 2008 at 12:18 amAnother difference–and a strong one is that Sarah didn’t run, she was picked. If Sarah had entered the Republican race, I would have cheered her on. Anti-choice, religious fathead, flip-flopper or no, I would have applauded her gumption.
September 10th, 2008 at 12:34 amWe would also see how many Republicans would really approve of her qualifications.
Hillary ran. Hillary fought. Sarah was picked.
Being picked is not an achievement.
Not a surprising comment, coming from a member of the Good Old White Boys Club.
A sexist pig is a sexist pig. And a bad politican is a bad politician. Their race and/or gender are irrelevant.
September 10th, 2008 at 1:02 am“Santorum Chastises ‘Feminist Community’ For Not Embracing Palin”
Santorum the guy that tortured his children by making them hold a rotting fetus….and he thinks the Feminist community should embrace this nut bag Palin?
I don’t really believe many women relate to Palin, and quite frankly, in my opinion she is white trash.
September 10th, 2008 at 1:50 amI can remember blogging on the blogs back in ‘01 how difficult it was to type Bush lies…. it just was not done and it appeared it would be an embarrassment to be caught in one.. Today, the word LIE is widely done and widely used and has become a BIG part of the goppers campaign and no one cares.
Think we can restore honor and dignity in the WH and country with Obama/Biden?
September 10th, 2008 at 2:36 amhttp://alchemytoday.com/obamataxcut/ Let’s show some good news for a change. Try this out and pass it around…Feminists everywhere:)Thank god for that! Sarah is NO feminist…
September 10th, 2008 at 8:49 amBetcha Rick Santorum has “a best friend who is black”.
September 10th, 2008 at 1:22 pmSarah Palin and I both have v*ginas.
That’s where our similarity ends.
Thank God.
September 10th, 2008 at 4:44 pmRicky baby is not smart enough to come up with that one on his own……………that had to of come from Rove, Limpbah, or Dickypoo.
September 11th, 2008 at 7:24 pmSo if Santorum is suggesting that women (will/should) vote for McCain because he has a set of fallopian tubes on his ticket, and that African Americans (will/should) vote for Obama because he’s black (that is, after all, what he’s implying if he says they should have been behind CT on those grounds), is he also suggesting that only white men are intelligent enough to actually vote on the issues?
September 15th, 2008 at 11:29 am