I don’t care what anyone says. I like Sarah Palin. True, we’re quite different and have nothing in common but gender. She’s White. I’m Black. She’s conservative. I’m liberal. She has five children. I have none. She’s riding above the economic crisis. I’m being crushed underneath. So, why do I like Sarah Palin? Well, she’s able to reduce progressives (formerly known as liberals) to apoplectic fits by just the sound of her voice. Now, why would I hold such a grudge against progressives, indeed the “Democrat” party, that I should take pleasure in their distress? The Democratic primary of 2008 is a start.
I supported Hillary Clinton over Barak Obama because I believed we needed a leader with more experience and less corrupt than Obama. (Considering the past year under an Obama administration, I’d say my concerns were justified.) Those who opposed Clinton's nomination cited her Iraq War vote, close ties to the “establishment” and corporations, her centrism and even their revulsion at Bill Clinton returning to the White House as First Gentlemen. These reasons are legitimate enough I suppose, even though Obama has never been a leftist, let alone a socialist as he's often accused of by Republicans. Obama supported the Iraq War with his Senate votes to fund it. Obama also received support from the same corporations and banks that are currently fleecing our savings…with Obama’s blessing. Nevertheless, I could accept opposition to Clinton’s nomination based on the reasons listed.
No, what bothered me – besides the ignorance of neophyte voters, enthralled Blacks not voting their interests yet again and Whites looking for absolution – was the sexism and misogyny that came from the Democrat party, the current home of liberalism. Liberals aren’t supposed to base arguments on sexism or racism. These “–isms” are an anathema to our ideology. Yet there was MSNBC guest host David Schuster presenting a cackling Hillary Jabber Jaw pen and MSNBC Countdown' commentator Keith Olbermann’s suggestion to “beat” Hillary Clinton out of the primaries. There was the 527 organization, Citizens United Not Timid (note the uppercase letters), created to tell us all about what Hillary Clinton really was. There were also the Hillary nutcracker dolls, her sexual orientation was questioned and “B**ch” became her pet name on blogs. From Huffington Post to Daily Kos, sexism and misogyny was exploited and encouraged by none other than progressives. I’d expected Republicans to take this tactic. John McCain, the Republican presidential nominee, had already begun when he chuckled at this question at a townhall. But liberals?
After a contentious primary battle, Obama was eventually selected as the Democratic nominee but before there was time to heal, John McCain selected Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate. If you recall, hell broke loose. I thought Hillary Clinton had it bad, but I felt downright sorry for Gov. Palin. Within hours after her nomination, progressive blogs attacked her children, labeled her a bimbo, trailer trash, and replaced the epithet "b**ch" with “whore”. Progressives, who still consider themselves gender equality advocates, donned t-shirts emblazoned with “Sarah is A C**t”. For Halloween, her effigy was lynched on a reveler’s front porch. Amazingly enough, progressives even argued that Palin was a bad mother for having a career.
Even though the McCain/Palin ticket lost, in part due to the sudden economic downturn which acted as an assist to the Obama/Biden ticket which had been lagging in the polls, progressives still can’t let go of Palin. Their constant harping about a losing vice-presidential candidate has extended Palin's 15 minutes into years. There’s a name for progressives’ reaction to Sarah Palin. It’s called PDS or Palin Derangement Syndrome. It’s similar to CDS, Clinton Derangement Syndrome, except its victims are more unhinged, nasty and self-destructive.
The latest and lamest attack to date is “PalmGate”. Sarah Palin, best-selling author and a recent contributor to Fox news, made an appearance at the first National Tea Party convention this weekend. The National Tea Party is a grass-roots movement comprised of conservatives, libertarians and independents who rose in opposition to the stimulus package and bailouts to banks. Palin was paid $100,000 to speak which infuriated progressives since, according to them, she’s an idiot. During the Q & A portion of the convention, she referred to crib notes written in the palm of her hand. Criticizing her on this is fair. It’s petty, but at least it’s not sexist. Although, the criticism is rather hypocritical considering Obama can’t make a speech without the TOTUS (Teleprompter of the United States). He stutters, which isn’t a transgression, but I believe he’s ignorant on policy which is a sin. Nevertheless, Palin's “cribbing” is fair game. Some may even argue that Palin's a hypocrite since she's criticized Obama for his frequent use of the teleprompter. However, it doesn’t end there. It never does with progressives and Sarah Palin.
The sexism returned as well as the attacks on Sarah Palin’s children. There are some new insults such as references to hand-jobs and “Sharpie Barbie” although “whore” and “trailer trash” made a comeback. With far more pressing concerns such as the economy, healthcare, wars and the environment, it is incomprehensible why progressives would spend so much time and ink sniffing for "scandals" against a woman who holds no political office and therefore can effect no change in policy and law. Even ratings anemic MSNBC brought this insipid non-story to consciousness. Is it not clear that these attacks work for Palin? Is not clear yet that the attention, even negative attention, increases Palin’s book sales, her speaking fees and her base?
The Democratic primary and the presidential general election were surreal. Liberals, adherents to an inclusive ideology, turned to sexism and misogyny to beat out female candidates who stood against Barack Obama. That he stabbed them in the back provides some measure of vindictive satisfaction although I can’t be too pleased since I’m screwed, too. Sarah Palin’s success eases that pain a bit, though. A success she can credit in part to progressives. Yes, she got the last laugh and she’s still laughing - all the way to the bank. It’s rather nice to see the progressives so vexed and consumed.
I could not disagree with you more about Sarah Palin. I think she knew she was not ready to be Vice-President of the United States and she walked onto a scene she was not ready for. She asked for what she got. I thought it was very immature for the McCain campaign to even ask her to be his running mate. She is inexperienced and impatient, as we have seen these last couple of months. She has resigned her Governorship for reason unknown.
I do agree with you on Hillary though. I was a big Clinton supporter during the primary. I think she would have made the better President, but the state democratic parties felt differently.
I too was a Hillary supporter, though I believe President Obama still will do some great work this year and has been over-criticized for the first year of office. But that's for a different discussion.
The selection of Palin to be the Vice Presidential candidate for the Republican party was as much a sexist move as anything else mentioned in this article. The McCain campaign wanted to fight minority with minority, and hoped the people of the country wouldn't notice. Already a large part of the female vote typically swings to the Democratic side, and the McCain campaign thought they could take the female vote simply by having a female running-mate. Not only did they select someone they thought the country wouldn't question, they picked someone severely lacking in national public policy knowledge and practice.
As much as I hate the media freakshow that inevitably occurs, I have to agree with Steven in that she brought a great deal upon herself.
In terms of her being a best selling author, that can hardly be to her own credit, as it can almost be guarunteed it was ghost written for her as a publicity stunt. And I really believe Fox News brought her on more because of her controversial attraction rather than her expertise and political knowledge.
Issues of public interest pop up around us constantly. Undergraduate students from the State of Tennessee take such issues, and critically discuss them as part of their coursework in the Division of Public and Nonprofit Administration, University of Memphis.
This blog is a forum for students taking PADM 3601: Introduction to Public Administration. Here the class presents and debates public administration topics leading the national, state, and local news.
I could not disagree with you more about Sarah Palin. I think she knew she was not ready to be Vice-President of the United States and she walked onto a scene she was not ready for. She asked for what she got. I thought it was very immature for the McCain campaign to even ask her to be his running mate. She is inexperienced and impatient, as we have seen these last couple of months. She has resigned her Governorship for reason unknown.
ReplyDeleteI do agree with you on Hillary though. I was a big Clinton supporter during the primary. I think she would have made the better President, but the state democratic parties felt differently.
I too was a Hillary supporter, though I believe President Obama still will do some great work this year and has been over-criticized for the first year of office. But that's for a different discussion.
ReplyDeleteThe selection of Palin to be the Vice Presidential candidate for the Republican party was as much a sexist move as anything else mentioned in this article. The McCain campaign wanted to fight minority with minority, and hoped the people of the country wouldn't notice. Already a large part of the female vote typically swings to the Democratic side, and the McCain campaign thought they could take the female vote simply by having a female running-mate. Not only did they select someone they thought the country wouldn't question, they picked someone severely lacking in national public policy knowledge and practice.
As much as I hate the media freakshow that inevitably occurs, I have to agree with Steven in that she brought a great deal upon herself.
In terms of her being a best selling author, that can hardly be to her own credit, as it can almost be guarunteed it was ghost written for her as a publicity stunt. And I really believe Fox News brought her on more because of her controversial attraction rather than her expertise and political knowledge.