Saturday, August 30, 2008

McCain's Trophy VEEP ChickPick: A Hideous Insult to All Women. Oh & To All Men, Too

So if Karl Rove thought that putting pro-government-forced maternity advocate, mother of five, Rush Limbaugh-appointed "babe," lovely cute oh so charming vagino-American Alaska Governor Sarah Palin on the John McCain ticket was going to win over the heart and mind of this die-hard Clintonista, he's got another think coming. (Oh, and this is for Paul L., "All-Out Battle For Women's Votes.)

I don't mind that they're running a female. I think that's kind of cute. Especially coming from the nappy-headed ho, dumpy-wife-dumping, cunt-calling section of the universe.

But running a national and international experience-free person who would be heartbeat away from the Presidency of the United States, leading a world super-power in an age where conflicts can erupt into wars in which whole countries are at risk?

Because of her gender? Her external appearance?

Her willingness to bear five children? Her charm and gumption? Her hardscrabble rise from PTA mom way up the Alaskan ladder of success? Her ability to moose-hunt/duck-hunt?


I mean, really. What were they thinking?

It's like they've chosen her as Trophy VEEP because of her feel-good teddy-bear vibes:
“[Sarah Palin] wouldn’t have articulated one coherent policy and people would just be fawning all over her,” said Andrew Halcro, a Republican turned independent, who along with Tony Knowles, a Democrat, ran against Ms. Palin for governor in 2006. “Tony and I looked at each other and it was, like, this isn’t about policy or Alaska issues, this is about people’s most basic instincts: ‘I like you, and you make me feel good.’


How cynical is that? How sexist is that?

Answer: very.

Sarah's choice proves Obama's point that John McCain doesn't get it while it has also had the surprising (to me) effect of slingshotting me right into BHO's arms at last. (Hmm.)

The Republicans just don't get it.

Not that we ever thought they did, mind you.

On the upside, it does add humor to an otherwise dull day. I see in the New York Times that Mrs. Palin, while pro-death penalty, stills calls herself "pro-life." Haha.

Even though Mrs. Palin totally opposes reproductive freedom, she claims to be a "feminist." Yo. That's like claiming to be a pro-boiling-beings-in-oil buddhist, is it not?


Oh, and there are those (and you know who you are) who think that this choice is NOT an insult to all women, in particular, not to conservative and independent women.

As recently as last month, Ms. Palin appeared to dismiss the importance of the vice presidency in an interview with Larry Kudlow of CNBC, who asked her about her prospects for the job.

Don't skip the clips!

McCain has picked a woman because she is a woman. A conservative woman. A young, physically-attractive Talibangelical homeschooling anti-science creationist conservative woman. What a great package for a Trophy VEEP. (Ooh! NBFH just coined it!!)

McCain has passed over more experienced, less photogenic conservative and independent women. (And men).

Now, you perhaps think that that is not insulting to all women. (Not to mention all men.)

But I strongly disagree. Looks over competence? Why is that not insulting? Shallow much? We electing a Vice-Prom Queen?

Faux Feminism at Washington Monthly, with more people who find Palin an insulting pick.
Sarah Palin: Sleight of Gender, at Vanity Fair.
Oh. And here's another uppity broad who thinks it's the Palin choice is an insult to women.
Deb della Piana on Who Does John McCain Think He's Fooling?

Blast from the past -- it's not about hillary, it's about us.
Goodbye to All That No. 2, by Robin Morgan.


danps said...

Nice post, Sarah. (Followed from Corrente.)

Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy said...

The "experience" angle is problematical because:

* Obama doesn't have much, all of which was spent angling for the next job

* Tim Kaine was considered a perfectly experienced-enough candidate despite a comparable resume (ah, the magic of the Y chromosome!)

* A governor has "executive experience," which some consider valuable

I'll offer you a tsk-tsk on the PTA thing. One man's "community organizing" is another woman's PTA, and running against motherhood, education, and local activism wouldn't be my choice of angle, FWIW.

All told, it's a maybe-crazy-enough-to-work cynical move, a randomizing game changer, which shows a degree of creativity that's been missing on the Democratic side.

Still, I expect Obama will win, though his shitty post-partisan frame is a proven loser (unlike gaming the caucuses and smearing your opponents -- and is rich, old guy with a lot of houses the best Axelrod can do with McCain!?). More Dems support McCain than Repubs support Obama, so I hope he's figuring that out (his convention speech answered that: maybe yes, maybe no). He's allowed what should have been a cakewalk to be close enough to be stolen or lost due to a gaffe or revelation, and he's dampened his ability to govern well, by convincing people that leftwing partisanship is more or less as bad as the rightwing version.

As to which party Don "Nappy" Imus belongs to, I'm sans clue.

And congrats on your new name, "Sarah"! Maybe it's the new "I am Spartacus," and all women are now Sarah!

No Blood for Hubris said...

1. Yes, VastLeft, I was wondering about the 'Sarah' thing.

2. Palin's been a governor for all of 20 months. Seems Very Not Ready for Prime Time to me.

3. Obama's inexperience, I think, pales next to Palin's. At least he knows how to write a mean syllabus. ; ) And his speech was purty good. I think he is feeling party pressure to become an actual Democrat.

4. The talking heads can yammer about how "taking care of five kids really prepares you to be the leader of the free world" but I think that's insulting to both motherhood AND the presidency.

And with all due respect, and reponsiveness to your tsk-tsk, pumping up PTA experience reminds me of Hillary getting slagged for saying this:

"I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas, but what I decided to do was to fulfill my profession which I entered before my husband was in public life."

Cookies? PTA? Negotiating treaties on nuclear disarmament? Apples? Oranges?

danps said...

And if it makes you feel any better Paul_Lukasiak thoroughly discredited himself in the comments. "if you read the comment in its proper context you’ll see that you’re agreeing with me." Boundless arrogance.

No Blood for Hubris said...

It does make me feel better, danps!


; )


No Blood for Hubris said...

Oh, and VL, I don't know what party Imus belongs to, but I do know that during the recent primary he called Obama "even more of a pussy than Hillary."

MSM didn't bother picking that one up, however. Hmm.

Anyhow, you are well aware of my feelings on sexism, cunt-calling, pussy-calling, etc.

Greenconsciousness said...

So who are you voting for? A sexist who used misogyny, ageism, race baiting and Dem bosses and ops to pressure Hill to drop out of the race? A candidate whose PAC gave thousand of dollars to delegates who then changed their votes? Who used caucuses to disenfranchise the working class? Who referred to Hillary supporters as bitter uneducated old women? A party that disenfranchised 2 states because their votes went the wrong way? A party with a four year majority in congress who could not pass equal pay for equal work?

I am Writing-In Hillary

and joining the New Democrat PUMA party.

Listen to the Aug 29th radio show on your computer. I called in at the end of the first hour.

No Blood for Hubris said...


Looks more and more like I'm voting for the "sweetie-caller" and not for the "cunt-caller."

You still stuck in Bush = Gore?

How'd that work out for you, eh?

ronpaulisoverrated said...

Hey hubris, you still sound annoying with your obligatory mentions of "sweetie", but...I really like your latest post. McCain is essentially betting the farm on the hope that enough voters who got upset with Obama because he said "sweetie" once or twice will vote for McCain.

The Republicans will never understand that it was Clinton's hard work and accomplishments, not her gender, that earned her the support she has now.

No Blood for Hubris said...

Well, at least you understand it now (refrains from adding "sweetie").

Anonymous said...

Talibangelical. I am in love with that word.

MJS said...

Man, it would be fun to steer a comment thread about what a dipsy-doodle, talking-snake-in-a-magical-garden, man's-contribution-to-climate-change-naysayer, home-schoolin'-science-defyin'-droog the Hand Maiden Palin is--anyway, it would be fun to steer this thread into an anti-Obama thread, because that's what it's all about, yes? After eight years of cultural and political fascism, the really important thing is to point out how horribly ass-fucked we are by the Democratic nominee.

Please: take a hint from Hillary. And if not from Hillary, take a hint from Al Gore. Even by subtraction, a Democrat is more than the sum of 4 more years of plutocratic war-mongering. But hey, I'm a member of the Democratic Party. What the fuck do I know?


No Blood for Hubris said...

Dear mjs --

Please re-read blog and comments. You will find that you have utterly totally missed the point.

No Blood for Hubris said...

As in missing the the point of the blog, & of my comments at least.

Not aware of any current anti-Obama comments here at all, so, like, don't get your big-girl pa----

Never mind.

Ask commenter ronpaulisoverrated.

He knows just what I was about to say next. ;)

MJS said...

The post seemed to be vetting Palin, which was clear enough. A few comments seemed to be using the occasion to bash Obama. Maybe I am missing something.


No Blood for Hubris said...

I wasn't actually vetting Palin, I was bashing her.


& unabashedly.

; )

There were a few comments mildly critical of Obama, as being insufficiently progressive, but what's wrong with that, eh?

And some comments accusing me of using the term "sweetie" merely to criticize Obama, but I believe I refuted that charge soundly. You can ask ronpaulisoverrated.

; )

No Blood for Hubris said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
No Blood for Hubris said...

I asked if we were picking a Vice Prom Queen. In which case her looks would be relevant.

I have also referred to Barack Obama in the same vein -- earlier in this blog. Asking whether we were picking a Prom King or a President.

But you had no quarrel with my asking that question, just had a problem with asking it about Palin.


Greenconsciousness said...

TrophyVeep is sexist and is in the grand tradition of BO campaign tactics -- It is a perfect example of why women who do not worship the Big Penis are leaving the Dems in droves.
I am sending them to this blog for educational purposes.

No Blood for Hubris said...


You are barking up the wrong tree.

Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy said...

Real life has got me on the run, so I'm about to go cold turkey on blog posting/commenting for a while, but I'll be continuing to read the handful (one for each finger of a six-fingered hand) of blogs I consider to be "intact" -- unflinchingly committed to honest critique of the candidates and the media. That list, I'm all hopey won't go all changey viz-a-viz this noble outpost.

I don't now and never did begrudge anyone who decides that Obama is likable enough, so long as the honesty and open critique aren't compromised in the bargain.

I have a hard time seeing eye-to-eye with those who will vote McCain for strategic reasons (though I'm not one to stifle their arguments as some do) and I have zero tolerance for those who argue that McCain is a worthy choice in any respect.

As of now, I'm uncommitted, considering either a write-in vote for whomever or voting for Teh Precious. I think it's important the he be willing to be accountable his base; I wish to heck that someone would redirect 1/1000th of the shaming that's aimed at Obama-skeptics toward candidate himself, with someone saying "WTF Barack, why in this year of all years are you running any which way but progressive? Why are you still chasing Religious Right voters who won't ever ever ever vote for you, and making your own base feel like dogmeat? Maybe it's your problem to solve, and not the job of those dried up, secular, feminist, baby boomer partisan Democrats to love you without you asking for their votes?"

If you are, indeed, punching your ticket to Sweetieland, I do hope (and expect) you'll continue to press Mr. Me-Me-Me-No-It's-Really-About-You Movement to cut the shit and run and govern like a real Democrat.

I never thought being as progressive as Hillary Clinton was such a high bar for Obama to meet, but he's missed it by a mile. His convention speech offered the first glimmer of, y'know, hope that he actually understood the goal. But no sooner did he start to articulate the partisan advantages of a Dem did he take a dive, suddenly pouring the Stepford-flavored treacle of Post-Partisanship on what had started as a relatively tasty meal. If I had the time, I'd mix in a few more metaphors, but that will have to do until the prodigal cow comes home to roost.

As I've mentioned, in an Obama presidency, you've got the best franchise on the internets, since we're going to see hubris that will make the "best and brightest" that gave us Vietnam look like.... I don't know, you're the Buddhist here, maybe you've got an example of someone really, really humble. Well, the Obama bestest and brightestest will be really, really not like that person, and FSM as my witness, I don't know whether that's any safer than ending up with the batshit-insane authoritarian war daddy. Pressure from sane progressives is our only, there's that word again, hope that he'll get off of Mt. Olympus and onto terra firma, where he and his Best Brains Evah cabinet might not kill us all (or at least everyone else) in continuing our disastrous imperialistic corporatist policies, not that he wouldn't do it in a super-cool way, of course.

As a great man once said, "What a country!"

No Blood for Hubris said...

I'm good with pressure from progressives. I'm very good with holding feet to the fire. And you-know- whose feet, do you not?

Anyhow, we will miss your voice. ; (

Because we love your voice, VastLeft. ; )

And always have . . . .

Deleted Female Poster said...

I think it is very progressive and mature to delete comments you disgaree with. Bold, open way to run your blog--but hey, it is your blog, so I respect that you want only comments that uphold your simple view of McCain's pick. I won't be back--no worries.
I didn't address your name calling on Obama because frankly, I wasn't aware of it. If all you do is name call, well, I wasted my time. Astute commentary, I must say. I believe feminists should speak out on sexism, even when the target is a woman we may or may not agree with.
It does sadden me that some women, ironically, are not giving her a fair shake.
As an avid political junkie who spends way too much time on rcp and other news soucres and blogs, I can say that Palin’s name has been floated for months.

No Blood for Hubris said...

I am aware that her name has been floated for months.

I read about it way back when.

I apologize for the very horrid and mistaken deletion, again.

I think this pick was chosen out of odious sexism.

I think it is insulting to women. And to men.

I think it is the work of a clever Karl Rove, who is, it seems, actually verry clever. With this pick, he both solidifies the rightwing Talibangelical base, and sticks a sticky finger once again in the eyes of dedicated Democratic Clintonistas.

Not good for progressives.