Long a supporter of women in politics, believing they are strong and nurturing, I hoped Sarah Palin would be that kind of woman—instead of the Karl Rove-inspired, snarly, divisive candidate who distorted her opponent’s record and policies and lied about her own. When the president and vice president of their own party don’t show up for their convention (damage control at its finest), you’d think that instead of catering to the lobbyists with whom Republicans surround their campaigns, they’d begin their “change” with a kinder, gentler convention. Instead, they promoted attack-dog antics on a country suffering from that very arrogance.
Clearly lacking substance, they separated themselves from their opponents with vindictiveness instead of ideas, putdowns instead of solutions. I guess its unreasonable to expect more from a senator who bailed out his friend, Mr. Keating, with $2 billion in taxpayers’ money and whose temper is the talk of Congress; or from a governor willing to use the power of her office to settle a personal grudge, or ask for millions of dollars for pet projects and say she didn’t. So many issues differentiate the two campaigns.
If McPalin wins, Roe v. Wade is done, and I believe we will have a draft. There’s food for thought for parents and grandparents. Since they consider abortion murder, what would be the punishment? The death penalty (not considered murder)? Life in prison? For the doctor? For the mother? What programs will help care for all those babies? Palin says she’ll advocate for special-needs babies, yet she cut Alaska’s special-needs funding 63 percent. With abstinence-only education (proven ineffective by Bristol Palin and others) and health care off the McPalin radar screen, again, who will help all those babies and treat all the STD and HIV cases filling doctor’s offices and hospitals
And how about the Supreme Court, stem-cell research, a privatized social security, the environment, more wars, alternative energy, the intent to ban books, taking taxpayer-funded per diem while at home, believing Iraq is God’s plan? And how about that Bridge to Nowhere? Palin kept the nearly $300 million anyway.
How easily Palin keeps secrets; how smoothly she lies. How sad that women are flocking to her and could help make her president someday. Sarah Barracuda, indeed. Country first, my ass. McCain’s choice and Palin’s remarks insulted Sen. Obama, who knows we all love America and has spelled out his solutions; Sen. Clinton, who is all about ideas and working across the aisle; community organizers, activists and volunteers in the trenches every day; pit bulls, who don’t even vote; and moms who don’t have money for their kids to play hockey or time to go fishing. What a lost opportunity to put red, white and blue together and heal the pain and hopelessness of the last eight years.
— Leni Sitnick
Asheville
The triumph of feminism
Lexington | The Economist | Sep 11, 2008
http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12208893&CFID=23366665&CFTOKEN=58249243
America’s feminists may have lost a battle or two. But they are winning the war
Fresh blood for the vampire
By Camille Paglia | Salon | Sep 10, 2008
http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2008/09/10/palin/
A beady-eyed McCain gets a boost from the charismatic Sarah Palin, a powerful new feminist — yes, feminist! — force.
Your letter says what so many woman are thinking! Sarah Palin does NOT speak for me! Be afraid Republican Males be very afraid Palin is not the sure thing you think she is!
Thank you Leni, you were spot on.
Sarah Palin is about as much of a feminist as Karl Rove is.
Being a spunky firecracker doesn’t make someone a feminist, supporting feminist goals does. On that front, Sarah Palin is definitely no feminist.
John McCain has a 0% rating on women’s issues, which is an absolute disgrace, but sarah Palin is even worse than he is.
Sarah Palin is not the victim. 12 and 13 year old girls that have been brutally raped and then are forced to sacrifice their childhoods to have their rapist’s babies if Palin gets her way would be the victims.
The many women who were charged for their own rape kits because of Sarah Palin after they were brutally raped were victims. Many of those women were already poor and traumatized, so the practice was unconscionable. The state had to create a new law to overturn Palin’s disgracefully unethical practice.
The girls who would needlessly die of AIDS and cervical cancer due to ignorance if Palin gets her way with her twisted and ignorant abstinence only sex ed would be victims.
Plumbing doesn’t make a person a feminist. Supporting feminist causes does, and that means Palin is certainly no feminist.
“the charismatic Sarah Palin, a powerful new feminist—yes, feminist!—force”
That is too funny. “Feminist?” Entopticon dismisses that silly notion with aplomb. “Charismatic?” Who knows? All we get are carefully packaged, controlled burts of animation, somewhat like a doll with a sting that when pulled, says one of ten different things, over and over and over again. And “powerful?” Yep, she’s the rootin-est, tootin-est, moose-hunting-est whacko east of the Pecos alright.
does this mean we have to humor entop the obama bot for another two and a half months?
I find it hilarious when feminists come unglued and drip venom when faced with a genuine, self-made woman who doesn’t bow down to all of their sacred Liberal cows (otherwise known as Ultimate Truth). As far as I can tell, Gov. Sarah Palin has never asked for special favors, played the ‘victim’ card, played the gender card or blamed ‘men’ for her lot in life. And she unabashedly LOVES her country (gasp!). Tolerance and open-mindedness cut both ways you know, so why not try them, Leni. A little bi-partian understanding? A mind is a terrible thing to lose.
That was really witty dave. And so informative. Did you think that up all by yourself?
“Gov. Sarah Palin has never asked for special favors”
Hmmm, what about her spiritual guide (the ‘Rev.’ Muthee) asking for Jesus to protect her from witchcraft? As seen in the video, he’s ‘laying on the hands’ to protect lil Sarah the dangers of rampant witchcraft. Plus, he prayed she’d win the governorship! Sounds like special favors.
Jose said: “As far as I can tell, Gov. Sarah Palin has never asked for special favors, played the ‘victim’ card, played the gender card or blamed ‘men’ for her lot in life.”
You have got to be joking. Every single major news venue, even Fox news, has said that there has never been such a mollycoddled VP candidate in the history of American politics. The McCain campaign isn’t even letting press near her! That is unprecedented. If she was a man she would have been eaten alive for that outlandish level of cowardice. The McCain campaign is pulling the “don’t pick on the girl” act in its most ridiculous form.
Check out CNN’s Campbell Brown eviscerating the McCain Campaign for this very reason:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/23/campbell-brown-rips-mccai_n_128782.html
This clip from the daily show is particularly hilarious. It has numerous McCain supporting right-wing extremists such as Dick Morris caught red-handed in their ludicrously hypocritical claims that Sarah Palin is being treated unfairly because of her gender.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/04/daily-show-takes-on-the-s_n_123908.html
Among other things, he has footage of Sean Hannity and Dick Morris talking about “the deep sexism” of the media’s treatment of Palin. Stewart follows that that with a clip of Morris ranting about Hillary’s complaining of sexism in the media on Fox. The clip has Morris saying “when a woman wants to run for President, she shouldn’t complain about gender!” He goes onto ask, “what happens when the boys in the middle easet, or the boys who run Russia, or the boys run China, start picking on you?”
After that Stewart plays a clip of John McCain’s Senior Policy Advisor, Nancy Pfotenhauer, saying, “the people who think they are helping her by playing this gender card are hurting her.” And “it would be a terrible mistake to play this victimology or victimization card, because that is not what we want in a President.” That is matched by several other clips of her doing exactly what she just warned against.
He wraps up the segment with a clip of Palin saying, “when I hear a statement like that, coming from a woman candidate with any kind of perceived whine about that excess criticism or maybe a sharper microscope put on her I think man, that doesn’t do us any good.”
The hypocrisy of the McCain Palin campaign really is almost as hilarious as it is pathetic.
Ouch Dionysis and entopticon! I think thou both dost protest too much! You’ve gotten it backwards. Never has the media been so whole-heartedly out to sink a presidential campaign and a VP pick in particular, than that of McCain/Palin. And the Huffington Post? That source of all truth and knowledge? Can you site a source a ‘teeny’ bit less partisan and more objective? How can an election be fair when the mainstream media is so biased?
The truth is, you all are going after Sarah with such low-class, unbecoming slander because she’s THAT GOOD, and you know it. She’s more accomplished, more experienced and more genuine than Obama–and you want him for POTUS! Believe it or nuts, Sarah represents the traditional values of people who love this country. Try ’em sometime, you might like ’em!
I say make a trade: increase Sarah’s media access and detox/rehab Obama off his teleprompter.
You know that Sarah and Johnny Mc have the potential to open a big can of Conservative whup-ass in November! I bet you’re scared, so just keep up with the sleazy trash talk–all the while accusing us evil conservatives of doing the same. Hope that works for you in November. So far, It’s working for Sarah.
Oh yeah, you can also thank me for representing Diversity and Bi-partisan dialogue here on the Mountain Xpress blog. If not for me and a few others, there would be no diversity here, no new thinking or new ideas. Only lock-step Conservative-hating and Republican-hating. You are most welcome.
If McPalin wins, Roe v. Wade is done, and I believe we will have a draft.
As far as RvW, you may be correct, as there could be enough conservative justices on the SC for it to be feasibly challenged. However, it would then be turned to a state by state basis, not necessarily an outright ban.
I have no idea why you think there would be a draft, unless you think McCain would start multiple wars.
Palin says she’ll advocate for special-needs babies, yet she cut Alaska’s special-needs funding 63 percent.
This is actually a complete fallacy.
According to an April 2008 article in Education Week, Palin signed legislation in March 2008 that would increase public school funding considerably, including special needs funding. In particular, it would increase spending for certain special needs students that Alaska calls “intensive needs” (students with high-cost special requirements) from $26,900 per student in 2008 to $73,840 per student in 2011. That almost triples the per-student spending in three fiscal years. Palin’s original proposal, according to the Anchorage Daily News, would have increased funds slightly more, giving intensive needs students a $77,740 allotment by 2011.
[snip]
Those who claim that Palin cut special needs funding by 62 percent are looking in the wrong place and misinterpreting what they find there. They point to an apparent drop in the Department of Education and Early Development budget for special schools. But the special schools budget, despite the similar name, isn’t the special needs budget.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_palin.html
While I’m not endorsing Palin, I find it necessary to be accurate.
entopticon wrote: “The McCain campaign isn’t even letting press near her!”
Lie.
CBS Sarah Palin interview
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vbg6hF0nShQ
believing Iraq is God’s plan?
Another misinterpretation of her words:
“Pray for our military…Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending them out on a task that is from God, that is what we have to make sure that we are praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God’s plan.”
It’s clear she’s saying she hopes it’s God’s plan as opposed to an independent declaration.
timpeck…. Perhaps you should learn a little more about the facts before wrongly accusing someone of being a liar next time. Even Fox News has said that the McCain’s campaign’s limited press access to Sarah Palin is literally unprecedented.
When I said that the McCain campaign isn’t letting the press near her I was being quite literal, and quite factual. As a matter of fact, it got so bad that the press threatened to boycott covering Palin after being locked out of her UN photo-op because they said it crossed a completely unacceptable line.
The Katie Couric, Sean Hannity, and Charlie Gibson interviews, which she was carefully prepped for, do not make up for the fact that the press has been nearly completely blocked out from asking questions that she might not want to hear in public. Even the press core that travels with her has been completely blocked from asking questions, which is also unprecedented.
By the way, the clip CBS news just released from tonight’s Palin interview with couric was an absolute train wreck. She is the right-wing extremist gift that keeps on giving. Couric asked Palin about her bizarre claim that being geographically close to Russia gave her expertise on Russia, and Palin couldn’t possibly have flubbed her response any worse.
It is nearly impossible to watch without cringing the whole time:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/25/palin-talks-russia-with-k_n_129318.html
I can see the stars pretty well from my house…. Maybe I should be put in charge of NASA!
No way Jose, if you had bothered to look you would have noticed that the links I provided were of clips from CNN and the Daily Show. The Huffington Post was not the source, they were merely reposting the clips.
I am sorry to inform you, but McCain’s numbers have been tanking. The brief bump he got from Sarah Palin is long gone. In fact many swing voters are reporting that Sarah Palin is the reason they will now support Obama:
http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/state/article818181.ece
People have started to learn about who Sarah Pain really is and what she has done politically, and it ain’t pretty.
If Sarah Palin’s preacher is right in his outrageous contention that anyone who criticizes George Bush is going to hell, I’ll be in very big trouble, so maybe you should pray for me, or speak in tongues if that’s your thing.
As far as your wanting to be thanked for trolling on a liberal website, I wouldn’t hold your breath waiting for that to happen.
entopticon: You are arguing ideological points and polls. I’m just calling you a liar. There’s a difference.
entopticon– Here is your new term for the day:
P.D.S. (Palin Derangement Syndrome). And just when you feared you wouldn’t have ‘Bush/Hitler’ to kick around anymore.
“Can you site a source a ‘teeny’ bit less partisan and more objective? How can an election be fair when the mainstream media is so biased”
Typical neo-con diversion, without one shred of factual refutation. Just ‘smear the messenger’, one the small number of knee-jerk non-answers you characters seemed to be programmed to utter. If you can factually refute the content, do so. Otherwise, just keep repeating (like the dimwitted rube Palin) bilge.
“Sarah represents the traditional values of people who love this country. Try ‘em sometime, you might like ‘em!”
So, brainiac, those who support silly twaddle like ‘creationism’, who pursue cronyism over competence, who habitually lie and continue to do so even when called out on it, who demonstrate a complete inability to articulate a cogent thought, who know less about foreign affairs than many 8th graders, who are scared witless to subject themselves to public scrutiny (after the Katie Couric interview, the whole country sees what a complete nitwit she is) represent ‘traditional values’? You are, excuse my bluntness, nuts.
And as far as “new ideas,” you guys could not come up with a “new idea” if you somehow were able to connect, Borg-like, all of what passes for brains in some kind of neuro-link.
And the only fear emanating from voters with regard to the dimwitted liar is the very notion of that rube anywhere near the White House. The public, as reflected in new poll results over the last few days, are realizing what a complete joke this clown really is.
Enjoy life in your fantasy world while you can.
“CBS Sarah Palin interview”
Yep, and anyone who watches that pathetic display of ignorance understands why she’s been kept on a leash. Now the Rethuglicans are trying mightily to scrub the one VP debate. She’s a joke.
Really Tim? You’re defending Palin? That must make you at least a little uncomfortable. She makes W. sound like Cicero. Couric’s questions were straightforward, over the plate softballs. All she has to do was get her thoughts in a row and lay them out. And yet.
I’m not saying she’s an idiot, because I’m not the governor of Alaska and I couldn’t ever be, but I also know better than to try.
There are also conservative calls for her to withdraw, check the Dallas Morning News for that.
So as a feminist, I have to say that my first priority for a leader, regardless of gender, is that they be able to clearly define their priorities, work to get things done without regard to the party affiliation of their cohorts, and first protect people who have no means of protecting themselves. Palin fails on all counts there.
Pixiedyke wrote: “Really Tim? You’re defending Palin?”
Where have I done that?
Apparently the Mountain Xpress web editor thinks it is just fine to let people call me a liar and insult me, but finds it necessary to censor my posts and delete my responses even though they had no profanity and were certainly no worse than the majority of posts that they don’t censor here.
I wish I could respect the Mountain Xpress, but they make that nearly impossible. Shame on you.
This is just a guess timpeck, but it was probably the part where you cited pro-Palin articles and then said:
“A beady-eyed McCain gets a boost from the charismatic Sarah Palin, a powerful new feminist—yes, feminist!—force.”
Ya think?
Or maybe it was the part where you called me a liar for citing the fact that the MSM has overwhelming complained about an unprecedented lack of daily access to Palin.
Talk about a liar. It always cracks me up when people like you seem to be amazed that we can simply scroll up on the page to call you out on your lies.
Palin takes press questions
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13910.html
Actually, that is an excerpt from Camille Paglia’s article:
Fresh blood for the vampire
By Camille Paglia | Salon | Sep 10, 2008
http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2008/09/10/palin/
“A beady-eyed McCain gets a boost from the charismatic Sarah Palin, a powerful new feminist—yes, feminist!—force.”
Ya think?
Palin updates:
“Apparently not everyone wants to have their photograph taken with Sarah Palin.
Paraguay President Fernando Lugo, while attending both the UN General Assembly meetings and the Clinton Global Initiative, shared with friends over dinner some of the other meetings he had been having in New York.
After enumerating the various heads of state he’d met with, the room went silent and then laughed a bit when he confided that he was approached about meeting with GOP Vice Presidential candidate and Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.
President Lugo said he turned the meeting down.”
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Paraguays_president_says_he_turned_down_0926.html
“National Review’s Kathleen Parker laments that the hockey mom turned PTA head turned governor actually might not be ready to be a heartbeat from the presidency.
Palin’s recent interviews with Charles Gibson, Sean Hannity, and now Katie Couric have all revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who Is Clearly Out Of Her League.
No one hates saying that more than I do. Like so many women, I’ve been pulling for Palin, wishing her the best, hoping she will perform brilliantly. I’ve also noticed that I watch her interviews with the held breath of an anxious parent, my finger poised over the mute button in case it gets too painful. Unfortunately, it often does. My cringe reflex is exhausted…
Parker says the fact that Palin is a woman makes observers “reluctant to say what is painfully true,” and she urges the Alaska Governor to drop from the ticket. McCain can’t fire Palin, because that wouldn’t look good, but the vice presidential nominee can cite personal reasons to leave of her own accord — perhaps she needs to spend more time with her infant son or wants to be there for her pregnant teenage daughter. Whatever the reason, she needs to retreat from the national stage.
“Do it for your country,” Parker concludes.”
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Conservative_columnist_Palin_Clearly_Out_Of_0926.html
timpeck: And you don’t think that quoting that line from Paglia was a defense of Palin? You are like a caricature of your own self.
By the way, have you ever read much Paglia? Ever seen her speak? Ever spoken to her? I have, and while I can appreciate her as a provocateur, if you start taking her warped version of feminism too seriously you definitely need to read up on contemporary feminist thought. When I first saw her she was talking about how she thought most date rape victims have no one to blame but themselves. Like Anne Coulter, she pushes buttons for a living, but if you take that stuff too seriously the joke is on you.
timpeck, are you seriously under the impression that that somehow exonerates you? Did you supply that quote as a way NOT to defend Palin? You really don’t see the logical inconsistency there? Remarkable. I can’t imagine how you manage to safely cross the street with that sort of reasoning.
Palin gets caught in yet MORE LIES:
“In a Thursday interview with Katie Couric, Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin cited “trade missions” with Russia as her one tangible piece of foreign policy experience.
What trade missions?
Research doesn’t show a single Alaska-Russia trade mission since former Democratic governor Tony Knowles visited Siberia in 1997, when Palin was running Wasilla…
When the reporter asked gubernatorial spokeswoman Kate Morgan about this issue, she refused to answer…
Spokespeople for the McCain/Palin campaign did not respond to requests for comment…”
A press release details Palin’s meeting with a trade mission from the Yukon, but nothing about dealings with Russia…”
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Did_Palin_lie_about_trade_missions_0927.html
Palin should name her campaign tour bus the Whopper Express.
“I can’t imagine how you manage to safely cross the street with that sort of reasoning.” Noted entopticon, referencing timpeck.
My take on him is that he is quite sincere, but finds himself in a bit of a quandary. He certainly does not support any ‘moonbat liberal’ (read: any Democrat), yet even today’s neo con strain of Republicanus Ignoramus isn’t ‘Ayn Rand’ enough for him. After all, his prescription for the debacle, brought on largely by the lack of financial regulation and oversight is…less regulation!
Sooo, we see what one could interpret as a sort of schizophrenic reaction to both parties.
To be fair, this is not unique to him; it seems to be shared by many who call themselves ‘libertarians’.
Dionysis wrote: “After all, his prescription for the debacle, brought on largely by the lack of financial regulation and oversight is…less regulation!”
It is regulation, specifically the Community Reinvestment Act, that brought about this debacle.
This current monumental economic crisis is yet another utter failure of socialism.
http://timpeck.blogspot.com/2008/09/bailout-roundup.html
“It is regulation, specifically the Community Reinvestment Act, that brought about this debacle.”
It probably was a contributing factor in some to buy when they shouldn’t, but that Act was passed in 1977. It is deregulation that allowed greed to reign unfettered, and now we’re paying the price.
The real problem was as described:
Phil Gramm’s most well remembered accomplishment was the sponsorship and passage of two key bills in Congress.
A champion of deregulation and unprecedented powers for big business
The first, known as the 1999 Financial Modernization Act eliminated Depression-era firewalls between commercial banks, investment banks, insurance companies, and securities firms-setting off a wave of mergers that resulted in many financial eggs in fewer and fewer baskets. The second came on December 15th, 2000 in the form of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act. Cosponsored by Senator Lugar (R) and written with the help of industry lobbyists, the act would, according to Gramm, ensure that neither the SEC or the Commodities Futures and Trading Commission regulated financial swaps and would “protect institutions from overregulation.”
The Enron loophole harms California and results in Enron’s collapse
The first visible damage of this deregulation came in the form of the now-famous Enron loophole. The loophole allowed energy companies to trade energy in an unregulated fashion. This act allowed Enron to play havoc with the California energy market, causing severe economic damage to that State while taking greater and greater risks that, ultimately, resulted in Enron’s collapse. Lawless chaos and greed led to collapse…
The prime goal of the legislation, however, was to keep government regulators from policing credit swaps between firms as a means of trading risk. These unregulated swaps created a casino like structure where firms traded in risk in hopes that their particular picks would come up as strong investments. The unregulated swaps also allowed for bundling of risky investments. The swap related provision of Gramm’s bill created a 62 trillion dollar market — four times the size of US GDP — that was entirely unregulated. In other words, no-one was looking through the market to make sure firms had assets to cover the losses they guaranteed. According to Michael Greenberger, former director of the CFTC’s division of trading and markets, unregulated swaps were at “the heart of the subprime meltdown…
The same proponents of the deregulation, zero oversight, laissez faire, help the wealthy pay zero taxes ideology of the past are ill equipped to responsibly deal with the same series of problems they caused.”
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1044963/phil_gramm_father_of_subprime_deregulation.html?page=2&cat=75
Tim, now, i’m no big Democrat, by any measure, but you can’t deny that the press was kept at a distance during Palin’s little tour de foreign officials.
Dave wrote: “but you can’t deny that the press was kept at a distance during Palin’s little tour de foreign officials.”
I would have done the same. In contrast to Obama’s ‘Triumph of the Will’ tour in Germany.
“I would have done the same. In contrast to Obama’s ‘Triumph of the Will’ tour in Germany.”
The closest to fascism this country has ever experienced has been the last seven and a half years under this Republican administration, yet in spite of this, you feel compelled to use this ridiculous characterization.
What, exactly, makes Palin’s hiding from the press have anything to do with Obama’s foreign tour? When was the last time you saw any politician greeted by 100,000 foreigners waving American flags? By comparison, Palin was greeted by a large protest in Pennsylvania last week with placards saying “Hey hockey mom, keep the puck out of Pennsylvania.”
Your attempts at smearing Obama are just as lame as any garden-variety neo con has offered.
Excellent, informative post as usual from Dionysis. Dionysis is entirely correct that most economists agree that the singlemost significant cause of the economic disaster we are facing was the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act.
It should be noted that the primary architect of that catastrophically misguided piece of deregulation legislation was none other than Phil Gramm, the primary architect of John McCain’s economic plan. Talk about letting the fox guard the henhouse!
It should also be noticed that although it was definitely a staunchly right-wing piece of legislation pushed by free-market extremists, there is plenty of blame to go around for Democrats who signed onto their plan. Clinton, in one of his many acts of Clintonian triangulation (polemicizing the opposition then taking credit for their work) signed Gramm-Leach-Bliley into law. That said, Clinton still resided over the longest period of economic growth in the history of our nation, which is a whole hell of a lot more than can be said for Bush.
Ron Paul and many right-wingers have been trying to place the primary blame for the housing bubble on the Community Restoration Act, which was created to keep banks from discriminating in order to make home ownership available to minorities and less wealthy individuals, but the numbers simply don’t hold up for that argument.
Unfortunately, the CRA has become the new “welfare mothers” target for the right-wing. The right-wing has instituted a frequently employed and unfortunate tactic of exploiting people’s prejudices based on fear-mongering rather than the facts. The right-wing would have you believe that the primary cause of the housing bubble is irresponsible, poor black people, but that is simply not the case.
The incontestable truth is, wealthy yuppies buying homes on speculation of their increasing values accounts for a far, far larger percentage of loan defaults. In fact, the loans under the CRA have a much lower foreclosure rate than the national average because they tended to make secure loans to regular people who needed a house, not speculators playing the market.
Tim,
Why would you have done the same?
Tim,
“Why would you have done the same?”
Posted by dave. I would love to know the answer to that myself. First, timpeck posts this:
“The McCain campaign isn’t even letting press near her!”
Lie.”
Making the case that Palin has not been kept from the press. Then, when you reiterate that in fact she has been kept from the press, he admits it by writing that he “would have done the same.”
Which is it? Try as you might, you can’t have it both ways.
oooh. nice point, dio. i didnt catch that.
Feminism is great if you agree to their political philosophy which clearly reveals their real angenda.
Mrs.Sara Palin doesnt fit within this agenda which has upsets the apple cart.
Insight: http://exposureroom.com/ff9cf489144a48329dfb07d324212bbf/
RB
To me, Obama is a naive, weak and inexperienced man, seemingly still operating under some of the grandiose delusions of adolescence. McCain made that crystal clear in the debate. Sarah Palin is much more reality-based, more mature, more experienced and tried than Obama. Sarah has accomplished a lot. She would make a better President –right now– than Obama ever would. Whether you agree with her positions on the issues is another matter entirely. I happen to.
Name one big accomplishment of Obama’s, one big piece of legislation, one time when he EVER left the herd and acted with independence, courage vision….Well…. I’m waiting….yawn…(cricket-cricket-cricket).
Now think of John McCain and apply these same criteria. Go ahead, I’ll wait. I know—it will take a few minutes…… Long list ain’t it?
Give Obama a teleprompter and he’s a magnificent speaker. He looks good in a suit. But his record as a real leader accomplishing ANYTHING of substance is non-existent. No, voting ‘Present’ doesn’t count. He’s still in ‘weenie-land’ in my book.
Obama might need to re-consider his choice of advisers as well. Let’s start with his chief economic advisor Frank Raines. He’s the guy that headed up Fannie Mae (hmm, where have I heard that name before?), ran it into the ground and made out like a bandit. Do you really think we would get any ‘Change we can believe in’ from the likes of him? Wake up people!! The guy’s a major crook. What’s that old saying..”If you lie down with a dog…”
Obama needs to grow up and grow a pair. Which might also be said of some of the naive people (men) who support him (you know who you are.)
Quite an interesting point there R Bernier. It is true, feminism is great if you agree with the political philosophies that illustrate the real agenda of feminism…. feminism. Who would have ever guessed such a thing?
Yes, it’s true, Sarah Palin’s misogynistic agenda doesn’t fit in with the feminist agenda. Who would have guessed that feminists wouldn’t support a candidate who opposes the goals of feminism? Why on Earth would anyone think that feminists might care about feminism? I can see why you were so surprised RB. Nobody could have possibly predicted such a thing.
Golly, why can’t feminists just be more like Rush Limbaugh and call themselves “feminazis,” right? It’s just so gosh darned unfair how feminists want people to support feminism.
Entopticon,
Point taking, no surprised taken though it does appears that the “feminazis” will not accept a true independent thinker with views that are diffent from within the feminism (feminazis, as you state) agendas – now can you belive that!!
I would suggust you get a definition of “feminazis” to have a clear understanding.
Jose, your naivete is surpassed only by your dishonesty. Apparently Jose, you are the one who needs to “grow a pair” because you lie like a child.
FACT: Franklin Raines is not Obama’s chief economic advisor. You are a liar. As a matter of fact, Franklin Raines has never been one of Obama’s economic advisors.
You should also stop spreading disinformation about Obama’s legislative record. Obama’s legislative accomplishments are far too long to list in full, but two important examples are the Lugar-Obama Act (designed to keep weapons out of terrorist hands) and Coburn-Obama, which is also known as the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (instituted a massive public database of government spending to increase accountability).
Both of those significant pieces of legislation were bipartisan, so that also negates your fallacious argument about Obama not acting independently of his party.
As far as the “present” vote issue goes, the truth is, Obama voted present less than 130 times out of over 4,000 votes! There is no such thing as a present vote in the US Senate. In Illinois, present votes are a tool that is commonly employed to keep legislation that still needs tweaking from being shelved.
Apparently you never heard the adage about people in glass houses not throwing stones. In the Senate McCain has missed 64.5% of his votes and Obama has only missed 46.5% of his:
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/110/senate/vote-missers/
Palin is ready to be President? That is the biggest whopper of them all. In her most recent interview she couldn’t even name a single Supreme Court case other than Roe v Wade. Not one! She’s not even ready to teach a high school civics class let alone to be President of the United States.
Obama graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law and held one of the most prestigious honors in the legal world, the President of the Harvard Law Review. He taught constitutional law at one of the most prestigious law schools in the nation, the University of Chicago Law School, for 12 years!
By the way, Obama’s political resume is nearly identical to Abraham Lincoln’s. Palin has been Governor of a state with a miniscule fraction of the population and economy of Obama’s state, Illinois, for less than two years. Before that she was mayor of a town that was a miniscule fraction of the size of Asheville.
It is no surprise that you have to fabricate fallacies to support your arguments, because on the facts you have no leg to stand on.
Yeah, that must be the problem RB… I just don’t have a sophisticated enough understanding of what a great term “femenazi” is. What a silly liberal I am for not liking that word.
The first visible damage of this deregulation came in the form of the now-famous Enron loophole. The loophole allowed energy companies to trade energy in an unregulated fashion. This act allowed Enron to play havoc with the California energy market, causing severe economic damage to that State while taking greater and greater risks that, ultimately, resulted in Enron’s collapse.
I agree…I learned a lot from watching ‘Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room’. And today, as I was reading about some changes certain legislators want to make to a new and improved bailout bill, I came across this:
“Another possible change to the bill would modify “mark to market” accounting rules. Such rules require banks and other financial institutions to adjust the value of their assets to reflect current market prices, even if they plan to hold the assets for years.”
I profess to not being an expert at economics, but doesn’t this sound so similar to the Enron situation? Basing current value of commodities (such as electricity) on possible future value? Dionysis, Entopticon? A little help? Are they trying to solve the problems brought about by deregulation with more deregulation?
“I profess to not being an expert at economics, but doesn’t this sound so similar to the Enron situation? Basing current value of commodities (such as electricity) on possible future value? Dionysis, Entopticon? A little help? Are they trying to solve the problems brought about by deregulation with more deregulation?”
I’m far from an expert in economics either, but you’re right. From what I understand, ‘modification’ of mark to market accounting rules would benefit mostly the banking and investment firms, and is opposed by the Big Four and other accounting firms, as well as consumer groups.
“Some House members advocate scrapping mark-to-market accounting altogether as a way to help lenders holding mortgage loans and securities whose value have fallen sharply. Consumer groups have balked at the idea, and accounting firms are about to jump in as well, fearing such a change could deceive investors about the value of troubled loans and mortgage-backed assets.
Accountants won’t be going it alone because consumer groups don’t like the idea of rescinding mark-to-market accounting either.
“It’s absolute idiocy,” said Barbara Roper, director of investor protection for the Consumer Federation of America. “Allowing companies to lie to investors and lie to themselves is not the solution to the problem, it is the problem…”
Ms. Roper said lawmakers need to understand “that the alternative to mark-to-market accounting is mark-to-myth” and could give banks and other financial companies the freedom to value assets at inflated amounts…”
“…lawmakers who seek to suspend the requirement would be siding with banks and their trade group at the expense of investors, and “may be sowing the seeds for another round of financial reporting devastation down the road.”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122280147924091325.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Second wave feminism was funded by the Rockefellers. The CIA funded Gloria Steinem. According to Nick Rockefeller, feminism was promoted in order to suck women into the tax base and put children into the hands of the state for 6 hours a day.
I also recommend that you read Julius Caesar’s letters from Gaul…specifically how he played up the tribal matriarchy as a means of subjugating populations.
Ms. Roper said lawmakers need to understand “that the alternative to mark-to-market accounting is mark-to-myth” and could give banks and other financial companies the freedom to value assets at inflated amounts…”
cool…thanks for the link and perspective….It seams to me that most people are against the bailout but don’t know why….but this is one of the pieces I think I understand
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/10/01/bail_out/
I’ve been trying to explain to friends and family (and supply copious links on the internets) what’s going on, but it’s not like I really know the full details (or have a solution).
I do think that we should spread the word that this “‘modification’ of mark to market accounting rules” is dangerous as evidenced by the Enron scandal and others. Shooting Shuler an email (he probably doesn’t understand what’s going on either) wouldn’t hurt, although Congress has been literally crippled with web traffic…
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/09/house-web-site.html
so maybe good luck getting through….crazy times, indeed….
Entopticon glad you understand.
Fascinating Wikipedia article on feminism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism
And just to confuse the politics of it all, here are some of the many forms of feminism philosophy:
Liberal feminism asserts the equality of men and women through political and legal reform.
Radical feminism considers the capitalist hierarchy, which it describes as sexist, as the defining feature of women’s oppression.
Black feminism argues that sexism, class oppression, and racism are inextricably bound together.
Postcolonial feminists argue that oppression relating to the colonial experience, particularly racial, class, and ethnic oppression, has marginalized women in postcolonial societies.
Multiracial feminism (also known as “women of color” feminism) offers a standpoint theory and analysis of the lives and experiences of women of color.
Classical liberal or libertarian feminism conceives of freedom as freedom from coercive interference. It holds that women, as well as men, have a right to such freedom due to their status as self-owners.
Post-structural feminism, also referred to as French feminism, uses the insights of various epistemological movements, including psychoanalysis, linguistics, political theory (Marxist and post-Marxist theory), race theory, literary theory, and other intellectual currents for feminist concerns.
Ecofeminism links ecology with feminism. Ecofeminists see the domination of women as stemming from the same ideologies that bring about the domination of the environment.
Hey Dionysis…
I transferred our little back and forth over to another thread…
http://www.mountainx.com/news/2008/shuler_votes_no_on_700b_bailout_plan/
It just seems more at home there away from all of the femenazi nastiness….
Jose,
Your post is so full of lies, half-truths, biased opinions trying to pass for ‘facts’ and faulty logic that it is unworthy of serious response, although entopticon did a great job demolishing it handily.
If you wish to accept nonsense as fact in order to confirm your bias, you certainly can. However, you really should reconsider if you want to publicly display such ignorance.
“Second wave feminism was funded by the Rockefellers. The CIA funded Gloria Steinem.”
Well, in that case George HW Bush is a feminist of the highest order, Since he was Director of the CIA in the mid 70’s. So, your saying that Bush and Gerald Ford funded Gloria Steinem?
Care to share any links for those interesting assertions Matt Marcy? I’d love to read them.
Dave:
I think Bush was more interested in running cocaine and setting up concentration camps in the US (look up “Iran Contra”, “Operation: Gardenplot”, “Operation: Cablesplicer”) during his directorship, but I am referring to Operation:Mockingbird, a project that included setting up Ms. magazine.
http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/msg02217.html
http://www.savethemales.ca/180302.html
“In May 1975, Redstockings, a radical feminist group, raised the question of whether Steinem had continuing ties with the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Though she admitted work for a CIA-financed foundation in the late 1950s and early 1960s, Steinem denied any further involvement.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloria_Steinem
…and you can check out her own autobiography. Most of this, however, is just common knowledge.
Oh my god… that stuff about feminism being a CIA conspiracy was not a joke! That is the most hilariously ridiculous conspiracy theory that I have ever heard. Matt Mercy, you make the Hale-Bopp cult look rational by comparison.
A couple highlights from one of the astonishingly misogynistic links provided by Matt Mercy:
“Feminism is a grotesque fraud perpetrated on society by its governing elite. It is designed to weaken the American social and cultural fabric in order to introduce a friendly fascist New World Order.”
and..
“Women’s oppression is a lie.”
It is astonishing that that level of ignorance still exists in anywhere in the world, let alone here. It is even more astonishing that someone who could argue such nonsense could actually be functionally literate.
Matt-
Cool links. I had never heard much about that subject, but I see the threads of truth already.
Points taken.
Thanks.
…and Gloria Steinem also admits – in her own autobiography – to working with the CIA and the agency helping to fund Ms. magazine.
As a matter of fact, if you don’t know about this stuff…or deny it’s existence, then the burden of proof is upon YOU. It’s common knowledge among the more educated circles.
I appreciate your singling out the more subjective materials from those web pages I cited. They are important too. I bet you thought they would be outrageous little tidbits that would discredit the argument. Try using FACTS.
The more educated circles? Really Matt Mercy? Where exactly did you get your advanced degrees from? In what graduate program did you study feminist theory in order to refute the central tenets of feminism? At everywhere that I studied feminism, at both the undergraduate and graduate levels, your ludicrously bigoted contention would not have been taken seriously.
Those links are worse than garbage. They are actually so phenomenally offensive and ignorant that they are almost as funny as they are disgraceful.
The truth is, those links are ridiculous, bigoted tripe, that would get you laughed out of any legitimate university in the US. They show an astonishing lack of education on even the most rudimentary tenets of the study of the oppression of women.
The burden to disprove your asinine CIA theory isn’t on me. Your theory might as well involve little green men because it is totally absurd. No rational person would deny the history of the oppression of women. You need to adjust your tinfoil helmut because the secret CIA/little green men transmissions must be crossing your wires.
Entop-
Why so up in a riot about this? It is common sense that “Feminism” was co-opted by capitalism to break apart the family unit and create a more consumer-based society. Its quite a simple equation, really. Fewer people watching the kids and tending the home, more people out there making money and paying taxes, equals a stronger Capitalist Society, with children being cared for by daycare or television.
Now, understand that co-opted “Feminism” is different from the notion that women should have equal rights in our society. I am not arguing against that, and it would seem Matt isnt either.
Matt-Again. Thanks for the links. It makes sense.
Common sense?!? It is every bit as offensive as anything Adolph Hitler ever said. Feminism is not a government conspiracy, and it is astonishingly disgraceful for anyone to suggest that it is. To say that there is no such thing as the oppression of women, as those ridiculous lunatic conspiracy theory websites did, is absolutely despicable.
Those websites were disgraceful, and frankly it is astonishing that the Mountain Xpress would allow that sort of disgracefully bigoted hate language to be published on their website. It is amazingly ironic that they will sensor any heated debate, even if there is no profanity, but they regularly allow links to the sites of registered white supremacist hate groups and shockingly bigoted right-wing extremist hate rhetoric like the above links that deny the entire history of the oppression of women.
The Xpress editor thought it was fine to post that hate rhetoric denying the entire history of the opression of women and calling feminism a government conspiracy, but they regularly choose to censor my posts. In my book, that makes the Xpress editor the only person who is EVEN MORE disgraceful then the people spreading that unspeakably horrible hate rhetoric.
There you go comparing anything you disagree with or dont fully understand as “Adolph Hitler”
No one has “denied the entire history of the opression (sic) of women”. They have just challenged your simplistic notions of the Women’s Rights movement.
Didnt you already storm out of here months ago saying you were sick of the MX’s obvious bias against you, vowing to never return?
“In my book, that makes the Xpress editor the only person who is EVEN MORE disgraceful then the people spreading that unspeakably horrible hate rhetoric.”
Great. Stop posting here, then.
I support Gov Sarah Palin enthusiastically. It is about time we have a woman in the White House, other than somebodies wife. She hunts and field dresses her own kill. She has more guts than all the democrats in congress put together. And as entertainment, it is fun to see how upset and nasty the liberal mainstream press has been because she is not a pro-abortion socialist. Go get them Sarah!
Al-
As a hunter, I would say shooting something from a helicopter isnt exactly heroic, or even ‘hunting’. And 30 thousand dollar helicopter rides are hardly populist.
Where did you get this current pseudonym?
Dave, since reading comprehension is apparently not your strong suit, I will once again include the same quote from the disgraceful article that was posted. Be sure to read it to yourself very slowly, out loud if necessary, because apparently you failed to grasp the meaning the first time:
“Women’s oppression is a lie.”
Tell us Dave, what exactly did Adolph Hitler ever say that was worse than that? The answer is nothing. There is nothing that could be said that is more offensively bigoted than that statement.
My simplistic notions of the women’s rights movement? I may not be anywhere near the world’s foremost expert on the subject, but I have taken courses on feminism at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. How about you Dave?
Gordon listed a few strains of feminism above, although it seems he may be under the impression that they are contradictory rather than complimentary. Radical feminism is often built on the foundational tenets of ecofemism, which holds that dominance over nature arose from agricultural practices that precipitated land ownership and slavery. Black feminism and multicultural feminism focus on the intrinsic ties between oppression in race and gender.
Postcolonial feminist studies frequently explore the false binary polemics inherent in the toxic memes of colonialist domination, such as East and West and black and white. Postructuralism deconstructs those arbitrary memes to expose the culturally embedded social constructs that present themselves as fact, but are actually coercive memes based on subjugation and legitimizing existing social stratification. They explore the history and cultural impact of the objectifying otherness of colonial bifurcation and its impact on the creation of social stratification and oppression.
Liberal and libertarian feminism are not necessarily in contradiction with the former, but some of the more radical strains criticize their model as a case of defining women’s liberation from misogynistic models of dominance and objectification rather than re-imagining social constructs from a non-hierarchical model that doesn’t instantiate the paradigmatic assumptions that lead to social stratification and oppression.
So tell us Dave, how does your theory that feminism is a CIA conspiracy fit into your notion that you have a sophisticated understanding of women’s rights issues? I’m just dying to know.
Dave, since you didn’t seem to comprehend the quote I supplied, I will once again include the same quote from the disgraceful article that was posted. Be sure to read it to yourself very slowly, out loud if necessary, because apparently you failed to grasp the meaning the first time:
“Women’s oppression is a lie.”
Tell us Dave, what exactly did Adolph Hitler ever say that was worse than that? The answer is nothing. There is nothing that could be said that is more offensively bigoted than that statement.
My simplistic notions of the women’s rights movement? I may not be anywhere near the world’s foremost expert on the subject, but I have taken courses on feminism at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. How about you Dave?
Gordon listed a few strains of feminism above, although it seems he may be under the impression that they are contradictory rather than complimentary. Radical feminism is often built on the foundational tenets of ecofemism, which holds that dominance over nature arose from agricultural practices that precipitated land ownership and slavery. Black feminism and multicultural feminism focus on the intrinsic ties between oppression in race and gender.
Postcolonial feminist studies frequently explore the false binary polemics inherent in the toxic memes of colonialist domination, such as East and West and black and white. Postructuralism deconstructs those arbitrary memes to expose the culturally embedded social constructs that present themselves as fact, but are actually coercive memes based on subjugation and legitimizing existing social stratification. They explore the history and cultural impact of the objectifying otherness of colonial bifurcation and its impact on the creation of social stratification and oppression.
Liberal and libertarian feminism are not necessarily in contradiction with the former, but some of the more radical strains criticize their model as a case of defining women’s liberation from misogynistic models of dominance and objectification rather than re-imagining social constructs from a non-hierarchical model that doesn’t instantiate the paradigmatic assumptions that lead to social stratification and oppression.
So tell us Dave, how does your theory that feminism is a CIA conspiracy fit into your notion that you have a sophisticated understanding of women’s rights issues? I’m just dying to know.
Entop-
It is not “my theory”. I’m flattered that you think I came up with it, but thats just not the case. I’m not that theoretical. I merely see the logic in it.
You might want to take that question up with Matt, who first posted it. He has, as you can see, already responded to you, but you chose to ignore it in favor of comparing me, and anyone else who disagrees with you, to Hitler.
I will say that many people believe that Capitalism has successfully co-opted Pop-Feminism for its own benefit. This is hardly a radical, or even controversial subject. I know local anarchist Punks and College Feminists who subscribe to this opinion. Although it requires going beyond a simple dichotomy of Good/Bad to see the subtleties of the topic. My own opinion is that a healthy home has a strong family unit, not just a high income.
Does it confuse you to hear that women being ’empowered’ to make more money isn’t exactly anti-capitalist? Does it hurt your brain to think that some “Leftists” dont think that a more disenfranchised home, with no mother or father around to raise the children, is a way to build a strong, helpful, healthy community?
Shouldnt we be working towards a society where Women and Men are free to enjoy their lives without having to work three jobs to make ends meet? Does that make me a Republican because I think that a healthy home requires a whole family? I certainly hope not, because I am planning on voting for your man Obama in a few weeks, and I’d be bummed if I had registered incorrectly.
Also, I do strongly disagree with your assertion that Adolph Hitler did not commit crimes worse than saying “Women’s oppression is a lie.” And my wife would certainly agree that the notion that ‘men control everything’ is a simplistic generalization which insults Women’s power within and outside of the Home.
In addition, your obsession with calling anyone you dont agree with “Hitler” is certainly bordering on a disorder of some kind, and lends a lot of discredit to your posts. How about comparing me to Kim Jong ill? Or Attila the Hun? G Gorden Liddy? Freshen it up a bit, guy.
Dave you are so full of misinformation. sarah does not hunt from a helicopter. She rides with her hubby on his souped up skidoo. Then gets the drop on the big horned monster and one-shot gets the moose in the heart. Then she slits it’s gut open and removes the entrails and field dresses the kill.
Sarah palin is a REAL feminist. She has more guts than all the democrats in congress. She speaks her mind. She is independent. She believes in the sanctity of life. She is a true feminist and I can’t wait to address her a Madam Vice President Palin!
I think you quoted paragraphs five and six from your course syllabus. -Forgot the quotation marks, though.
All I know is that mainstream second-wave feminism was co-opted to produce a desired (by our controllers) social climate.
Actually Matt, I didn’t quote a thing. That was off the top of my head. I could easily go into much, much more detail at great length, but I don’t think that is necessary. Simply Google any phrase from what I have written and you will not find a match because I did not plagiarize.
I studied directly under one of the founders of ecofeminism, who I also became friends with and later I worked for the same college, so I have plenty to say about that, and I could go on endlessly about postcolonialism and poststructuralism because I have strong interests in both. My own work in the study of the syntactical structure of mental imagery and pictorial representations particularly overlaps with postructural theories about semiotic shifts in culturally embedded lexical representations because that illuminates syntactical disparities which prevent the possibility of meaningfully translating representations across syntactically distinct modalities. Anyway, that doesn’t make me the foremost expert on those subjects, but it shows that I am certainly not simply uneducated, as dave falsely charged.
You do not know that feminism was co-opted by the CIA. You believe that that is the case, but you are wrong. You have been misguided by bigoted, misogynistic sources such as the links you provided, who exhibit a complete ignorance of even the most rudimentary tenets of feminism.
There you go comparing anything you disagree with to Adolph Hitler.
How about Kim Jong Ill? G Gorden Liddy? Come on, guy, freshin it up a bit, you little adoplh hitler.
Dont forget to call him Hitler. I bet he was “misguided” by Hitler.
“My own work in the study of the syntactical structure of mental imagery and pictorial representations particularly overlaps with postructural theories about semiotic shifts in culturally embedded lexical representations because that illuminates syntactical disparities which prevent the possibility of meaningfully translating representations across syntactically distinct modalities”
Dont get out much?
Now you are calling me a little Adolph Hitler. Oh Dave, you are just such a card. Your cartoonish zeal more than overcompensates for the clumsy rhetoric that you regularly substitute for wit.
I’ve never heard Kim Jong Il or G Gordon Liddy deny the oppression of women, Dave. Hitler is the example I used because the denial of the holocaust is the closest thing that came to mind in relation to the denial of the oppression of women.
It really is just too funny how you lie as if we couldn’t just scroll up and catch you in your lies. I had quoted the original source saying, “Women’s oppression is a lie.” That’s the same source that you lauded. Sorry, guy, but that means you have some very serious issues with women that you seriously need to work out.
Then you just completely lied and said, “No one has “denied the entire history of the opression (sic) of women” as if we couldn’t just scroll up and bust you on that blatant lie.
After I completely busted you on your lie by supplying the original quote once again, instead of having the character and integrity to admit you were blatantly caught in a flat-out lie, you tried to hide behind a pathetically weak smokescreen of irrelevant snarkiness.
I challenge you Dave, to simply supply a quote from Hitler that is more offensive than a denial of the entire history of the oppression of women. Scan your favorite copy of Mein Kampf. Frankly, it’s hard to imagine anything more offensive than that.
The plain truth is, you are completely out of your depth.
Dave asked, “Don’t get out much?”
Ho-ho-ho Dave, there you go again. What a card you are. I get it, since your idea of intellectual rigor is perusing websites claiming that feminism is a CIA conspiracy and the oppression of women is a lie, the best you could do was to ask, “Don’t get out much?”
Actually Dave, you are the one who might consider getting out a bit more. Those misogynistic conspiracy theory sites will rot your brain.
Instead of claiming to know what educated people have to say about feminism, despite your complete ignorance of even the most rudimentary tenets of feminism, you should consider actually becoming one of the educated people and try taking a few courses in feminist studies to disabuse yourself of the ridiculously misogynistic delusions that you ignorantly try to pass off as fact.
The idea of comparing Barack Hussein Obama to Hitler really isn’t that far fetched. Parallels: in the early 1930s, Germany was in a depression…and the people were depressed. Hitler was a magical speaker who could sell anything. Quite the speaker Hitler was, who promised a lot. But didn’t give a lot of details as to how he would do it. Same same Barack Hussein Obama. Obama has promised the American people the moon, and this with a “tax cut” for 95% of the middle class. hey, and old saw is in play here: what sounds too good to be true isn’t true.
Real feminists should line up behind a real feminist running for Vice President” Governor Sarah Palin, of Alaska. She is one of us. And John McCain is a man of experience, and honor.
entop-
“That’s the same source that you lauded. Sorry, guy, but that means you have some very serious issues with women that you seriously need to work out.”
Well, actually that’s Matt’s source that were surgically quoting, to be honest. I’d love to take credit, but i just can’t. Also since Ms. Steinem has been quoted as saying she received funding from the CIA, by your logic, she must have some serious woman issues she must need to work out.
“Then you just completely lied and said, “No one has “denied the entire history of the opression (sic) of women” as if we couldn’t just scroll up and bust you on that blatant lie.
After I completely busted you on your lie by supplying the original quote once again, instead of having the character and integrity to admit you were blatantly caught in a flat-out lie, you tried to hide behind a pathetically weak smokescreen of irrelevant snarkiness. ”
You take great pride in saying you “busted” me. First, i am not a statue, so you can’t “bust me”. Second, where did I deny the Oppression of women never existed? Nowhere that i can see on this page, as you claim. Is it possible, that in your righteous rage, you read into things, and assume something is there when it isnt?
I dont think Hitler ever “denied the Holocaust”, as you say. Seems quite silly to even think that could be the case. I have only maintained that there are plenty of “Leftists” who dont agree with your over-educated, yet out-of-touch notions of “Feminism”. but you probably think guys like me who work with our hands are all sexist pigs, anyway.
Your posts always gain such vigor when challenged. I just love it. You get so worked up, calling people ‘liars’, ‘hitlers’, ‘uneducated’… insulting the Editors of the Mountain Express, throwing a tantrum and swearing to never return the the chat boards because nobody here understands your obvious intellectual superiority…. Really. Great stuff, please keep it up.
Your right. I’m just a dumb, redneck, hillbilly who hates women. I guess someone should inform my wife, daughter, mother and grandmother. and then I’m going to go home and oppress them.
Al-Your affection for Hitler’s “Magical” speaking skills is a bit disturbing. Do you think Obama is going to try and kill all the Jews?
You know the scary thing about Al “Cullen Anderson” Cottingham? He really seems to believe this crap. Whereas I can find people like Rush, or Bill O’reilly quite entertaining because it is so obvious they dont believe much of what they spew.
Could you say take “Obama” out of that paragraph and insert “McCain” and have it be equally true? Yes.
Now, entop, please go after “Al” and not me. We’re much closer to the same team, you and I, then you seem to realize..
Great read, what a treat to see this from A-ville’s former mayor. What surprises me most about Palin is the knee-jerk nastiness that she occasionally accidentally lets slip out, that for some reason seems to always come from the most self-proclaimedly devout. I personally think she was Rove’s choice to employ the fabled ‘southern strategy’ at the last moment if things got that bad, and apparently they have. I think they saw her as a less than bright, expendable zealot with a limited political future and chose her because they didn’t want to ‘waste’ someone with more potential.
You know, Entopticon is right. Governments NEVER become corrupt and they certainly have NEVER hijacked legitimate social movements to steer well-meaning people to that corrupt government’s desired outcome. Didn’t happen with civil rights, nor feminism, nor environmentalism. All is well and dandy. I’m going to drink some beer and watch football now.
Leni, those behind the draft were DEMS — remember Rangel? He wrote the legislation himself and then voted against it when the REPUBS pushed it to a vote to dispel the media myth that Bush administration was behind it. The same smoke and mirrors we abhor when the Republicans do it, but Dems are no better.
Feminists, from my observations (as a woman) is an elitist class who want to dictate to everyone else what it means to be a woman. It’s a “party line” model and no dissent is tolerated. If one disagrees with Ms. magazine on any issue, we’re sent back to the kitchen, barefoot and preggers. No credibility or consideration is afforded to the diversity of women who have strong minds and wills of their own and want to ponder and develop their own unique identities.
Where’s the criticism of Hillary, who acted just as (if not more) nastily in her campaign than Palin?
It’s getting harder and harder to stay a liberal pinko chick.
Al Cottingham: “The idea of comparing Barack Hussein Obama to Hitler really isn’t that far fetched. Parallels: in the early 1930s, Germany was in a depression…and the people were depressed. Hitler was a magical speaker who could sell anything. Quite the speaker Hitler was, who promised a lot. But didn’t give a lot of details as to how he would do it. Same same Barack Hussein Obama. Obama has promised the American people the moon, and this with a “tax cut” for 95% of the middle class. hey, and old saw is in play here: what sounds too good to be true isn’t true.
Real feminists should line up behind a real feminist running for Vice President” Governor Sarah Palin, of Alaska. She is one of us. And John McCain is a man of experience, and honor.”
So well said I can’t add to it. Other than this: vote for McCain/Palin!