2008 Previewing Tonight’s VP Debate: Part 2
posted by on October 2 at 14:25 PM
Besides (see below), there’s absolutely no reason to criticize Palin for anything but her own statements and policies. A few examples:
She may think that making rape victims pay for evidence-gathering kits is “crazy,” but that’s exactly the policy she signed into law as mayor of Wasilla.
She slashed funding to a program benefiting impoverished teenage mothers.
She goes to a church that’s truly scary.
She thinks lengthening the amount of time for women to sue their employers for pay discrimination would be a “boon to trial lawyers.”
She mocks Joe Biden for being old—while running alongside a 72-year-old.
She won’t stop talking about how she has foreign policy experience because you can see Russia from Alaska—even though she’s never been to the one island in Alaska where this is true.
She is tremendously incurious about other nations, bragging that she didn’t even have a passport until 2006 because she wasn’t part of “that culture.”
She opposes unions but brags of having gotten a “good union job.”
She believes that being gay is a choice.
She thinks global warming is due to “cyclical” changes and that it “kinda doesn’t matter” whether it’s caused by human activity.
She doesn’t know her own running mate’s position on Pakistan.
She opposes abortion even in cases of rape or incest.
She can’t name a single newspaper or magazine that she’s ever read.
Et cetera. See? No need for sexist attacks whatsoever.
I agree that sexist attacks certainly aren't necessary, but not all of the examples that you provided were sexist attacks.
Ever heard of confirmation bias, Erica? Your eagerness to find sexism everywhere has you parroting Republican talking points, and your face needs that nose.
She's dumb.
I'll attack her anyhow and anyway I can. It makes me giddy.
Yes, but that doesn't give me anything I can scream at the television.
how about 'moron'? what do you scream at mccain?
I'm with Ercia. About the sexist stuff. No reason for it when there's so much else to ridiculed/be scared of.
And sexism stuff isn't right, in any context.
So anybody know of a place, in downtown Seattle, to catch the debate tonight??
Artwalking Pioneer Square, -but don't want to miss it!
The governor speaks in gibberish.
Palin reminds me of high school, but not in a good way; getting stoned, then wandering into my US history class and basically making up vague gobbledegook answers on the pop quiz.
You can find sexist comments in both parties. In fact, as you already know, sexist comments are found in both parties. All the time. We saw it from Republicans and Democrats with Hillary. We would have seen a lot less from our side if Obama, our savior, was out of the picture. Now that Hillary is out of the picture, we only see it with Democrats, because Republicans don't have an open mind when it comes to humor at their expense. Kind of like you. And by kind of, I mean exactly.
What I'm trying to say is, um, you should save your feminist bullshit for sexism, not sexist comments. There's a big difference, and you have hands that can brush off your shoulders. Don't you? Oh, you think sexist comments will sway an undecided voter, or even a sensitive liberal, to vote for McCain/Palin? You think that our sexist comments will secure an already secure vote for a Republican? Really?
Oh, there's simply "no need" for them. Well, there's no need for any cheap shot, now is there? So, have you, Erica C. Barnett, ever taken part in a cheap shot? Have you ever made a joke/crack about men? Throw the first stone, toots.
Is it sexist to suggest that she must have been born blonde?
Holy Mary, Mother of God, I agree with Mr. Poe @10.
Erica, you called McCain "Gramps" a number of times in the last debate liveslog. How is that ageism any different from the sexism you are railing against?
You are correct: there is no need for sexism, Palin is already a buffoon without the use of her vagina. But, you can't have it both ways.
it's ad hominem attacks that are the problem. not just sexist ad hominem attacks. all of them. they are often sexist, but they can also be racist, ageist, or no -ist at all; any mean-spirited personal attack counts.
if politics are supposed to be about the issues - which always should be the case - then this simple rule always applies, all the time, regardless of the person's gender: no vicious personal attacks.
yeesh, no need for humor either, apparently.
By the way, I'd prefer if you didn't use the pronoun 'she' when you're denigrating her. It brings attention to the fact that she's a woman and associates her womanhood with her incompetence, a sexist strategy if I've ever heard one.
Try "The esteemed governor of Alaska goes to a church that’s truly scary." In fact, we should all make an effort to only read transcripts of the debate to avoid reminding ourselves, visually or aurally, that she is a woman.
Yeah, actually, you might consider leaving this paper all together if you ever want your "sexist comments" tirade to make any sense.
@10: Well done, Mr. Poe. I had no idea you were so smart.
@Hippo,
Some of the people that work there could actually advance their issues a lot better if they weren't working at the stranger. Jonah is really the only exception since his issues are not posting enough fantasy football updates.
16, of course a dumb cracker fag like him is pro-sexism. honky butt pirates only respect things that give them boners, like john mccain or don rickles.
where's josh feit to throw around some n-bombs so mr poe can give him a pat on the back?
Totally agree! Sexism is totally unnecessary AND counterproductive. When we waste our breath being anti-women we don't have time to talk about her beliefs that are anti-woman. I went to a debate watching party tonight and got totally discouraged when a drunken asshole made a comment about Palin being a porn star. What the fuck? That shit hurts the cause.
Comments Closed
Comments are closed on this post.