Political Comment Du Jour
Sarah Palin needs to close her legs and open a book.
[EDIT 4:40pm: BTW, now that the reactions are in and the original author of the quote has been outed in our comment stream I'd like to point out that this statement came from a woman. FYI]
-Loki, HumidCity Founder
September 12th, 2008 at 8:56 am
BOO-YAH!
September 12th, 2008 at 9:40 am
That’s mature.
September 12th, 2008 at 9:59 am
Yes, closing one’s legs and taking time to self educate is mature. Thank you for noticing.
September 12th, 2008 at 10:12 am
Actually, I know quite a lot of folks who read books and aren’t that “educated” by them. Depends on the book. But then, you’d have to be forward-thinking to write that in your sexist insult.
September 12th, 2008 at 10:42 am
Well since I am written off as a sexist already why don’t we fall back to the words of Gloria Steinem in the LA times earlier this week:
Palin’s value to those patriarchs is clear: She opposes just about every issue that women support by a majority or plurality. She believes that creationism should be taught in public schools but disbelieves global warming; she opposes gun control but supports government control of women’s wombs; she opposes stem cell research but approves “abstinence-only” programs, which increase unwanted births, sexually transmitted diseases and abortions; she tried to use taxpayers’ millions for a state program to shoot wolves from the air but didn’t spend enough money to fix a state school system with the lowest high-school graduation rate in the nation; she runs with a candidate who opposes the Fair Pay Act but supports $500 million in subsidies for a natural gas pipeline across Alaska; she supports drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, though even McCain has opted for the lesser evil of offshore drilling. She is Phyllis Schlafly, only younger.
I don’t doubt her sincerity. As a lifetime member of the National Rifle Assn., she doesn’t just support killing animals from helicopters, she does it herself. She doesn’t just talk about increasing the use of fossil fuels but puts a coal-burning power plant in her own small town. She doesn’t just echo McCain’s pledge to criminalize abortion by overturning Roe vs. Wade, she says that if one of her daughters were impregnated by rape or incest, she should bear the child. She not only opposes reproductive freedom as a human right but implies that it dictates abortion, without saying that it also protects the right to have a child.
For the complete article follow the link http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oe-steinem4-2008sep04,0,1290251.story
September 12th, 2008 at 10:43 am
Go ahead and slap that label if you need to, Carmen. Loki’s post didn’t look sexist to me - and if you’re calling *him* sexist…well, that’s just laughable.
Personally, I don’t care what Palin does with her legs, as long as those legs, and the rest of her, stay out of the White House.
As long as I have the ability to vote (and I do, and I shall), book-banning, Roe vs Wade opposers will have a foe at the polls.
Oh - that also goes for those who are against freedom of speech.
September 12th, 2008 at 11:23 am
Oh, and here’s another good link:
http://womenagainstsarahpalin.blogspot.com/
I consider Palin’s nomination for veep to be a sexist move by the Republican party. As in “any woman will do, ’cause all we need to get more votes is a woman”.
Give women credit for BRAINS, dammit. ‘Cause my brain is telling me the nomination of McCain this year is in the vein of “any prick will do” for the GOP. If they won’t take a good, hard, critical look at what their policies have done to this country over the past eight years and how they could turn it all around for change, then to hell with ‘em all.
September 12th, 2008 at 11:25 am
The funniest part of Carmen’s “sexist” accusation is that this quote was originally generated by a woman, http://twitter.com/aliciammyers/statuses/918941144
Zing!
September 12th, 2008 at 11:27 am
Jonah, I was waiting for permission before outing the source but since its on the table now we will see if Carmen cares to comment.
Carmen?
September 12th, 2008 at 11:34 am
McCain, Plain, Republicans, sexist, not sexist….
…I’m just trying to wish them all under the cornfield.
September 12th, 2008 at 11:39 am
Legs- pah! I’d settle for her just closing her mouth. I’m not even going to suggest Palin open a book, because I concur with Carmen: I don’t think it would do much good. Depends on the reader.
September 12th, 2008 at 11:43 am
<—woman here. About to make a hugely “sexist” statement by the standards of some commenters above. I think Sarah Palin is nothing more than an animatronic blow up doll that the RNP pumped up, put pumps ON, then paraded around to get the “family values” voters. Since they’re all for “abstinence only” programs, they probably all have one of these dolls in their closet somewhere, so she looks familiar and comfortable. They probably keep theirs right next to their shotguns, which only completes the familiar, comfortable “family values” portrait they hold so dear. Spit those babies out, don’t feed them, don’t give them medical care, tell them not to have sex, and when they grow up to be feral sociopaths, THEN we can kill them, either by lethal injection if we catch them, or with our shotguns when they come onto our property.
Hey, this ALL makes sense to me. Not.
Go ahead, bring it on. But Loki sexist? Just total BS. Palin sexist? Um, YUP.
September 12th, 2008 at 11:54 am
Another great critique of this whole situation:
http://www.coldspaghetti.org/blog/2008/09/11/i-couldnt-hold-it-any-longer/
Let’s all just get smarter than the GOP and its piddly nominees want us to be. Period.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
I guess one way to judge the sexism (or lack thereof) in this comment is to find out if the person who said it would be equally likely to state, “George W. Bush needs to keep it in his pants and open a book.” Or, maybe… “Giuliani needs to zip up his fly, and open a book.”
Or, more broadly, would the person who made this statement agree that ANY person with an acutely naive worldview should close her legs or zip up his fly, and open a book? (Any acutely naive person who, say, mixes up Sunnis with Shiites; or blindly trusts that Dick Cheney and the Neo-cons were well-meaning people who did not deliberately manipulate the intelligence community; or does not understand the importance of wetlands restoration; or, who denies the effects of global climate change; or thinks that the CIA is incapable of torture, or that torture is actually EFFECTIVE …)
Pragmatically, I believe that people who oppose Palin-McCain (McPalin?) should be thinking about HOW TO STOP THE McCAIN-PALIN TICKET from winning. And pragmatically speaking, do you really think that schoolyard smears and taunts are really going to be effective? Obama’s in hot water for a completely UNINTENTIONAL smear, that was not even a smear. Maybe you’re not Obama supporters, but it’s not helpful to Obama if someone says that bloggers who support him are indulging in cheap vituperation. Now, if you don’t give a hang about Obama anyways because you think he’s too mainstream — if you are a radical anarchist or liberatarian who just doesn’t trust government and politicians in general and that trust extends to Obama-Biden …then, you probably do not care about such pragmatic points. — F.P.
p.s. It’s funny, you know — even highly intelligent and sophisticated thinkers such as Bill Clinton have clearly been susceptible to thinking with the wrong organ, at times…
September 12th, 2008 at 12:48 pm
I see it more as a comment on her extreme pro life stance. As to cheap vituperation, the right wing has had a hammerlock on that for quite some time, Rush Limbaugh being only one glaring example.
I actually support Obama, as do the majority of bloggers on HumidCity. I see him as our best hope to retreat from the Abyss we have stepped up to over the past eight years.
I really do appreciate not only your position , but also that you took the time to share it with us. I must add, however, that while my own analysis of the gladiatorial battle for the Oval Office is coming I do not recant the smal but potent meme that started this thread.
If people would keep sex and profits out of societal decisions the word would be a better place. Since that is impossible considering the visceral and instinctual nature of the urges in question we are stuck with what we have.
And BTW, the Obama campaign is unique in being the first campaign I have ever donated a penny to.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
The obvious message in the original metaphor, to me anyway, is that politicians-in-general need to stay out of our sexuality, and educate themselves constantly, a truth so obvious it overshadows the other elephant in the room, which is that Sarah Palin is simply unqualified and far too opinionated to represent the American People. At all.
Loki, rock it like you own it, brother.
In the words of another Great Southern Wit, Mark Twain;
“In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man; brave, hated, and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot.”
September 12th, 2008 at 1:11 pm
wow, the double standard here is fascinating. so basically, according to what steinem said, we are not ‘women first’, we are ‘liberals first’. if we break the liberal covenant than we are no longer protected by the sisterhood, and are thrown to the savages to be socially raped and mutilated? ah, sweet progress…iveness.
i think we can make some pretty strong arguments against palin’s politics without undermining the hard fought values of liberal ideology. this hypocrisy must end. liberalism is above this.
September 12th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
I don’t care who said it. It’s a crass comment, and repeating it here only undermines your credibility.
September 12th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
@pistolette actually I d not think that Steinem’s comment is “liberal first,” as evinced by this line “She opposes just about every issue that women support by a majority or plurality.”
@civitch Much like Greg Peters who draws Suspect Device (and will be joining us as a contributor here on HumidCity soon), I do not shy away from being crass or rude or profane. Sometimes it is required in this age of desensitization. The 18 prior comments above illustrate that at the very least conversation is being generated, and a conversation that includes opposing views. That is always desirable. As to losing credibility, I am sorry you feel that way, then again if I tried to please all the people all the time this site would be supremely useless…
September 12th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
I, for one, am rather surprised to see this being a converation about sexism and feminism.
Sarah Palin intends to do more to destroy womens’ rights than any remark made anywhere, ever.
Consitutional amendments to remove anyone’s rights to choose what to do with their own bodies far outway interpertation of a political satire.
As the argument over what somebody else meant, when they’ve clearly explianed their intention as otherwise, is a waste of time and misfocusing of energy.
Perhaps this why so many believe that the McCain camp will win the election.
Pull your wagon’s in circle, people, and worry about this later when you’ve retained your right to speak freely, choose what to do with your own body and even use the internet and telephone without being monitored.
September 12th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
Pistolette has a good point, and I might add, I’m sick of the liberal sexism I’m seeing from my side of the fence. Over and over, liberal men, and women — what, liberals can’t be sexist? women can’t be sexist? — toss out comments about Palin’s body, childbearing or childrearing (she ought to stay home with her Down’s baby, for instance) and call her everything just short of a cumbucket.
Attack her positions, but lay off her body. It’s sexist, coming from the right or left, to tell a woman to “shut her legs” as if that has anything to do with her intellect, or her abilities.
God, I’m sick of liberal boys who think they have a pass on being misogynist pricks.
September 12th, 2008 at 5:29 pm
Sarah Palin makes the point that women can be sexist. The comment made by man or woman is just a flip throw away line that has no real substance. It is like trying to defend a cat call.
September 12th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
Sorry to double comment, but this is starting to really bug me.
Why continue to cry Feminest Foul at Loki’s reposting of a remark, made by a woman, about a woman? If you’ve followed the thread, you’d know that’s the case.
The remark in question, while in wnderfully bad taste, hardly sees women “thrown to the savages to be socially raped and mutilated?”
Why the wildly out of the park reaction?
Have you EVER read anything on this site that would lead you to believe that it’s anti-woman? I think not.
What exactly do you think will happen if & when Old Man McCain and his Nazi Valkyre, Ms. Palin, take office?
You’ll no longer be able to sit at the coffee bar, plugging away online about your convoluted belief system without a room full of MEN spying on what you say, who you say it to, and where they live. Discussions of thwarting the new abstinence laws, since birth control is illegal and an act of treason, will likely get you jail time.
Talk about socially raped and mutilated. I don’t mean in metaphysical or social sense, like I think you do. I mean the real thing.
10 years ago, the idea that one could be held in prison for a decade, without right to counsel, contact with the outside world or any charges leveed, seemed like a bad Orwellian Dream. Yet here we are.
Think about it.
HERE WE FUCKING ARE.
Please, save the intellectual punditing for the next meeting.
The freedom of a nation is at stake.
Pull it together people.
Like your life depended on it.
It does, indeed, as does that of you children, and theirs.
OBAMA ‘08
Because we’re ready fro America 2.0
September 12th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
Last remark for now:
The truly horrible slap in the face to women here is not a flippant remark that Loki will be a long time living down (oh, yes, you will).
The truly horrible slap in the face to women is that the Republican Party can wheel out this under qualified lunatic and expect your vote simply BECAUSE SHE IS A WOMAN.
There is no clearer picture of a female human being used as a bag of meat, then dragging her out to show off her plumbing before anything else.
The McCain adminstration grabbed the first ultra conservative woman they could find to play upon the psyche of American Women, especially those who support Hilary Clinton.
By buying into that and wasting your time poking at Loki (who will be a long time living this down) your are allowing these power mongers to manipulate you sex like puppet masters.
Therein lies your battle. It’s easier to log on and tell of an editor than it is to defend your counrty, I know.
I believe that this one remark will pass (after a long time, Loki) and the truth of what is happeneing will return to the forfront of our minds.
September 12th, 2008 at 5:47 pm
“Why continue to cry Feminest Foul at Loki’s reposting of a remark, made by a woman, about a woman?”
It’s terribly simple-minded to offer this as a defense of any remark. The identity of a speaker doesn’t define the credibility of an argument: are you familiar with what ad hominem means? Palin is a woman; are you going to argue that when she opposes abortion rights it’s just fine, and not ant-feminist, because, after all, she’s a woman? The “shut your legs” remark is stupid, from a woman or a man.
I’m not voting for McCain. I don’t like Palin as a candidate. I don’t like her positions, and I don’t want either of them to hold office.
I will, however, call foul on liberals using sexist attacks against Palin, or anyone else. It’s a lousy tactic, first of all. It’s not going to win the election for Obama. It’s also a worthy issue - feminists need to pay attention to how women, Hillary and Palin both, have been attacked in this election, and not just by rightwing paleolithic pigs.
September 12th, 2008 at 7:06 pm
I understand.
And I agree.
I didn’t say it wasn’t a foul.
I said “why continue”, and I was very clear that I wasn’t defending the remark, just saying that it came from it a woman’s point of view and therefore might be open to a different interpertation than if it ahd been made by a man.
Not validity of content.
Interpertation of content.
I think the point’s been made, as I pointed out (It’s going to take a long time, Loki) and there are other issues of import abounding.
September 12th, 2008 at 7:10 pm
In rereading my earlier remarks, I soundly attested to my opinion that his was off color and in bad taste.
My point in the post you quote from was about the much larger picture of what this particular woman would do to women.
If you’re going to quote me out of context of the enitre message to further a reactive response, please lose the idea that I’m “simple mined”.
Have we now dropped in to spin factor and personal insult against those who AGREE WITH US?
Somebody said something bad.
Move on.
September 12th, 2008 at 7:48 pm
Ok, let’s move on.
Albert Einstein once said, “We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.”
Apply to current election cycle and discuss.
September 12th, 2008 at 9:43 pm
“In rereading my earlier remarks, I soundly attested to my opinion that his was off color and in bad taste.
My point in the post you quote from was about the much larger picture of what this particular woman would do to women.”
I’m sorry to have overlooked part one — the attesting to the bad taste. I disagree vehemently that it matters whether it comes from a woman or a man. And I agree heartily that this particular woman will be bad for women.
I’m just so disheartened by the tone and immaturity of the sexist, puerile attacks on Palin f being thrown about by the left — this little remark is just one example. As others have pointed out here, there’s real, substantive issues to attack. We won’t win with snark. And from my point of view, this reveals something about the left — it’s not really, truly committed to the ideals it espouses.
September 13th, 2008 at 10:41 am
I never considered my self “part of the left”. I beleive that certain things, like telling the truth and not killing thousands of poeple for their oil” are just, well, wrong.
By considering all those who have similar beliefs “part of the left” you are using the same wide brush that you are so pissed off about.
Whether the slapping of this “you people” paint is about genetailia or politics, it’s the same principle.
Commited to priciples, indeed.
Perhaps when they serve your cause.
It was one lame joke.
Not our children getting drafted for the war in Iran for the next 8 years.
Get over it.
September 13th, 2008 at 10:55 am
Well, now you’re just babbling. What is it exactly I’m supposed to “get over”? And what do any of the things in your list have to do with this specific topic, this specific issue, of using sexist language and images to attack Palin? You’re just changing the subject. I’m going to assume that means you have no response other than “well, a girl said it first!” Whatever.
September 13th, 2008 at 11:00 am
What do any of the things in your list have to do with this specific topic, this specific issue, of using sexist language and images to attack Palin? You’re just changing the subject. I’m going to assume that means you have no response other than “well, a girl said it first!” Whatever.
September 13th, 2008 at 11:34 am
Your assumption is incorrect.
My ‘babble’ though perhaps out of your reach, is this:
You’re pissed off about a sexist remark, derogatory to women as a group, that was directed at an individual.
(keep in mind, I’m not supporting that remark)
You respond by using a political remark, derogatory to liberal constituents, directed at a group of individuals.
You make assumptions about “what I assume you meant” and vilify me for things you imagine, which I never said, and use a huge double standard in doing so. Then accuse me of ‘babbling’.
What I suggest you get over is one stupid remark. I agree that it’s stupid. I have from the beginning. That’s no excuse for putting words in someone’s mouth.
The specific subject that you think I’ve ignored is the use of derogatory remarks to ear mark a group of individuals.
Whether it’s sexist or political, the technique is the same.
September 13th, 2008 at 11:37 am
I thought the comment was cheap and vulgar, but … have you ever been around children with Down’s syndrome? They take just a wee bit of time to handle–as in, what, five to eight times the usual amount for a child. To say that the child will need extra attention from mom *past the baby stage* is not being sexist. It will need extra attention from dad as well. I figure, however, that they’d just hire someone to take care of the child. This, despite the fact that some conservative evangelicals apparently think only liberals seriously hire people to take care of their children. Seriously. I heard comments to this effect on the loathsome, GOP-glorifying American Family Radio when coming back from Miss. after Gustav.
September 13th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
While this thread digresses into the politics of sexuality and finger pointing, Future President Palin is getting ready to make online dialouge such as this illegal.
Let’s not ignore the good work Obama/Biden can do because someone told a bad joke.
(By the way, Beth, assuming that I hold certain beliefs, simply because I’m a man IS Sexist)
September 13th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
from my point of view, this reveals something about the left — it’s not really, truly committed to the ideals it espouses.
I consider myself from the left and would never have said something like that. So, stop generalizing, Beth. It’s about as fruitful as sexist language and images to attack Palin. We’re all victims of our own limitations, it seems.
September 13th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
I’m guessing Beth works for Fox “News.” While most other Big News Media outlets will run a minute or so on fluffy non-issues like this, Fox spends interminable time kvetching about “sexist liberal comments.” In the 48 hours after Palin’s speech, Fox paraded every available Republican gasbag they could find, and each one of them condemned the “sexist liberal comments” being made by the opposition. Which was strange, because in all that time, the never once showed anyone making a “sexist liberal comment.”
Want to see something truly sexist that Fox “News” missed? Here…
“I’m stunned - couldn’t the Republican Party find one competent female with adult children to run for Vice President with McCain? I realize his advisors probably didn’t want a “mature” woman, as the Democrats keep harping on his age. But really, what kind of role model is a woman whose fifth child was recently born with a serious issue, Down Syndrome, and then goes back to the job of Governor within days of the birth?”
That’s from longtime Republican shill and intellectual black hole Dr Laura. Where are the cries of foul and outrage? Where are the pitchforks and torches? It’s a dodge. A diversion. Anything to distract the masses from the real issues. They have the fangs of animals and the heads of cabbages.
I leave you with a paraphrase. (I can’t find the actual quote.)
“I want to be the candidate that wants to get back to the issues, not the candidate who actually does.”
-George Hamilton as Congressman Dan McCadden in the HBO series ‘Dream On’
September 13th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
A home run, M. Styborski.
As we suffer another dealy hurricane season, certianly affected by global warming to some degree, begin reallocating troups, stare down yet another war, address fuel prices that seem to be from Rodeo Drive, & struggle to keep our largest mortgage companies afloat in a rapidly crashing economy, couldn’t we agree that these, the real issues are paramount?
It won’t matter if your children are male or female when they get drafted to fight the 100 Year War in Iran.
September 13th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
Okay, as the original poster of the comment on this site it is time for me to chime in once more. Especially now that I have gotten my first decent ight’s sleep since before Gustav two weeks ago.
I would like to thank everyone on both sides of this discussion for their thoughts and input. While digressing at times it has been a lively dialogue on a touchy subject, and touchy subjects deserve dialogue. Lots of it.
While my negative sentiments about Palin are staunch and solid my way of expressing it was indeed wrong. Just because we are bombarded daily by crass attacks that are simply memes independent of factual basis or good taste does not mean that we should sink as low.
In a moment of anger I found an attack of this type resonating with me enough to crosspost it here. This was a moment of weakness and poor judgement on my own part for which I take full responsibility. It would be very easy to take down the offending post and try to bury the mis-step, but that is the coward’s way out. What sort f champion of transparency would I be if I tried to hide my own mistakes?
Rather now to be an adult and offer my apologies for re-posting something that does not accurately reflect my own views or stance.
So to all readers, especially those of the female gender I offer my apologies. Feel free to continue to excoriate me here in the comments, I acknowledge that I deserve it, but please also help us continue to discuss the more valid aspects of this and the other issues we address.
September 13th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
Cods to the dogs, I say.
September 14th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Loki - Nice wrap up. I share your staunch and solid anti-Palin, and anti-McCain (he’s the one running for president after all) stance. I’m committed to keeping both of them out of the White House.
Mike - guess again.
September 15th, 2008 at 10:05 am
I am insulted by this woman. I’m even more insulted that folks don’t see the truth here. the very core of womens rights are about to be challenged by a woman. We as americans have forgotten what we came here for. Did we not come here to get away from persecution? And now we are persecuting ourselves? Americans and their puritan ideals? Freedom of religion? say goodbye to what we really set out to do?
tis a sad day for all…
September 15th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Thanks for getting to the core of the matter, Mz Claw.
I thought about this last night, in fact. Thousands upon thousands who sailed across a New Ocean in tiny wooden vessels, scared to death, yet leaving behind everything they knew and owned to come build a safe haven in the distant wilderness.
I would die of shame were they to see the multitudes of vast shopping junkies, illiterate and swollen with greed, turning their dream into a slaughter house for freedom.
A New Country lays in the heart, free from oppression of spiritual choice and control of our liberties. Raise your voices, now. Bring it, and bring it loud, sez I.
September 18th, 2008 at 9:45 am
I can’t believe how much spare time everyone on here has. 43 responses to an out-of-context one-liner posted in some random person’s twitter. I swear, people on the internet will take time out of their day to argue about anything. It never ceases to amaze me.
September 21st, 2008 at 2:46 pm
@ Heather D;
How wonderful of you to join us.