Update of September 3
GOP women saying it as well (to think, if only Dean had cable, we might have heard Hillary defended by the party too)
It’s reported that mcCain finally said it:
One of GOP presidential candidate John McCain’s high-level surrogates lashed out against their rival campaign’s assessment their candidate had more experience than McCain’s newly-minted vice president, calling their attacks “sexist.”
a top McCain aide expressed incredulity when asked by a reporter whether Palin could be vice-president with an infant and her 17-year-old daughter due to give birth this fall.
“Frankly, I can’t imagine that question being asked of a man,” McCain’s Steve Schmidt told reporters who mobbed him as he arrived at the convention hall. “A lot of women will find it offensive.”
And they didn’t even get to Clyburn’s trash
“Now Mondale tried to shake things up by going with Geraldine Ferraro, she proved to be a disaster as a running mate. And as a campaigner, she was absolutely awful.”
but rightfully stated
“I am appalled by the Obama campaign’s attempts to belittle Governor Sarah Palin’s experience,” Republican National Committee Victory Chair Carly Fiorina said a statement released Tuesday. “The facts are that Sarah Palin has made more executive decisions as a Mayor and Governor than Barack Obama has made in his life. Because of Hillary Clinton’s historic run for the Presidency and the treatment she received, American women are more highly tuned than ever to recognize and decry sexism in all its forms. They will not tolerate sexist treatment of Governor Palin.”
You bet!
And since some people seem shocked about such a notion, here’s a reference link I just stumbled upon.
The good news? Palin is up to the fight! her response to being warned about what’s in store:
Palin: “Thanks for the warning. By the way, do you know what they say the difference is between a hockey mom and a Pit Bull?”
McCain aide: “No, Governor.”
Palin: “A hockey mom wears lipstick.
26 Comments
September 2, 2008 at 3:54 pm
WOW! We knew that McCain’s campaign wouldn’t let this go on indefinitely…just long enough to show the Obamans in all their disgusting glory.
Well-played again by McCain. And of course, Our Hillary, who must be ready to choke the Presumptuous Nominee for making it so d*mn easy for the Republicans to win this year.
Oh well, she will be busy kicking Obama’s *ss in the Senate for the next four years. I am sure she will be enjoying the experience.
September 2, 2008 at 4:02 pm
This is silly. Are Democrats allowed to criticize Palin without being called sexists? I mean she is a right wing republican who will toe the party line that Bush has set up. This is the same kind of crap we hear from some Obama supporters that if you criticize Obama you are a racist. It’s got to stop.
September 2, 2008 at 4:07 pm
MD:
The attacks were sexist for the most part (e.g. abortion, mother, daughter).
September 2, 2008 at 4:09 pm
MD – not exactly ‘the same kind of crap”. After the avalanche of “steel vaginas” and “shouldn’t she stay home with the baby” comments from you guys, this was LONG overdue! There is “tear the bitch down” part two – not so hard to see if you’re not too busy running with the wolves.
September 2, 2008 at 4:27 pm
“American women are more highly tuned than ever to recognize and decry sexism in all its forms. They will not tolerate sexist treatment of Governor Palin.”
Damn straight we are! And this year, the Democrats are on the wrong side of this battle.
I have been called a racist long enough, for not falling in love with Mr. Obama… and daring to support Senator Clinton.
How’s it feel to have the shoe on the other foot, fellas?
September 2, 2008 at 4:48 pm
First the many explained it away as CDS when applied to Clinton, but now they try it on another woman. Won’t work this time, no excuse other than sexism.
September 2, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Carly! Carly!…if they can cry racism, I can sure as hell cry SEXISM, enough is enough!
September 2, 2008 at 5:24 pm
FlVoter – right on! They were just about to bury that story with “it was her incompetence – see those e-mails – there was no sexism” meme…now, another bitch ruins it all
http://edgeoforever.wordpress.com/2008/08/31/not-anti-women-only-that-woman-oh-and-that-other-one-too/
September 2, 2008 at 5:31 pm
I don’t care that she is a woman. I care that she is anti-sexual health, anti-education, she has a revisionist and distorted view of history, and that she seems to have been selected to be used as a strategic piece in McCain’s campaign. Who would attack a middle class mother with a disable child from Alaska?
I hope I am wrong and she is not being exploited in this way but, right now, the signs seem to point in that direction. In a few more weeks we’ll see what come of it.
September 2, 2008 at 6:18 pm
@Cerus
Something tells me you also didn’t care Hillary was a woman either….
Somehow, there’s a bit too much obsession on the VP’s beliefs to ring true
September 2, 2008 at 6:42 pm
The most efficient way to handle Obama’s sexist attacks is to use Ayers, Wright, etc. That’s what Clinton learned too late.
September 2, 2008 at 7:03 pm
Sarah Palin’s sins
Guilty of being female….check
Guilty of running against the ONE…check.
Guilty of being female…..
Gosh, don’t the Obamanation realize this is getting downright creepy. Can they not sit back on their laurels, having beaten the only qualified candidate because she was guilty of being female.
\Can we have Hillary back now?
September 2, 2008 at 8:10 pm
Actually, I thought it was great that we had a chance for the first woman president. I initially supported her, especially her position on net neutrality. I won’t support a candidate that will not support net neutrality. Through time, however, I became less enthusiastic with her campaign.
No, I don’t care what position a candidate holds, their beliefs matter. That is why I finally decided to switch over to Obama after he gave a very good speech on America being for everyone of all faiths, or none, not just Christians. It meshed many of my views on the world together under his political claims. Now will he uphold those claims? Time will tell, he is after all a politician.
I am currently trying to examine much of Joe Biden’s time in Congress and will decide what I think of Obama’s choice for a running mate. Right now, I am hesitant and I hope that in the end that will change but Biden was the safe bet which means more than likely I will still be hesitant about Biden as a VP choice.
I cannot say that Obama is perfect because he is not, I am particularly upset at his and other democrats support of the DNC as some sort of faith-based convention. His change of heart on FISA has left me somewhat jaded with him as well.
When issues get boiled down to what color are they or what is their gender, and so on, I think the big picture is lost. And I know some people vote this way, and that is upsetting and it is very telling about how the political system actually works.
My approach is to ask how do their beliefs match with mine? How will this person in office better my life? my town? my county? state? country? maybe the world? These are the issues that I believe are important for selecting a candidate no matter which election it is, school board and beyond.
The fact that person X supports candidate Y and disapproves of Z should not automatically garnish claims of sexism, ageism, racism, elitism, and so on.
While there are surely people that do such things, lumping all individuals that do not like a candidate together, under such a claim, is baseless and hurtful towards any movement to stop those people that are actively seeking to discriminate against others.
Change cannot occur when those that do not commit such actions are lumped with those that do. People become defensive and unresponsive in the call to help change the system so that discrimination, of any kind, is stopped.
That is two cents from a sociologist, so after conversion about .0001 cents, but there it is laid out for you to do what you will.
September 2, 2008 at 8:11 pm
I apologize for that being so long.
September 2, 2008 at 9:38 pm
If you think a speech shows one’s beliefs, i have a bridge to sell you real cheap. The one certain thing I know about Obama is that he doesn’t believe in absolutely nothing.
http://edgeoforever.wordpress.com/2008/07/07/the-flip-flop-list/
September 2, 2008 at 9:57 pm
If the Democratic leadership and Obama had done the same thing when Hillary was attacked lots of us wouldn’t be considering the McCain/Palin ticket.
Mountain Sage
September 2, 2008 at 10:10 pm
You’re right, that was unclear. I meant to say that the given speech was the turning point after examining other information.
I’ll have to ask my spouse if she would like another bride, I’m going to doubt she does. She’ll definitely question the price tag as too good to be true.
September 2, 2008 at 10:30 pm
Why is it okay for Michelle Obama to have a career and not Sarah Palin? Wasn’t she a law partner while raising young children? Didn’t she leave them in the care of others to pursue her career? Isn’t the office of First Lady a high visability/high demand job which would pull her away from her young children on a frequent basis? What’s with the double standard?
September 2, 2008 at 10:39 pm
You’re right, that is unfair. She shouldn’t be attacked for that. The father should be considered just as capable to stay home and take care of the children. I don’t believe that the attacks on her for “abandoning her children” bear any considerable debate on her ability. They are vacuous and bear no merit in deciding if she is a candidate capable of the job of vice president.
September 3, 2008 at 7:30 am
I LOVE when people worry that the R’s are EXPLOITING Palin…
YOU low life MSM and D’s are exploiting Palin..Wolf was about to cream himself last night discussing everything from her baby, to the ticket she got for fishing without a license.
September 3, 2008 at 8:51 am
Ah, now I’m a lowlife. I’m glad that you’re being fair and trying to determine everyone’s position equally as you wish people would do for Palin. You’re definitely working to make the world a better place.
Again, if you want change, I suggest you work with people not just spout hateful remarks about how they are lowlifes. But hey, we are trying to get everyone to be discussed on their ability and not dismissed immediately because of a gut reaction to race, gender, or that they are a lowlife, right?
September 3, 2008 at 11:42 am
Oh “GOD” Cerus~ please save it… and when O dimisses national security I hope they drop the nuk on your house and those in your cult first!!!
I am so sick of all you naive cult followers!! I will stay with the Christians~ you can keep the atheist! Our basis in this Country was founded on “GOD”! In GOD we trust! No wonder we’re going to hell here! And I believe, but am far from any holy roller!!! so dont try thay come back!!!
keep the change~
Country FIRST!
McCain/Palin 08
PUMA!!! GROWL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
September 3, 2008 at 11:47 am
no Cerus you’re not a low life! just a blinded jacka$$ fool!!!
September 3, 2008 at 3:51 pm
I am an atheist, but I would vote for Palin/McCain, even more than McCain/Palin, because her record shows she is way more fearless and competent than Obama. Competence trumps experience trumps so-called judgment (AKA rewriting history).
September 3, 2008 at 8:27 pm
*grabs popcorn*
This is truly entertaining now. I’m a member of a cult, a blinded jackass fool, a lowlife. Obama has become an atheist, I wonder if he knows?
And the country was founded on God? Really where? The Declaration of Independence (DOI) mentions a creator but it doesn’t mention which creator, in fact it says people are endowed by their creator, maybe it means multiple? In fact, the mention of the Creator was a document for succession from Britain, not a document of founding.
The Constitution was the document, as the articles of the confederation were a failure (no mention of God there either), that founded this country, I fail to see where God is written into it. And I’ve read it several times, have you? Oh wait, in the year of our lord.. no, that just means they were using the gregorian calendar, damn. I got excited for a moment.
Many of the founders were deists that believed that there was a creator but he/she/it is long gone and we must make the world what we wish it to become. Is that the creator that the DoI refers too?
This country and the original colonies were populated by people that believed in God, but I fail to see how that means the country was founded “on” God.
September 4, 2008 at 2:49 pm
Actually, “In God We Trust” was added during the Red scare. The government was taking subtle steps to distinguish good, American citizens from the Godless communists.
In addition, written into our Constitution is a certain freedom of religion. Many of the colonists that came to this country had been the recipients of some sort of religious discrimination in Europe. Our Founding Fathers took steps to ensure that, no matter what this country became in the future, citizens would not be hated and persecuted for their religious beliefs (or lack thereof).
It’s a bit sad to see SAVE YOUR RHETORIC undoing all their careful planning.