And people wonder why I have so much anger …about the things men do, about sexism and misogyny.  SEXISM KILLS! So it’s not just important, it’s imperative to stop allowing men (and women) from saying sexist things and supporting misogyny in any of the myriad ways they do: lives are at stake, dammit.

When I saw the stills of Shaniya being carried by that man in the hotel, my heart sank. I knew she was about to be molested or raped or sodomized or all of the above and I also knew, objectively, that she most likely would NOT live to see the end of her own news story.

She was so beautiful, so sweet and innocent and vulnerable and trusting.  So very trusting of that man carrying her. Like a lamb to its slaughter….

When I saw the Breaking News about her body having been found a few hours ago, my whole body went numb. I felt as if I’d been kicked in the gut, my breath and energy absolutely gone. Even though I knew this would be the outcome, even though it was so fucking predictable.

I’m so tired of you killing us, you men. I’m so tired of your sexual urges and perversions being more important to you than our very lives. I’m tired of your Viagra consistently glorified on TV while we women too often lose our lives at the mercy of your perverted sexual urges. I’m fed up that no one questions whether Viagra should be covered by the public option, but we women are suddenly finding ourselves in the position of having to refight our abortion rights all over again thanks to an idiot asshole misogynist named Bart Stupak and his 30-odd House Democrat friends. I’m so tired of your own wounds and sicknesses and dysfuntionalities and pathologies getting acted out on our bodies. And I’m bleepin’ tired of our bodies being used to sell shit — all manner of shit, from GoDaddy.com to beer to sports magazines.

I’ve been against the death penalty for a very long time, but you boyz are about to change my mind — at least until we can absolutely, positively “cure” pedophilia, stalking is a thing of the past,  and we can routinely catch and imprison ALL rapists.

Oh, and what about Shaniyah’s degenerate mother?  Not much — one look at her reveals a woman 99% likely to be strung out on drugs. What I’m about to say neither exonerates her nor justifies what she did — but I’ve seen women who got strung out on drugs (meth, usually) who are in the process of losing their kids if they can’t kick it. They can’t — not in the time alotted them by the state.  In one case, the mother participated in the truly horrible sexual abuse of her daughter who was even younger than Shaniyah. She insisted she hadn’t done that and in fact could NOT have done any of it. The truth of the matter was that she didn’t remember any of it, typical for some addicts. The drugs made her do it.

So I am not in favor of rushing to much judgment  for mom until we find out much more about what she did and what she thinks she did.  Additionally, a quote reverberates in my mind, originally from a completely different situation but certainly applicable here:  “What did you think would be the result of you teaching us to hate ourselves?” Is there any question Shaniyah’s mother valued her female child little more than Shaniyah’s perverted murderer did? Where did that misogyny come from? Certainly not from an essentially pro-woman society, a woman- and life-affirming culture, nosirree. But rather from OUR culture, which likes to make both men and women believe that the highest calling and value of women is sexual in nature or, barring that, caregiving  — unpaid caregiving, of course, or lowest paid caregiving if not.

Now, let me be clear. Her perverted murderer is also surely a victim. As I’ve said many times: child molesters and rapists are made, not born. Still, he knew that what he was doing was wrong, as all pedophiles do, though many rationalize the matter until they’ve convinced themselves otherwise (see NAMBLA, for example). We MUST stop the cycle of violence that perpetuates the harm done to our innocent children. We must. Men must join us, instead of putting their own sexual depravities or sympathies and latent misogyny above everything else including the very lives of women and children.

In other news
Here’s one killer of women and serial rapist who’s facing a possible death penalty. I won’t weep.

It seemed to me as I watched that Fey had certainly seen what I had because she was certainly playing it, and pretty well.

Just before the end of the skit Fey validated my observation big time.  You’ll have to watch it yourself, if you didn’t see it Saturday night.

That said, this third take off wasn’t nearly as well done (well written) as the previous two, but I did enjoy Queen Latifah. (I’m a fan.)

All you have to do is read through them, one by one, to get an absolute belly full of how sexist a place DemocraticUnderground really is. These had all been allowed to stand at the time I plucked them, and I’ll bet they’re all sill there:

I Masturbated To Sarah Palin (John McCain Ad)
(Hah! after all the lurid comments that were allowed to stand in this thread, ya have to wonder what on earth got Post #12 in this thread deleted? Given DU’s dedication to misogyny, I can only assume someone calling out the whole thread for it virulent misogynism.)

Does she not look like she’s playing with herself?

Here’s someone who thinks blaming the victim for her own sexist treatment is somehow appropriate — as if she were the one doing that anyway (all I’ve seen is from the campaign and their surrogates):
14. Gak! The ‘Ho From The Snow strikes again. That’s right, I said ” ‘HO “…    If she’s going to cry “Sexism!” every time someone questions her glaringly bad judgment, I’m not going to feel at all badly when actually serving a little up.    Choke on it, Sarah.

and of course, someone has to go after the child:
Bristol won’t have to drive as far for those one nighters

I don’t know how sexist this essay by the prolific NanceGreggs is, but it’s patronizing and that’s usually considered sexist. I don’t think talking down to Palin really works that well, at least not on an extended basis. I hope Nance can get her nose back down after all this verbiage. Here’s How It Goes, Sweetie

aviationPro shows his age, I guess, along with his sexism:
Sarah Palin is every Amway distributor’s wife….

scheming daemons answers the question, “What’s the difference between Palin and Cheney?” this way: I’d like to f*** Palin…. but Cheney is too busy f***ing me……

Palin is such an incredibly stupid vapid bitch

(I’m Thinkin’ ‘Bout Nailin’) Sarah Palin

vpilf

From our sexist friend, TahitiNut, the one who along with nearly every other male on the planet thinks he’s NOT a sexist: Well, if you put lipstick on a rabid dog in heat, it’s still a bitch.

The voice! That should be enough to end the Palin Pander.

Red state Update: “She’s hot”

Surprise, surprise, here’s a whole thread which uses a serious opening post about Palin to chock it full of comments about her looks, her desirability, etc.

Here’s one of their Sorry Sisters, as i call them — women who ought to know better resorting to sexism themselves: As a woman, a lesbian, a pagan, a socialist, and a FEMINIST I’ve had it with listening to fatuous crap about Sarah Palin. I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to hide it anymore. If I want to call that bitch yes I called her a bitch any name in the book I’ll do it! She’s the whore of Babylon, drinking the blood of saints.

Nauseous enough yet?

Please understand what you are looking at when you look at Sarah “Evita” Palin. You are looking at the designated muse of the coming American police state.

You have to understand how things work in a closing society in order to understand “Palin Power.” A gang or cabal seizes power, usually with an affable, weak figurehead at the fore. Then they will hold elections — but they will make sure that the election will be corrupted and that the next affable, weak figurehead is entirely in their control. Remember, Russia has Presidents; Russia holds elections. Dictators and gangs of thugs all over the world hold elections. It means nothing. When a cabal has seized power you can have elections and even presidents, but you don’t have freedom.

Reports confirmed my suspicions: Palin, not McCain, is the FrankenBarbie of the Rove-Cheney cabal. The strategy became clear. Time magazine reported that Rove is “dialed in” to the McCain campaign. Rove’s protege Steve Schmidt is now campaign manager. And Politico reported that Rove was heavily involved in McCain’s vice presidential selection. Finally a new report shows that there are dozens of Bush and Rove operatives surrounding Sarah Palin and orchestrating her every move.

I realized early on with horror what I was seeing in Governor Palin: the continuation of the Rove-Cheney cabal, but this time without restraints. I heard her echo Bush 2000 soundbites (“the heart of America is on display”) and realized Bush’s speechwriters were writing her — not McCain’s — speeches. I heard her tell George Bush’s lies — not McCain’s — to the American people, linking 9/11 to Iraq. I heard her make fun of Barack Obama for wanting to prevent the torture of prisoners…Then I saw and heard more. Palin is embracing lawlessness in defying Alaskan Legislature subpoenas — this is what Rove-Cheney, and not McCain, believe in doing. She uses mafia tactics against critics, like the police commissioner who was railroaded for opposing handguns in Alaskan battered women’s shelters — Rove’s style, not McCain’s. I realized what I was seeing.

There’s more, including very grim actuarial news on someone McCain’s age with “a virulent and life-threatening form of skin cancer.” YIKES! I think my hair is catching fire now.  Please read it.

One of the things I’ve been mulling over lately is how thoroughly this campaign is simply using her. And how sad that is. Does she realize? Does she care?

They want her femaleness, including her beauty and poise, but they don’t want anything else about her (well, other than her ability to give dynamite if canned speeches). As one DUer put it, ” She can play with the boys but the boys can’t play with her.”

She’s not allowed to express her own thoughts at all, and in fact after the Charles Gibson debacle, she’s not allowed in front of a camera unless it’s without a microphone. Campbell Brown spoke up about the whole matter in her own little commentary and even Alaskans are angry at how absent she’s become.

Curiously, a number of her campaign events have been cancelled, including fundraisers (wtf???), and there’s a rumor she may be yanked from the ticket. I wonder how much she knows, if that’s the case, and just how they’ll engineer a graceful exit, if true. And WHEN!!? Time’s a-wastin’. Of course, perhaps they want to wait until the last possible moment so that there’s little chance to do all this public vetting of her replacement.

The fact continues to be visible for all to see that for McCain and his campaign, Palin is the nearest version of a trophy wife you can have for a VP nominee. Garrison Keillor thnks that “Anyone with a heart has to hurt for how Mr. McCain has made a fool of her.”

Well, no, actually, Garrison. That takes it a bit too far for me. I know I certainly don’t hurt for her, and I’m not only a really compassionate person, I’m a strong feminist who routinely defends women I don’t like when they’re treated cavalierly (just as I’m defending Palin here).  So I’ll stick up for her and any other rightwing traitor to my gender, but I won’t extend much sympathy to her. I won’t say she deserves what she’s getting, but I’ll say it’s also not blaming the victim to point out that were she a feminist she’d (a) not put up with this shit and (b) not have been picked to start with.

I also don’t agree with those who feel Palin is setting women’s rights back by decades. As I see it, she is one of Patriarchy’s Women and she serves as a dramatic, in your face example of how far some women have come while she and others like her haven’t, and for that reason alone perhaps how desperately most of us wouldn’t want someone like her in charge of our government or even small parts of it.  IOW, I see her as a strong and effective negative reinforcement for women’s rights.

I think we can all take some comfort in that.

And there’s a petition to sign as well. Here’s the original email:

Friends and compatriots,

We are writing to you because of the fury and dread we have felt since the announcement of Sarah Palin as the Vice-Presidential candidate for the Republican Party. We believe that this terrible decision has surpassed mere partisanship, and that it is a dangerous farce-on the part of a pandering and rudderless Presidential candidate-that has a real possibility of becoming fact.

Perhaps like us, as American women, you share the fear of what Ms. Palin and her professed beliefs and proven record could lead to for ourselves and for our present or future daughters. To date, she is against sex education, the pro-choice platform, environmental protection, alternative energy development, freedom of speech (as mayor she wanted to ban books and attempted to fire the librarian who stood against her), gun control, the separation of church and state, and polar bears. To say nothing of her complete lack of real preparation to become the second-most-powerful person on the planet.

We want to clarify that we are not against Sarah Palin as a woman, a mother, or, for that matter, a parent of a pregnant teenager, but solely as a rash, incompetent, and all together devastating choice for Vice President. Ms. Palin’s political views are in every way a slap in the face to the accomplishments that our mothers and grandmothers so fiercely fought for, and that we’ve so demonstrably benefited from.

First and foremost, Ms. Palin does not represent us. She does not demonstrate or uphold our interests as American women. It is presumed that the inclusion of a woman on the Republican ticket could win over women voters. We want to disagree, publicly.

Therefore, we invite you to reply here with a short, succinct message about why you, as a woman living in this country, do not support this candidate as second-in-command for our nation.

Please include your name (last initial is fine), age, and place of residence.

We will post your responses on a blog called “Women Against Sarah
Palin,” which we intend to publicize as widely as possible. Please
send us your reply at your earliest convenience-the greater the volume of responses we receive, the stronger our message will be.

Thank you for your time and action.

VIVA!

Sincerely,

Quinn L. and Lyra K.
New York, NY
womensaynopalin@gmail.com

**PLEASE FORWARD WIDELY! If you send this to 20 women in the next hour, you could be blessed with a country that takes your concerns seriously. Stranger things have happened.

I was just reading this post over at DU decrying the police state antics of law enforcement at the RNC:

What I find really discouraging is watching the reaction to the demonstrations at the RNC.  The right-wing reaction is “dirty, smelly, unemployed hippies who should have been shot.”

The left-wing reaction is “Since when is free speech a crime, and what about the possibility of police provocateurs?”

The “moderate” reaction is, “Well, I believe in free speech and everything, but those protesters shouldn’t have thrown stuff.” (This is even though the violence started after the main protest was over.)

Neither the right-wing nor the “moderate” group seems willing to even consider the possibility of police or FBI provocateurs, despite clear historical precedents.

She’s right, up to a certain point. Except that the right doesn’t need a reason to hate us, or demean us, or be treat us violently.  Our very existence is reason enough.

I myself never quite understood why starting at least as far back as Nixon the right wing went after us liberals with huge police presence, apparently worried about us being violent.  Leftwingers are notoriously NOT violent, too laid back (sometimes too stoned) to get that upset about anything even when provoked, and/or deeply committed to non-violence as a philosophy and value system anyway. Why on earth would they target us like that?

Well, one reason is to discredit us. As the author pointed out, agents provocateurs are pretty much de rigeur for any self-respecting goverment law enforcement agency and has been since at least Nixon. There are several sterling reasons:

• If the left can be provoked into being violent (or just made to look violent by agents provocateurs who dress like us or often in masks, insert themselves into our group and do the violent work for us), mainstream folks will cluck their tongues and ignore what we are all about.  We will be discredited.
• Any violence during a protest is an automatic excuse for law enforcement to crack down, beat a few skulls, lob a few gas cannisters, spray a few faces with mace and, these days, haul out the rubber bullets at close range and employ those deadly tasers.
• Crackdowns on protesters will have a chilling effect on future protests. Who wants to get their heads bashed in? Or be stunned into incoherence?

And, as I said, they don’t seem to need real reasons. Nor do they exercise much restraint anymore, in these heady neofascist times. This year at the RNC convention, there was hardly any reason to, with the policy the city insisted the RNC buy which covered  “up to $10 million in damages and unlimited legal costs for law enforcement officials accused of brutality, violating civil rights and other misconduct.” To authoritarian cops that’s like an invitation to party, isn’t it?

Okay, so what is the real reason? I’ve already told you: because we exist, and because they understand they are forever imperiled by our very existence.

Profoundly anti-democratic, the movers and shakers — the fascists, the uber-rich, the oligarchs and plutocrats, the upper 1% of the population — these and their sycophants are the folks who know that if their power is directly inversely proportional to the power the left gains and any and all gains present the potential for more gains.

This was vividly driven home to me by Naomi Wolf’s amazing and chilling must-read book, Shock Doctrine. It details quite well how fascists go after the left in each and every third world country where democracy has raised its head and the left has been ascendant or already powerful and threatening to be more so.

Because let’s be clear: the policies of the left are the policies of the people. They appeal to the people and the people want more of them.  Those policies are directly threatening to the powerful, the oligarchs and the oligarchs therefore want us not just out of power but thoroughly defeated, dead. Yes, they want us dead — politically, figuratively and literally — and have gone to some pains to make that happen in other countries in the world. Now it appears to be our turn.

More on this important topic another day.

While she delivered a speech written by speech writer(s) for McCain and therefore can’t really be held totally accountable for the content, she sure seemed to wear it well, filled with enmity and mocking contempt as it was, didn’t she? Tsk, tsk. So much snark, so little moral authority. “Tonya Harding with speechwriters,” said Barry Crimmins.

One of the most insightful analyses of Palin’s speech — and attitude — came from DUer paxmusa who says these kinds of derisive, belittling attitudes are what she experiences whenever she spends time with her family of origin:

I am absolutely fuming angry this morning. The atmosphere in which I grew up and must continue to deal with regarding my family is now being played out on a national, political stage.

My immediate family members are rapid (sic) Republicans who:

barely finished high school
were pregnant as teenagers or were responsible for getting teenage girls pregnant
are very prejudiced against all ethnic groups
are anti-feminist and anti-gay
have had numerous extra marital affairs
have been divorced several times
have children who barely finish high school and get pregnant outside marriage, marry, then divorce
have drug and alcohol issues
have big family blow-ups with guns and restraining orders involved
have no desire to live or travel beyond where they grew up (Northern CA)
are not involved in community activities or political activities
wholeheartedly have supported Bush and Cheney and the Iraq war

snip

SARAH PALIN, in all of her grand hypocrisy, panders to this group, mocking and deriding Obama and the very principles of social justice. It is really pissing me off. We cannot have this mindset involved in running our country.

Pandering to this group is scary. “This group” are the folks for whom anything is acceptable in the service of winning. “This group” are the kinds of people who would stage mock protests to stop the counting of votes of Americans. “This group” are the types of people who would steal elections, and see nothing wrong with it. “This group” is the type that relishes and promotes an “us against them” attitude.

Were it not for “this group” and their psychological need for an “us against them” attitude, a far more united citizenry wouldn’t vote Republican. Again and again the Republicans find they have to divide us — on aborton, gay rights, immigration, and so forth. If it weren’t for these wedge issues, the entire citizenry would overwhelmingly vote for the democratic policies they otherwise prefer. That is the real threat of Obama: that he really is a unifyer.

Barry Crimmins had another insight that pulls it all together:

,,,she fortified the luxury bunker where the rich and powerful hide. The creepy thing is that she did it in the guise of an American every woman.

Well, it’s not creepy at all — or rather, not unusual at all and not the least bit unexpected — when it’s one of Patriarchy’s Women that we’re talking about: defending and promoting Patriarchy at the expense of their own (and ALL of our own) best interests.

Bob Moser over at The Nation correctly identifies “this group” and refers to them as cultural populists, a darned good assessment, and points out that they are part of the Republican base. I call them the “ignernt and proud of it” crowd.

You might not think that averageness would qualify a person for the second-highest office in the land. But if you might not think that, you haven’t been paying attention to the way Republicans have won presidential elections for the last forty years. Palin is the logical extension of the cultural populism that has warped our politics–and for which the Democrats have, as yet, found no good answer.

snip

It’s all about firing up the non-ideological center–which can only be done by drowning the economic sufferings of average Americans once again under a wave of whitebred, flag-waving, faux populism.

A comparison of the two conventions? Stark. From a Canadian DUer:

One was inspiring in such a good way (filled with so much hope for the future)
One was amazing in such a bad way (filled with so much hate/exclusion-ism for your fellow countrymen)

One lifted you up
One put you down

One showed and explained to you what the future can become
One mocked and made you fear what the future can become

One made me cry tears of joy
One made me cry tears of sadness

So many differences….I as a person who can not participate, other than to express my views,was shaken to the core after watching the applause given to Palin and the words that came from her mouth.

How is it possible that people can be so mean while placing themselves upon a pedestal.

The political pundits seem to be taken in by her, but not everyone is. (More on that later, possibly after the weekend, depending on my schedule.)

• No criticism of Palin’s lack of experience allowed. Why? It’s sexist to treat a woman’s accomplishments dismissively. (Except if she HAS none, it’s not so sexist after all.)
• No fair mentioning that she demonstrates hypocrisy where her family and her family values are concerned. Why? It’s sexist to say a woman  can’t work and have a family (which isn’t what anyone is saying, so this is a strawman — or woman — to boot).

Joe Klein noticed too:

Steve Schmidt has decided, for tactical reasons, to slime the press. He wants the public to believe that there is an unfair–sexist (you gotta love it)–personal assault going on against Palin and her family. This is a smokescreen, intended to divert attention from the fact the very real and responsible vetting that is taking place in the media--about the substance of Palin’s record as mayor and governor. Sure, there are a few outliers–and the tabloid press–who have fixed on baby stories. That was inevitable….the flip side of the personal stories that the McCain team thought would work to their advantage–Palin’s moose-hunting and wolf-shooting, and her admirable decision to have a Down Syndrome baby. And yes, when we all fix on the same story, whether it’s a hurricane or a little-known politician, a zoo ensues. But the media coverage of the Palin story has been well within the bounds of responsibility. Schmidt is trying to make it seem otherwise, a desperate tactic.

UPDATE: AND WHAT ABOUT THAT GLASS CEILING?

The Governor doesn’t exactly look like her new handlers put her in a position to punch through ANY glass ceiling here, does it:

Palin - Bush - McCain

CAN’T PUT MY FINGER ON IT – UPDATE
It might be that undercurrent of “Look how special I am, and you WILL agree with me about that” behind every smile. IOW: narcissism.

Now, narcissism is a special case because it confers on its “victim” an inability to get it about how others see them, how their words and actions impact someone else, etc. It also confers a lack of personal responsibility, or rather a lack of seeing the need for that for yourself.

Newt Gingrich is my favorite narcissist because he’s such a perfect, overwrought example. Remember the time he’d made several outlandish statements to the press, such as that we need more orphanages and that Susan Smith (the woman in south Carolina who drowned her two little boys on the way to trying to kill herself and initially blamed it on a fictitious black man) was the Democrats’ fault, etc. The comments themselves sparked quite a bit of public outrage, but instead of seeing how stupid his ideas were or at the very least noting that they were ideas better left to himself, he blamed the media. Yes, to Newt it was the media’s fault that people were outraged by his ideas. Classical narcissism.

Let’s see how Palin handles her narcissism. We’ve gotten a glimpse so far, actually, and that sense of entitlement I’ve spoekn about figures in prominently, I believe. (I probably should’ve tumbled to it from the start.)

GRATUITOUS PORN
Note that I’ve had to add a new category. Seems mere Gratuitous SEXISM isn’t enough. We now have Gratuitous Porn. Actually, it’s been there all along, I just haven’t recognized it as such (and don’t spend that much time looking for it either). In any case, some of what’s being posted online about Palin (and her family) actually goes that embarrassingly far.  It’s really beyond disgusting and frankly I don’t want the guy responsible censored, i want him jailed. Alas, the age of consent he invokes probably clears him from anything like child porn charges, but it’s still exactly that smarmy.

He’s a misogynist I’ve identified for his misogyny before, Rude Pundit. He can’t limit himself to just sliming the female adult in the equation, but instead goes after the pregnant daughter in lurid, pornographic detail, and the shamefully misogynist poster at DU (Commie Pinko Dirtbag) was just thrilled to be able to quote the pornography in some, s detail and, sadly, get away with it.  I wish DU admin could be made to understand how utterly depraved and demeaning to them it is to allow this type of “discussion” at DU.

Bristol Palin’s vagina, which may or may not be topped by a tuft of pubic hair shaved in various shapes, is important to our national discourse for obvious reasons. Her vagina, however tight or loose it may be, reveals how degraded conservative moral beliefs actually are…

It’s almost amusing that Rude Pundit thinks he has the moral authority to judge any one or anything else in the world as ‘degraded.” And a note for porn lovers, including child porn lovers hiding behind age 17: some of the rest of his post is actually even worse.

MORE UTTERLY PREDICTABLE “PROGRESSIVE” SEXISM
Here’s a thread you know is going to be bad: To further define Sarah Palin, we need a unified nickname.

Fortunately, one of the worst offending posts, which included this image photoshopped to include the acronym MILF (and/or VPILF in the deleted post), was removed. Here’s how it appeared (and still appears) elsewhere:

An equally disgusting (if not more so) image posted in response by seemslikeadream was inexplicably allowed to stand. Did the moderator not get it? Not find it sexist? What? And what’s the point of this wet nurse post by the same DUer? And why isn’t the nursing practices of any woman, including this VP nominee, considered inappropriate (sexist)? It’s just not germaine to anything. In this day and age there’s no need for a wet nurse, and to my knowledge there aren’t very many wet nurses in this country, slave wage or not. Ridiculous, and ugly.

And then there’s the follow-up to this thread which, again, you pretty much know, given the premise, is going to get sexist and ugly: Official Nickname Poll: What is the best nickname for Sarah Palin? but it isn’t nearly as bad as it could have been.

Then there are the category of sexist name-calling. No doubt about it, objectively she’s a real lightweight, but that doesn’t give anyone the right to make that into a sexist slur.  Doing so doesn’t add weight or importance to the criticism, but rather serves to detract from weight or importance, and puts the onus on the poor manners and obvious sexism — which involves lack of objectivity — of the criticizer instead. Here’s DUer paparush:

This Bimbo is the iceberg against which Titanic-McCain will grind itself.

When called on his sexism, he defends himself thusly (if you can call it a defense rather than a further indictment):

Bimbo is more friendly than the other terms I was going to use.

Nice guy, huh? Insightful too. Finally, when krkaufman notes that that “Doesn’t say much about your lexicon, then. We might remember that gender-specific attacks are amongst the most unproductive one could mount,” paparush reveals that like the Republcons, he considers sexism just another perfectly viable tool to use against the opposition:

Way too touchy feely. This election is war. No prisoners. Take the gloves off or lose.

CLUE: It’s NOT a viable tool at all. In a warfare analogy, since paparush invoked that, sexism is analogous to biological warfare. Sexism hurts everyone, even those who use it. Sexism is a key undergirding of the entire system we live within. We will never defeat the forces of oppression and repression unless we also defeat sexism (and racism and homophobia and….. you get the idea).

I keep thinking about her speech that morning. She struck me as a too too perky, too cheerful, too effervescent, too irrepressibly-positive-no-matter-what, just for starters. And I got really tired of her saying, “This is a time…,” especially since I clearly didn’t agree with her points that followed those introductory words. I thought her invoking Hillary Clinton and the glass ceiling Hillary was trying to break was entirely inappropriate — rightwing women haven’t helped women at all, and now she wants to co-opt and profit by our hard work and years and years of struggle? How impertinent, how brazen, how arrogant.

Ah, yes. the arrogance. Yes, beneath all those smiles was a certain form of arrogance. While I was intrigued and approving about how comfortable she was on stage and giving a majorly important speech, she was also entirely too comfortable being there, in that rarefied position, especially with her paltry background.

Or rather there was no humility about her whatsoever that I could see. It was as if she expected this, felt entitled to it, as if it were her due. How and where did she acquire all that hubris in her short political career so far? Is this a side effect of having been a beauty queen?

And the speech itself. Oh, my. I was put off by the extensive family talk. It’s fine to introduce them, but not so much at the beginning of the speech, and certainly not at such length when we hardly know her at all. I don’t care about her family, they’re not running for office. Further, that kind of familiarity is more appropriate for small, intimate settings — a luncheon with mostly women attending, perhaps. Actually, come to think about it, that whole thing did make her sound more like the potential First Lady than the VP nominee, didn’t it?

Then there was the speech itself. Mostly substanceless — and now, we find out, mostly filled with exaggerations and even actual outright lies. It would have been barely appropriate for local office, but it was embarrassingly empty for someone seeking the 2nd highest office in the land. Ridiculously inappropriate.

It’s all just a little too high school for me. Know what I mean?

That observatonn was driven home for me when I discovered this “review” of the governor’s appearance on local talk show in Alaska. The author was not impressed. The Governor had not just allowed, but was complicit in, the talk show host’s unwarranted sexist attack on one of Palin’s political opponents. The author is right: it was most unbecoming.

And most telling. Now we know for sure what her substanceless speech only hinted at: Sarah Palin is little more than a gossip with all the maturity and gravitas of a high school beauty queen with a mean streak.

Shoot. Now I’m about to feel sorry for her. Wonder what happened to her as a child that stunted her emotional growth like that?  Of course, if she was raised as a religioius extremist that she is now, that might be enough. Oh well, no matter, really. Even without the experience factor (or lack thereof), whatever it was made her unsuitable material for Vice President of the United States of America.

Nope, still haven’t put my finger on it. Not entirely, anyway. I will. It’ll out.