Comments on: Who’s Afraid of Sarah Palin?

By: Palin – Going Going Gone. The World Dodged A Bullet « The BigotBasher

Palin – Going Going Gone. The World Dodged A Bullet « The BigotBasher — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 21:51:49 +0000

[...] those stupid PUMAs running SarahPac and all of their other other stupid haunts, I am again doing this, you have again given me a whole load more [...]

By: Diana Castaneda

Diana Castaneda — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 21:47:40 +0000

I just began reading your blogs. I am astouneded how by bashing my sincere uneducated thoughts you have elevated my name in the blogosphere, on a national level. Looks like I am getting my 15 minutes of fame, good or not! Just what I wanted! Thanks! I am enjoying reading your hysterical vomit and intolerence for people you consider beneath your intellegence or differing opinion. My friend Theresa from a rural town would call it (BRAIN ASFHART). I call it “Boy do they have a life Just get a life! Thanks for making my day! Diana

By: Janis

Janis — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 17:45:24 +0000

You know what this is?

Remember the old button slogan for the suffragists?

VOTES FOR WOMEN.

Well, guess what? That’s my slogan now. Only interpreted in a slightly different way.

VOTES FOR WOMEN.

Period. Votes FOR women.

By: benergy

benergy — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 14:19:26 +0000

Nice article, and agreed 100%.

Well, I have to take umbrage with the gay rights mantle. There’s no comparison, and the gay orgs do not have a leg-up on something like NOW. Gay rights are still young, and the HRC (Human Rights Campaign) is essentially like NOW — apparatchiks of the Democratic Party. They focus primarily on urban gay rights issues, with no concern for rural/suburban gays. And they, too, had lukewarm support for Hillary — who’s marched in Prides both as First Lady AND as as Senator, and promised to be the first President to do so — and instead joined the Obama train, who wouldn’t be photographed with Gavin Newsom, never marched in Chicago Pride (and was in Chicago during Pride ‘08), and brought homophobes as members of his Faith and Values tour.

And they’ve (as in, the HRC, but also all of us gays) been screwed since the election. And now write strongly worded letters.

Openly gay candidates are rarely on the radar for any election, and if so, treated as a novelty. The Democrats sit on their hands regarding “same sex union, nee marriage” equality, despite having full control to do something, even in a measure like pulling the Federal plank from DOMA.

As a gay man, I got a LOT of flak from other gays about voting Hillary, and then EXTREME heat for supporting Palin. I kept arguing that the sexism was wrong, and if this is going to happen so publicly for WOMEN, what does it say about gays and lesbians?

Gays may appear more united, join things like the HRC out of unity (I used to be a member, myself), but as gays become more public and the “issues” more viable, then the stress-fractures start to show. There’s already divides between the “activists” and the machinists, and any Republican Gay reaaaaally has to keep themselves on the down low. Give the gay orgs 20 or so years.

By: donna darko

donna darko — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 13:08:56 +0000

Great title!

Look who’s afraid of women: Jay Cost.

Is Sarah Palin Running for President?

First, her negatives are very high.

Because women are “polarizing” and “divisive.”

Second, she’s the governor of Alaska.

I think Palin’s best bet is to win election to the Senate. That would be a way to burnish her credentials.

Bush and BC were governors one of a small state before becoming President Her best bet in the Senate to burnish her credentials? That worked so well for another woman.

We’ll see what she does, but I think it would be a real stretch for her to run for the presidency in 2012. I think she has enormous political talent, and that she was treated unfairly last cycle (though that’s the breaks in politics!) – but I just don’t think she’s well-positioned for a run next cycle.

It was a stretch for an inexperienced Obama to start running for President after two years in the Senate and a razor thin resume but he’s a guy which trumps everything! Those are the breaks? Does he mean the historic misogyny in 2008? Call it what it is, Jay Cost.

By: Nicky

Nicky — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 07:59:53 +0000

I live so far from America, I’m an addict follower of the US politics. I loved Hillary and I now see myself loving Sarah Palin.

I think now I understand why I love these 2 women. It was never because of their policies, which is already obvious that they are on opposite sides of policy. So I have loved them because they have both become VICTMS because of their biological make up.

TNA, you guys are a breath of fresh air. I will just second what one commenter said above by adding: JUST VOTE/SUPPORT HER, BECAUSE SHE IS A WOMAN.

By: bruce nahin

bruce nahin — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 06:03:36 +0000

M.A-went to the site and gave her the talk her father should give her- sorry I am a guy and that is how a father should respond, even if her’s did not( but I hope he did and that she has one to whom she can talk openly about such things.)

By: samanthasmom

samanthasmom — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 05:29:42 +0000

I went over to femisex as requested to answer Elizabeth’s question, and it amazes me that anyone is suggesting that Elizabeth attend a party where underage drinking is obviously part of the party plan. I hope that those responding that way are not parents. Amy has made several comments and posts about the sexualization of young girls. I have refrained from placing the blame on parents. However, re this case – in my high school
teacher days I was privy to information about the time and place of parties where liquor was advertised as a reason to attend. My first response was to report the time and place of the party to the police, and I was not alone. It was easy because we had a policeman on duty in the school building. The cops would wait until an hour after the party started up to arrive. Then they would disperse the kids and arrest the parents whose home was host to the party. They never gave even a hint that teachers were ratting the kids out because we were great snitches. If you allow underage kids to drink in your home, there are legal consequences. Don’t do it. Your kids may have conscientious teachers who will help send you to court. No matter what messages the media sends out to our sons and daughters, parents can counteract it if they are willing to go against the crowd. Your child only needs a cell phone that can call you in an emergency – no camera, no texting, and limited call numbers. If you allow liquor to be served to minors in your home and you’re caught, you’re legally in trouble. If you let your daughter leave your house in “slutty clothes”, you’re sending her the message that she’s a sex object. The most powerful messages in the world come from a child’s own parents. How weak are parents today? Are they afraid of saying “no”? Elizabeth shouldn’t need help from a blog. Where are Mom and Dad?

By: Juliette

Juliette — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 04:42:16 +0000

I agree Kathy

Our country has 99 problems and a Choice aint one.

By: Anne-Marie

Anne-Marie — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 21:29:34 +0000

Boston Nell and everyone: A quick reminder that communicating through text can cause people to misread someone’s intended tone, usually making neutral expressions read harsher than they were intended.

We were born to communicate face to face, not through text.

Someone I know signs his emails with the phrase: “All we are saying is give peace a chance” and it has a surprising effect of softening any messages he sends. He tends to be very direct in the way he communicates, and I am always surprised at how negatively I react to his style of writing, until I read that last phrase, “All we are saying is give peace a chance.”