 |
| Image via |
-- Columnist Edward McClelland on the notorious Rep. Joe Walsh (deadbeat dad, lunatic) and his tactics against his challenger, Tammy Duckworth (war veteran who lost both legs in an act of heroism).
Showing posts with label sexist. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sexist. Show all posts
Monday, October 15, 2012
Quote Of The Day - Here And Now Edition
Oct 15th, 2012
"Walsh is an insecure bully who needs to point out that Duckworth is more of a woman than he is to overcome the fact that she's also more of a man than he is."
-- Columnist Edward McClelland on the notorious Rep. Joe Walsh (deadbeat dad, lunatic) and his tactics against his challenger, Tammy Duckworth (war veteran who lost both legs in an act of heroism).
-- Columnist Edward McClelland on the notorious Rep. Joe Walsh (deadbeat dad, lunatic) and his tactics against his challenger, Tammy Duckworth (war veteran who lost both legs in an act of heroism).
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
What War On Women?, cont...
April 17th, 2012
Jon Stewart notes that while Fox News fiercely denies there is a "war on women" at all they have equally passionately propagandized that "wars" on Christmas, Hanukkah, Halloween, Ladies nights, fisherman, salt, "spuds" and fossil fuels are all very real.
Jon Stewart notes that while Fox News fiercely denies there is a "war on women" at all they have equally passionately propagandized that "wars" on Christmas, Hanukkah, Halloween, Ladies nights, fisherman, salt, "spuds" and fossil fuels are all very real.
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
What War On Women? cont...
April 10th, 2012
As a result of the ongoing war on women, which exists no matter how much senior Republicans are now scrambling to deny it, the gap between support among American women voters for President Obama and Mitt Romney has grown wildly. Yesterday, Herman Cain was asked about this on Fox and explained the numbers as follows:
As a result of the ongoing war on women, which exists no matter how much senior Republicans are now scrambling to deny it, the gap between support among American women voters for President Obama and Mitt Romney has grown wildly. Yesterday, Herman Cain was asked about this on Fox and explained the numbers as follows:
"I think many men are much more familiar with the failed policies than a lot of other people, as well as the general public."You read that right.
Monday, April 9, 2012
What War On Women?
April 9th, 2012
That's the official GOP line; there is no "war on women."
Today, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) called it a "manufactured issue".
He went so far as to presume that high ranking Republican women agree with him:
 |
| Image via |
Today, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) called it a "manufactured issue".
He went so far as to presume that high ranking Republican women agree with him:
"There is no issue. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and Kelly Ayotte from New Hampshire and Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe from Maine, I think, would be the first to say — and Lisa Murkowski from Alaska — ‘We don’t see any evidence of this.' "Really?
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
"What's Wrong With These People"
March 6th, 2012
Good question, Joe. The war on women is destroying the GOP. Here's proof.
Good question, Joe. The war on women is destroying the GOP. Here's proof.
Monday, March 5, 2012
Not Good Enough, Rush. Not Good Enough At All
March 5th, 2012
Again, one of my conservative heroes steps up to the plate. He also hits it out of the park.
Regarding Rush's phony "apology," David Frum gives what may be the most dignified smackdown in recent political history.
He has four points over at CNN regarding the Limbaugh/Fluke spectacle that all ring true:
"Point 1: Even by the rough standards of cable/talk radio/digital talk, Limbaugh's verbal abuse of Sandra Fluke set a new kind of low. I can't recall anything as brutal, ugly and deliberate ever being said by such a prominent person and so emphatically repeated. This was not a case of a bad "word choice." It was a brutally sexualized accusation, against a specific person, prolonged over three days.
 |
| Frum's Bullshit-Detector is pinned |
Regarding Rush's phony "apology," David Frum gives what may be the most dignified smackdown in recent political history.
He has four points over at CNN regarding the Limbaugh/Fluke spectacle that all ring true:
"Point 1: Even by the rough standards of cable/talk radio/digital talk, Limbaugh's verbal abuse of Sandra Fluke set a new kind of low. I can't recall anything as brutal, ugly and deliberate ever being said by such a prominent person and so emphatically repeated. This was not a case of a bad "word choice." It was a brutally sexualized accusation, against a specific person, prolonged over three days.
Sunday, March 4, 2012
Maureen Dowd Kicks Some Flabby, Creepy, Misogynistic Ass
March 4th, 2012
If someone had told me a few years ago that I would be coming to the defense of basic women's rights as well as explaining the fundamentals of hormone therapy while the nation headed into the 2012 Presidential contest, I would simply not have believed them. After posting about this HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE, I have come to the conclusion that Margaret Atwood was not fabulist in the least.
Maureen Dowd nails these creeps to the wall:
"Limbaugh leeringly suggested that were taxpayers to be stuck with the bill, Fluke and other “feminazis” should give them something back: sex videos. “We want you to post the videos online so we can all watch,” he said.
Fluke was lobbying Georgetown University to change its policy for three years before she became a cause célèbre outcast when the Republican congressman Darrell Issa barred her from an all-male panel on contraception. But her conflict with her Jesuit school did not stop its president, John DeGioia, from eloquently defending his student (who ended up testifying for Nancy Pelosi’s all-Democratic panel).
“She provided a model of civil discourse,” he said in a letter to the school. “This expression of conscience was in the tradition of the deepest values we share as a people. One need not agree with her substantive position to support her right to respectful free expression.”
He branded the reaction of Limbaugh and some other commentators as “misogynistic, vitriolic and a misrepresentation of the position of our student.”
Given this season’s lava spill of hate, it was fitting that DeGioia evoked St. Augustine: “Let us, on both sides, lay aside all arrogance. Let us not, on either side, claim that we have already discovered the truth.”
It’s hard to believe that not that long ago, Bob Dole, the former G.O.P. leader and presidential nominee, was a spokesman for Viagra. (Mother Jones pointed out that Rush, a Viagra fan, might be confusing the little blue pill and birth control, since “when and how much sex you have is unrelated to the amount of birth control you need.”)
Rush and Newt Gingrich can play the studs, marrying again and again until they find the perfect adoring young wife. But women pressing for health care rights are denigrated as sluts."
If someone had told me a few years ago that I would be coming to the defense of basic women's rights as well as explaining the fundamentals of hormone therapy while the nation headed into the 2012 Presidential contest, I would simply not have believed them. After posting about this HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE, I have come to the conclusion that Margaret Atwood was not fabulist in the least.
Maureen Dowd nails these creeps to the wall:
"Limbaugh leeringly suggested that were taxpayers to be stuck with the bill, Fluke and other “feminazis” should give them something back: sex videos. “We want you to post the videos online so we can all watch,” he said.
Fluke was lobbying Georgetown University to change its policy for three years before she became a cause célèbre outcast when the Republican congressman Darrell Issa barred her from an all-male panel on contraception. But her conflict with her Jesuit school did not stop its president, John DeGioia, from eloquently defending his student (who ended up testifying for Nancy Pelosi’s all-Democratic panel).
“She provided a model of civil discourse,” he said in a letter to the school. “This expression of conscience was in the tradition of the deepest values we share as a people. One need not agree with her substantive position to support her right to respectful free expression.”
He branded the reaction of Limbaugh and some other commentators as “misogynistic, vitriolic and a misrepresentation of the position of our student.”
Given this season’s lava spill of hate, it was fitting that DeGioia evoked St. Augustine: “Let us, on both sides, lay aside all arrogance. Let us not, on either side, claim that we have already discovered the truth.”
It’s hard to believe that not that long ago, Bob Dole, the former G.O.P. leader and presidential nominee, was a spokesman for Viagra. (Mother Jones pointed out that Rush, a Viagra fan, might be confusing the little blue pill and birth control, since “when and how much sex you have is unrelated to the amount of birth control you need.”)
Rush and Newt Gingrich can play the studs, marrying again and again until they find the perfect adoring young wife. But women pressing for health care rights are denigrated as sluts."
Damn straight.
Newt Watch - Cashing In On Rush Limbaugh's "Slut-Shaming"
March 4th, 2012
Well, even after the fat man issued his phony apology, there was at least one politician who sought to gain some advantage by dragging himself through Rush's snail-stain.
The National Journal reports:
"Newt Gingrich on Saturday used the flap over Rush Limbaugh's controversial denunciations of Sandra Fluke as a way to attack President Obama for acting "opportunistically" when he called the Georgetown University law student to express his disappointment over Limbaugh's comments.
After Limbaugh described Fluke as a “slut” and “prostitute” for advocating for subsidizing birth control, Obama contacted Fluke personally. Numerous conservatives and other GOP presidential candidates have rebuked the conservative broadcaster to varying degrees, but the former House speaker said he saw the issue much differently.
"I think the president will opportunistically do anything he can," Gingrich said in response to a reporter’s question after a rally in Hamilton. "I think the most important use of language in the last week has been the president's apology to religious fanatics, and I want to stay focused on what the president has said, and I think what he said was inexcusable and is exactly the wrong policy at a time of life and death, and playing political games is irrelevant as far as I'm concerned."
My first reaction is to suggest that Gingrich, with this act of opportunism, is the last person who should accuse anyone else of behaving "opportunistically."
What's really illuminating here is that he attempted to use the vile spectacle while simultaneously framing it as no big deal.
 |
| Image via |
The National Journal reports:
"Newt Gingrich on Saturday used the flap over Rush Limbaugh's controversial denunciations of Sandra Fluke as a way to attack President Obama for acting "opportunistically" when he called the Georgetown University law student to express his disappointment over Limbaugh's comments.
After Limbaugh described Fluke as a “slut” and “prostitute” for advocating for subsidizing birth control, Obama contacted Fluke personally. Numerous conservatives and other GOP presidential candidates have rebuked the conservative broadcaster to varying degrees, but the former House speaker said he saw the issue much differently.
"I think the president will opportunistically do anything he can," Gingrich said in response to a reporter’s question after a rally in Hamilton. "I think the most important use of language in the last week has been the president's apology to religious fanatics, and I want to stay focused on what the president has said, and I think what he said was inexcusable and is exactly the wrong policy at a time of life and death, and playing political games is irrelevant as far as I'm concerned."
My first reaction is to suggest that Gingrich, with this act of opportunism, is the last person who should accuse anyone else of behaving "opportunistically."
What's really illuminating here is that he attempted to use the vile spectacle while simultaneously framing it as no big deal.
The Right Goes From "Religious Freedom" To "Slut Shaming" In Just Two Weeks
Mar 4th, 2012
by F. Grey Parker
When the GOP made the bright decision to attack the Obama Administration's new contraceptive requirements, they framed their argument as one of "religious freedom."
by F. Grey Parker
Thursday, March 1, 2012
The War On Women Meets The War On Science
march 1st, 2012
Well, this certainly is a convergence of two lunatic disciplines; practiced denial of science meets institutional misogyny. I suspect a sprinkling of Dominionism was added for flavor.
Igor Volsky writes:
"Just moments after Senators defeated the so-called Blunt Amendment, Rep. Tim Murphy (R-PA) accused Sebelius of lying about the administration’s rule requiring employers to provide birth control coverage in their health insurance plans and falsely insisted that religious organizations would be required to provide “abortifacient” drugs." EMPHASIS MINE
One more time... were talking about organizations that seek to participate in secular society, for commercial benefit, underwritten in dozens of ways by the U.S. taxpayer. They don't like it? Close. Period. I say that as a Christian.
Well, this certainly is a convergence of two lunatic disciplines; practiced denial of science meets institutional misogyny. I suspect a sprinkling of Dominionism was added for flavor.
Igor Volsky writes:
"Just moments after Senators defeated the so-called Blunt Amendment, Rep. Tim Murphy (R-PA) accused Sebelius of lying about the administration’s rule requiring employers to provide birth control coverage in their health insurance plans and falsely insisted that religious organizations would be required to provide “abortifacient” drugs." EMPHASIS MINE
Sebelius: There also is no abortifacient drug that is part of the FDA approved contraception. What the rule for preventive care…
Murphy: Ma’m that is not true…Is the morning after pill or something like that an abortifacient drug?
Sebelius : It is a contraceptive drug, not an abortifacient… It does not interfere with a pregnancy. If the morning pill were taken, and a female were pregnant, the pregnancy is not interrupted. That’s the definition of abortifation.
Murphy: Ma’m that is your interpretation, and I appreciate that’s your interpretation.
Sebelius: That’s what the scientists and doctors…
Murphy: We’re not talking about scientists! Ma’m we’re not talking about scientists here, we’re talking about religious belief. Ma’m, I’m asking you about a religious belief. In a religious belief, that is a violation of a religious belief.This man is an idiot. Worse, he's a very dangerous idiot. Science isn't a political or theological opinion.
One more time... were talking about organizations that seek to participate in secular society, for commercial benefit, underwritten in dozens of ways by the U.S. taxpayer. They don't like it? Close. Period. I say that as a Christian.
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
The Day In "Slut Shaming"
Feb 29th, 2012
It's been a hell of a day in the world of "slut shaming." A hell of a day, indeed. In case you haven't heard yet, Rush Limbaugh savagely attacked Sandra Fluke, the young woman whom House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) refused to allow to testify during his all-male-witness contraception hearing two weeks ago:
"What does it say about the college coed Susan [sic] Fluke, who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex? What does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex.
"She's having so much sex she can't afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex. What does that make us? We're the pimps.
"The johns, that's right. We would be the johns -- no! We're not the johns. Well -- yeah, that's right. Pimp's not the right word.
"OK, so, she's not a slut. She's round-heeled. I take it back." EMPHASIS MINE
via Media Matters
In case you are wondering what set Rush off, Ms. Fluke managed to get her voice heard in a separate hearing held by the The Democratic Steering & Policy Committee. Although House Republicans managed to intentionally prevent her appearance from being broadcast, it wound up being seen by a lot of people anyway. You know how that pesky internet is.
This woman not being effectively silenced altogether was too much for Rush to bear.
Of particular note is his remark today about the quantity of sex a person engages in having anything to do with "contraception."
Beyond a refusal to recognize the fact that a majority of women use "contraception" as an essential component of health-preserving hormone therapies (such as the one related in Ms. Fluke's testimony), this exposes the psyche of the contemporary, self-declared conservative male...
"Behold, the most influential voice in Republican politics.
I'm curious whether GOP officials, including Darrell Issa, are comfortable with the language Limbaugh used today. If recent history is any guide, Republican officeholders are loath to disagree with the radio host publicly, and it'll be interesting to see if GOP lawmakers or candidates make any kind of exception here.
Given that they started this War on Women, it seems unlikely, but here's hoping I'm wrong."
That's a damn good question. And, it should be asked of every single elected Republican in the United States.
Believe it or not, the day got even more depressing.
The National Review published a "hilarious" piece by Charles C. W. Cooke showing just how stupid we liberals are and 'exposing' the fact that access to birth control is a phony issue. His piece, titled "My Contraceptive Haul," (yuk yuk) details how easy it was for him to find condoms simply everywhere in NY City.
They are speaking for millions of Americans who think that women shouldn't be speaking on this subject at all.
It's been a hell of a day in the world of "slut shaming." A hell of a day, indeed. In case you haven't heard yet, Rush Limbaugh savagely attacked Sandra Fluke, the young woman whom House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) refused to allow to testify during his all-male-witness contraception hearing two weeks ago:
"What does it say about the college coed Susan [sic] Fluke, who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex? What does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex.
"She's having so much sex she can't afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex. What does that make us? We're the pimps.
"The johns, that's right. We would be the johns -- no! We're not the johns. Well -- yeah, that's right. Pimp's not the right word.
"OK, so, she's not a slut. She's round-heeled. I take it back." EMPHASIS MINE
via Media Matters
In case you are wondering what set Rush off, Ms. Fluke managed to get her voice heard in a separate hearing held by the The Democratic Steering & Policy Committee. Although House Republicans managed to intentionally prevent her appearance from being broadcast, it wound up being seen by a lot of people anyway. You know how that pesky internet is.
This woman not being effectively silenced altogether was too much for Rush to bear.
Of particular note is his remark today about the quantity of sex a person engages in having anything to do with "contraception."
Beyond a refusal to recognize the fact that a majority of women use "contraception" as an essential component of health-preserving hormone therapies (such as the one related in Ms. Fluke's testimony), this exposes the psyche of the contemporary, self-declared conservative male...
They think this debate is about rubbers and fucking.Steve Benen raises an eyebrow:
"Behold, the most influential voice in Republican politics.
I'm curious whether GOP officials, including Darrell Issa, are comfortable with the language Limbaugh used today. If recent history is any guide, Republican officeholders are loath to disagree with the radio host publicly, and it'll be interesting to see if GOP lawmakers or candidates make any kind of exception here.
Given that they started this War on Women, it seems unlikely, but here's hoping I'm wrong."
That's a damn good question. And, it should be asked of every single elected Republican in the United States.
Believe it or not, the day got even more depressing.
The National Review published a "hilarious" piece by Charles C. W. Cooke showing just how stupid we liberals are and 'exposing' the fact that access to birth control is a phony issue. His piece, titled "My Contraceptive Haul," (yuk yuk) details how easy it was for him to find condoms simply everywhere in NY City.
"Were one to have listened uncritically to the more hysterical elements in America’s news media over the past month, one would have concluded that contraception is intractably hard to come by in the United States; but a cursory glance at the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene’s well-appointed website gives quite the opposite impression. There, contrarily, visitors are informed that anyone in need of contraception is somewhat spoiled for choice." EMPHASIS MINEWhile poking fun at the "NY Condom App" available for a number of smart phones, he says:
"Never has a society been so precisely and easily led to safe sex."He even describes how his pockets were "bulging" with so many rubbers. Again, it's all about rubbers and fucking.
"Next time someone tells you that, if the federal government does not force all health insurers to cover contraception without raising premiums, the sky is going to fall, why not take him for a walk in a major urban area? You’ll only have to go a couple of blocks." EMPHASIS MINEYou just read that right.
"Take him."There are so many things wrong with these two men that go beyond their dripping smarm.
They are speaking for millions of Americans who think that women shouldn't be speaking on this subject at all.
Friday, February 17, 2012
The GOP War On Women, cont...
Feb 17th, 2012
UPDATE: We may have been taken in by a parody here. If so, we apologize. That said, that we found it plausible in the current climate is worth noting.
If you think there is any way to argue that senior members of the GOP are not actively engaged in a war against women's rights, you are not paying attention. It is being reported that Presidential hopeful Rick Santorum made the following statement recently while speaking before a Nebraska audience:
"It has been my experience that when dealing with females, you need to treat them as though they have a mental disorder… especially those that are constantly seeking equality in the workplace, the military, and in the home. Women need to know their place and need to know when it is okay for them to speak. They were put on this earth for two reasons, and two reasons alone: taking care of their husband, and giving birth to his children… that is all. Any woman who tells you otherwise is obviously touting the liberal agenda of equality, and they need to be told the truth of their purpose. It is a disorder that can be fixed, but not until they go through several years of therapy to understand that they need to be subservient." EMPHASES OURS
This man is now the darling of the GOP base. His vision for a world of barefoot, pregnant, docile and obedient females whose primary destiny lies in their breeding status actually appeals to them.
UPDATE: We may have been taken in by a parody here. If so, we apologize. That said, that we found it plausible in the current climate is worth noting.
If you think there is any way to argue that senior members of the GOP are not actively engaged in a war against women's rights, you are not paying attention. It is being reported that Presidential hopeful Rick Santorum made the following statement recently while speaking before a Nebraska audience:
"It has been my experience that when dealing with females, you need to treat them as though they have a mental disorder… especially those that are constantly seeking equality in the workplace, the military, and in the home. Women need to know their place and need to know when it is okay for them to speak. They were put on this earth for two reasons, and two reasons alone: taking care of their husband, and giving birth to his children… that is all. Any woman who tells you otherwise is obviously touting the liberal agenda of equality, and they need to be told the truth of their purpose. It is a disorder that can be fixed, but not until they go through several years of therapy to understand that they need to be subservient." EMPHASES OURS
This man is now the darling of the GOP base. His vision for a world of barefoot, pregnant, docile and obedient females whose primary destiny lies in their breeding status actually appeals to them.
Friday, December 9, 2011
Dominionist Watch - Bachmann's Rules For Girls
Dec 9th, 2011
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) worked hard earlier this year to spin remarks she had made about the bible and spousal submissiveness. Just last month, the Washington Post got her to go on the record again for clarification:
"Since Bachmann was elected to Congress five years ago, the primary caregiver for their oft-mentioned kids has been her husband, Marcus Bachmann, back home in Minnesota. "We’ve been a tag team," she says. Only, her husband has been "it" for the past five years, hasn’t he, despite her Bible-based belief that wives should be submissive to their husbands?
"My husband is the head of the household," she says, but "we’re equals. If it came down to it, I’d probably let him have the last word." But in 33 years, she adds, this has never happened. "Every decision has been a negotiated settlement."
There are many, relatively mainstream Christians who don't find these statements particularly objectionable. I am not among them. The argument I have made since this flap started in July was that her willingness to project these views in a political setting exposes deeper and more dangerous beliefs; Antiquated notions of traditional marriage are likely the least repressive of her philosophies regarding gender. Which brings us to her most recent interview on Hannity's radio show. Alex Seitz-Wald reports via ThinkProgress:
"While promoting her new book on Sean Hannity’s radio show this afternoon, Rep, Michele Bachmann (R-MN) said she doesn’t let her daughters ask boys out on dates. Apparently embracing antiquated notions of sexuality and gender relations, Bachmann suggested women should have to wait to be asked out. Otherwise, they’re out of luck if they never are. No word on Sadie Hawkins exceptions:
BACHMANN: People do find out [in my book] that I did not get asked to my senior prom.
HANNITY: Well, neither did I. And nobody would go with me.
BACHMANN: Well, in my time, girls didn’t ask boys to prom. If you didn’t get asked, you didn’t go.
HANNITY: Yeah, well let me tell you, I have a 13-year-old son. Those days have changed big time.
BACHMANN: And our girls are not allowed to do that in our house. They have to wait for the boys to call."
Should women also walk behind their husbands if they are told to do so? What does Bachmann think? It's a legitimate question.
 |
| Steve Pope / Getty Images via |
"Since Bachmann was elected to Congress five years ago, the primary caregiver for their oft-mentioned kids has been her husband, Marcus Bachmann, back home in Minnesota. "We’ve been a tag team," she says. Only, her husband has been "it" for the past five years, hasn’t he, despite her Bible-based belief that wives should be submissive to their husbands?
"My husband is the head of the household," she says, but "we’re equals. If it came down to it, I’d probably let him have the last word." But in 33 years, she adds, this has never happened. "Every decision has been a negotiated settlement."
There are many, relatively mainstream Christians who don't find these statements particularly objectionable. I am not among them. The argument I have made since this flap started in July was that her willingness to project these views in a political setting exposes deeper and more dangerous beliefs; Antiquated notions of traditional marriage are likely the least repressive of her philosophies regarding gender. Which brings us to her most recent interview on Hannity's radio show. Alex Seitz-Wald reports via ThinkProgress:
"While promoting her new book on Sean Hannity’s radio show this afternoon, Rep, Michele Bachmann (R-MN) said she doesn’t let her daughters ask boys out on dates. Apparently embracing antiquated notions of sexuality and gender relations, Bachmann suggested women should have to wait to be asked out. Otherwise, they’re out of luck if they never are. No word on Sadie Hawkins exceptions:
BACHMANN: People do find out [in my book] that I did not get asked to my senior prom.
HANNITY: Well, neither did I. And nobody would go with me.
BACHMANN: Well, in my time, girls didn’t ask boys to prom. If you didn’t get asked, you didn’t go.
HANNITY: Yeah, well let me tell you, I have a 13-year-old son. Those days have changed big time.
BACHMANN: And our girls are not allowed to do that in our house. They have to wait for the boys to call."
Should women also walk behind their husbands if they are told to do so? What does Bachmann think? It's a legitimate question.
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Frum On The Fox/Cain Spin Job
Nov 9th, 2011
David Frum may have been substantially more polite than we were in analyzing Fox News' astounding campaign against the Cain accuser(s), but, he is no less indignant:
"It’s telling that the central communications network of the conservative world remains–for all its professed concerns about the war against Christmas–much more “Mad Men” than 700 Club in its attitude to women. On Fox, women exist as talking pinups, their opinions valued to the extent that their legs are shapely and their hair is blonde. Increasingly it looks like Herman Cain may well share those attitudes much more than the faith-and-family culture of the Christian conservative who plumped his poll numbers over the past weeks."
Hear hear. What Fox, along with Limbaugh, have set in motion is nothing short of program-directed misogyny. And for what? To promote and defend, without all the facts, an uniformed fringe candidate about whom a case can be made that he is punking the electorate.
David Frum may have been substantially more polite than we were in analyzing Fox News' astounding campaign against the Cain accuser(s), but, he is no less indignant:
Hear hear. What Fox, along with Limbaugh, have set in motion is nothing short of program-directed misogyny. And for what? To promote and defend, without all the facts, an uniformed fringe candidate about whom a case can be made that he is punking the electorate.
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
Quote Of The Day
Monday, November 7, 2011
"You Want A Job, Right?" cont...
Nov 7th, 2011
by F. Grey Parker NSFW
Considering the conservative establishment's race to double down on their defense of Herman Cain after today's explosive revelations, one needs to wonder whether, perhaps, the GOP front-runner might not actually be doing even better had he actually raped someone.
The only accuser to come forward publicly, Sharon Bialek, is a lifelong Republican and a Tea Party supporter. Not good enough. For those in the GOP elite who have been so desperate to, as Ann Coulter notably intoned, prove that their "blacks are better," any allegation against Cain must be met with a savage response. Its veracity is of no consequence. After all, the GOP was just on the verge of showing us all how open minded they are.
We'd already listened, this afternoon, to the world's foremost overweight, balding, multi-millionaire liar and doctor-shopping, pill-popping drug-fiend as he lowered himself to previously unsuspected depths. We'd also heard that slicked back little GOP-pimp and Nerf-football-enthusiast they call Sean Hannity dismiss the allegations with a big 'so what.'
I genuinely thought it could not get much worse. Silly me. I was wrong. There was still plenty of broadcast day left.
The sputtering shit-bag known as Dick Morris charged onto the Murdoch Device to smear Cain accuser Sharon Bialek further. She's a "gold digger." She "wants money." She wants "a book, a movie, a film deal, a spread in Playboy, who knows?" By the way, Morris went out of his way to make sure Fox viewers knew that Ms. Bialek has "an out of wedlock child."
That bit, in particular, is as venomous as anything I have ever heard. The GOP, the ban-abortion-and-even-contraception party, is now sending its media heavyweights to use Ms. Bialek's embrace of the challenge of single motherhood, rather than choosing to terminate her pregnancy, against her.
Hannity couldn't resist the chance to outdo his afternoon antics. The graphic behind his introduction to footage of this afternoon's presser reads "Anatomy Of A Smear Campaign."
Morris apparently stuck around the vermin-ridden filth that is Fox studios to get a chance to repeat his "Playboy spread" slur. Hannity made sure to plug Morris' children's book at the top of the segment. I shit you not. Again, Morris says "this woman is in search of money."
As I said to a colleague earlier, after all the years that the GOP paraded and manipulated the case of Paula Jones in an attempt to teach us how much "character matters," this propaganda is beyond reason.
The institutionalization of situational ethics is now more damning for the GOP than anything of which Cain is accused.
Remember, women of the GOP, it's not good enough for you to prove your pro-life position through action, vote with your party and also act on behalf of your party's causes. You have to let the men around you do and say whatever they want, whenever they want, no matter how disgusting it may be.
After all, baby, you really are only good for "a Playboy spread" if they turn on you.
Dick Morris, Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity say so.
by F. Grey Parker NSFW
 |
| Cain accuser Sharon Bialek via the LA Times |
The only accuser to come forward publicly, Sharon Bialek, is a lifelong Republican and a Tea Party supporter. Not good enough. For those in the GOP elite who have been so desperate to, as Ann Coulter notably intoned, prove that their "blacks are better," any allegation against Cain must be met with a savage response. Its veracity is of no consequence. After all, the GOP was just on the verge of showing us all how open minded they are.
We'd already listened, this afternoon, to the world's foremost overweight, balding, multi-millionaire liar and doctor-shopping, pill-popping drug-fiend as he lowered himself to previously unsuspected depths. We'd also heard that slicked back little GOP-pimp and Nerf-football-enthusiast they call Sean Hannity dismiss the allegations with a big 'so what.'
I genuinely thought it could not get much worse. Silly me. I was wrong. There was still plenty of broadcast day left.
The sputtering shit-bag known as Dick Morris charged onto the Murdoch Device to smear Cain accuser Sharon Bialek further. She's a "gold digger." She "wants money." She wants "a book, a movie, a film deal, a spread in Playboy, who knows?" By the way, Morris went out of his way to make sure Fox viewers knew that Ms. Bialek has "an out of wedlock child."
That bit, in particular, is as venomous as anything I have ever heard. The GOP, the ban-abortion-and-even-contraception party, is now sending its media heavyweights to use Ms. Bialek's embrace of the challenge of single motherhood, rather than choosing to terminate her pregnancy, against her.
Hannity couldn't resist the chance to outdo his afternoon antics. The graphic behind his introduction to footage of this afternoon's presser reads "Anatomy Of A Smear Campaign."
Morris apparently stuck around the vermin-ridden filth that is Fox studios to get a chance to repeat his "Playboy spread" slur. Hannity made sure to plug Morris' children's book at the top of the segment. I shit you not. Again, Morris says "this woman is in search of money."
As I said to a colleague earlier, after all the years that the GOP paraded and manipulated the case of Paula Jones in an attempt to teach us how much "character matters," this propaganda is beyond reason.
The institutionalization of situational ethics is now more damning for the GOP than anything of which Cain is accused.
Remember, women of the GOP, it's not good enough for you to prove your pro-life position through action, vote with your party and also act on behalf of your party's causes. You have to let the men around you do and say whatever they want, whenever they want, no matter how disgusting it may be.
After all, baby, you really are only good for "a Playboy spread" if they turn on you.
Dick Morris, Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity say so.
"You Want A Job, Right?"
Nov 7th, 2011
"You want a job, right?"
These are the words Herman Cain uttered when his sexual advances were rebuffed by Sharon Bialek according to allegations made public this afternoon.
This is the most damning evidence in the Cain saga so far. If true, and there is no reason to doubt Ms. Bialek, this represents a quid pro quo. It meets the standard for true abuse of power.
Since the story broke, Cain and his defenders have not only attempted to portray his accusers as liars, they have also sought to ridicule the very existence of sexual harassment allegations in our culture. Conservative pundits, Fox News and Rush Limbaugh in particular, have been truly vicious. Some have even gleefully trotted out "race" as a factor in their defense of the current GOP front-runner. Cain himself employed this tactic in an attempt to raise money off the charges. Apparently, using the race card is different when "conservatives" do it.
There are examples of all this apologism and pandering HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE. In fact, just after the press conference today, Limbaugh resorted to mockery of the accuser's name. This derision was, of course, sexual in nature. "Buy a lick," he said. Get it? He then made a slurping sound and repeated his joke, "Buy a lick."
Dahlia Lithwick wrote about this astounding phenomenon last week, before we had a face and a name for one of the accusers:
"Sexual harassment is now nothing. Welcome to the era of gender harassment denialism. The harassment skeptics claim that harassment, like racism, used to exist but is now over. Twenty years ago, when charges were leveled at Clarence Thomas, supporters of the accused refused to take the accuser seriously. Now supporters of the accused refuse to take the accusation itself seriously. We have gone from not knowing what sexual harassment is to not believing it still happens. All in less than 20 years.
Remember, we don’t know what happened, beyond the fact that several employees came forward with complaints and received cash settlements. That’s not a lot of information. Cain defenders could have stopped there. Instead, great swaths of them have opted to assert that there could never be a valid sex discrimination claim because the whole thing is just a racket. And they went even further: The same folks criticizing the National Restaurant Association employees who came forward with claims that they were uncomfortable in their workplace are willing to deploy the most archaic and gender-freighted stereotypes to get there. Sexual harassment can’t be “real” because the women who claim it are money-grubbing, hysterical, attention-seeking tramps."
Limbaugh suggested last week that "sexual harassment is a political tool of the left to get rid of people or to score money gains."
Really? Meet Sharon Bialek; She is a registered Republican. She is also a Tea Party supporter.
Andrew Sullivan made note of this while liveblogging the presser:
"Cain has countered with a statement denying any sexual harassment of anyone. So these four women are, according to him, lying. Including the latest who was, at one point, a fervent Cain fan and subsequently attended a recent Tea Party event. It will be hard to turn Bialek into a liberal tool."
At last, some social conservatives are demanding the Cain take the charges a little more seriously. That hasn't stopped guys like Hannity from responding with a resounding "so what."
Howard Kurtz noted this afternoon that many Republicans seem to share Hannity's sentiment:
"The news conference followed the first sign that the controversy is beginning to chip away at Cain’s standing in the polls. A Reuters/Ipsos survey found his favorability rating among Republicans slipping from 66 percent a week earlier to 57 percent. And a majority, 53 percent, believe the harassment allegations are true.
In an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll out Monday, negative impressions of Cain among Republicans doubled, from 18 to 35 percent. At the same time, 54 percent of those responding said they aren’t concerned about voting for Cain despite the allegations." EMPHASES MINE
This what the GOP base has become. They no longer care about fundamental questions of character or decency within their own ranks. The same party which made a spectacle of Paula Jones for years in an attempt to undermine President Clinton, now believes an almost identical allegation is no big deal.
As long as they win, they seem willing and poised to elect almost anyone.
"You want a job, right?"
These are the words Herman Cain uttered when his sexual advances were rebuffed by Sharon Bialek according to allegations made public this afternoon.
This is the most damning evidence in the Cain saga so far. If true, and there is no reason to doubt Ms. Bialek, this represents a quid pro quo. It meets the standard for true abuse of power.
Since the story broke, Cain and his defenders have not only attempted to portray his accusers as liars, they have also sought to ridicule the very existence of sexual harassment allegations in our culture. Conservative pundits, Fox News and Rush Limbaugh in particular, have been truly vicious. Some have even gleefully trotted out "race" as a factor in their defense of the current GOP front-runner. Cain himself employed this tactic in an attempt to raise money off the charges. Apparently, using the race card is different when "conservatives" do it.
There are examples of all this apologism and pandering HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE. In fact, just after the press conference today, Limbaugh resorted to mockery of the accuser's name. This derision was, of course, sexual in nature. "Buy a lick," he said. Get it? He then made a slurping sound and repeated his joke, "Buy a lick."
Dahlia Lithwick wrote about this astounding phenomenon last week, before we had a face and a name for one of the accusers:
"Sexual harassment is now nothing. Welcome to the era of gender harassment denialism. The harassment skeptics claim that harassment, like racism, used to exist but is now over. Twenty years ago, when charges were leveled at Clarence Thomas, supporters of the accused refused to take the accuser seriously. Now supporters of the accused refuse to take the accusation itself seriously. We have gone from not knowing what sexual harassment is to not believing it still happens. All in less than 20 years.
Remember, we don’t know what happened, beyond the fact that several employees came forward with complaints and received cash settlements. That’s not a lot of information. Cain defenders could have stopped there. Instead, great swaths of them have opted to assert that there could never be a valid sex discrimination claim because the whole thing is just a racket. And they went even further: The same folks criticizing the National Restaurant Association employees who came forward with claims that they were uncomfortable in their workplace are willing to deploy the most archaic and gender-freighted stereotypes to get there. Sexual harassment can’t be “real” because the women who claim it are money-grubbing, hysterical, attention-seeking tramps."
Limbaugh suggested last week that "sexual harassment is a political tool of the left to get rid of people or to score money gains."
Really? Meet Sharon Bialek; She is a registered Republican. She is also a Tea Party supporter.
Andrew Sullivan made note of this while liveblogging the presser:
"Cain has countered with a statement denying any sexual harassment of anyone. So these four women are, according to him, lying. Including the latest who was, at one point, a fervent Cain fan and subsequently attended a recent Tea Party event. It will be hard to turn Bialek into a liberal tool."
At last, some social conservatives are demanding the Cain take the charges a little more seriously. That hasn't stopped guys like Hannity from responding with a resounding "so what."
Howard Kurtz noted this afternoon that many Republicans seem to share Hannity's sentiment:
"The news conference followed the first sign that the controversy is beginning to chip away at Cain’s standing in the polls. A Reuters/Ipsos survey found his favorability rating among Republicans slipping from 66 percent a week earlier to 57 percent. And a majority, 53 percent, believe the harassment allegations are true.
In an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll out Monday, negative impressions of Cain among Republicans doubled, from 18 to 35 percent. At the same time, 54 percent of those responding said they aren’t concerned about voting for Cain despite the allegations." EMPHASES MINE
This what the GOP base has become. They no longer care about fundamental questions of character or decency within their own ranks. The same party which made a spectacle of Paula Jones for years in an attempt to undermine President Clinton, now believes an almost identical allegation is no big deal.
As long as they win, they seem willing and poised to elect almost anyone.
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Ben Stein Jumps The Shark
May 17th, 2011
Ben Stein's arguments that the long term unemployed smell (literally) or that Arabs don't deserve democracy were one thing. But this? This is unforgivable. Today, Stein addressed the shocking tale of IMF head Dominique Strauss-Kahn as rape and assault allegations unfold against him. While Stein purports to be defending the principle of the presumption of innocence, what he reveals is anger that New York's judicial system is treating someone so very wealthy with the same standards that it would, as he calls them, the "have-nots."
He writes in The American Spectator:
"1.) If he is such a womanizer and violent guy with women, why didn't he ever get charged until now? If he has a long history of sexual abuse, how can it have remained no more than gossip this long? France is a nation of vicious political rivalries. Why didn't his opponents get him years ago?"
Amazing. A vast majority of sexual assault is unreported. Most countries do not treat victims of rape as well as we do in the U.S and that's not saying much. It is generally understood in law enforcement that for every successful rape prosecution there are far more victims of the convicted who simply aren't known to the authorities. One doesn't suddenly just start raping women. Does Stein honestly believe that a man who is arguably the most powerful banker in the world could not get away with intimidating witnesses? This is, incidentally, exactly what allegedly happened a decade ago to French journalist Tristane Banon.
He writes in The American Spectator:
"1.) If he is such a womanizer and violent guy with women, why didn't he ever get charged until now? If he has a long history of sexual abuse, how can it have remained no more than gossip this long? France is a nation of vicious political rivalries. Why didn't his opponents get him years ago?"
Amazing. A vast majority of sexual assault is unreported. Most countries do not treat victims of rape as well as we do in the U.S and that's not saying much. It is generally understood in law enforcement that for every successful rape prosecution there are far more victims of the convicted who simply aren't known to the authorities. One doesn't suddenly just start raping women. Does Stein honestly believe that a man who is arguably the most powerful banker in the world could not get away with intimidating witnesses? This is, incidentally, exactly what allegedly happened a decade ago to French journalist Tristane Banon.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Things You Can't Make Up
March 22nd, 2011
Please donate to planned Parenthood by clicking HERE
Some propaganda is just so wildly dense as to leave me mostly speechless. Today, Jezebel shone a light on arguably the most questionable medium for an anti-choice message I have ever seen. A coat hanger. Seriously. The picture says it all.
Please donate to planned Parenthood by clicking HERE
Some propaganda is just so wildly dense as to leave me mostly speechless. Today, Jezebel shone a light on arguably the most questionable medium for an anti-choice message I have ever seen. A coat hanger. Seriously. The picture says it all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
