Leftist women whine for their very own 'progressive Palin'

*
Just how far to the left are Anna Holmes, founding editor of Jezebel, and Rebecca Traister, author of Big Girls Don’t Cry? In a New York Times op-ed co-authored by the "progressive" pair, they rather surprisingly let a big, feral cat out of the bag.

The opinion piece is just so much anti-Palin drivel, and the seething jealousy drips from every paragraph. But that's not the surprising part of an op-ed which bemoans the fact that the Left has no anti-Palin to call its very own. The slip of the keyboard is found in this nugget from the article:

"Since the 2008 election, progressive leaders have done little to address the obvious national appetite for female leadership. And despite (or because of) their continuing obsession with Ms. Palin, they have done nothing to stop an anti-choice, pro-abstinence, socialist-bashing Tea Party enthusiast from becoming the 21st century symbol of American women in politics."

Socialist-bashing?

These two moonbats are so far out there in la-la-leftist land that they actually express their indignation over Gov. Palin's criticism of socialism. They must believe that being a socialist is something to actually be proud of! They must think that those who believe in economic freedom should be tolerant of socialists. We can only imagine the polite cocktail party conversation that goes something like this:

"I understand your friend Zelda is a socialist."

"Yes... What of it?"

"Oh, not that there's anything wrong with that, of course..."

The problem is that there is plenty wrong with socialism, as this American Thinker commentary explains:

In the late 1930s, the noted economist Friedrich Von Hayek wrote his landmark pamphlet "Road to Serfdom," laying bare the diseased skeleton of socialist/utopian thought that had permeated academia and the salons of his day. With an economy of words that showcased the significance of his conclusion, he pointed out the Achilles heel of collectivist dogma: for a planned economy to succeed, there must be central planners, who by necessity will insist on universal commitment to their plan.

How do you attain total commitment to a goal from a free people? Well, you don't. Some percentage will always disagree, even if only for the sake of being contrary or out of a desire to be left alone. When considering a program as comprehensive as a government-planned economy, there are undoubtedly countless points of contention, such as how we will choose the planners, how we will order our priorities when assigning them importance within the plan, how we will allocate resources when competing interests have legitimate claims, who will make these decisions, and perhaps more pertinent to our discussion, how those decisions will be enforced. A rift forming on even one of these issues is enough to bring the gears of this progressive endeavor grinding to a halt. This fatal flaw in the collectivist design cannot be re-engineered. It is an error so critical that the entire ideology must be scrapped.

Von Hayek accurately foretold the fate that would befall dissenters from the plan. They simply could not be allowed to get in the way. Opposition would soon be treated as subversion, with debate shriveling to non-existence under the glare of the state. Those who refused compliance would first be marginalized, then dehumanized, and finally (failing re-education) eliminated. Collectivism and individualism cannot long share the same bed. They are political oil and water, and neither can compromise its position without eventually succumbing to the other. The history of the twentieth century is littered with the remains of those who became "enemies of the state" for merely drawing attention to this flaw. As Von Hayek predicted, the socialist vision would not be achieved without bloodshed.

Conservative women from Cassy Fiano to Lori Ziganto have argued that the feminism of the left is no longer about empowering women, but rather all about radical leftist politics. By showing their outrage over Sarah Palin's criticism of socialism, Ms. Holmes and Ms. Traister are proving that point made by conservative feminist commentators.

- JP