Tantaros: Sexism not an issue for libs if Palin or Bachmann targeted

Misogyny, to libs, knows no bounds, as long as it's looking to the right
*
Andrea Tantaros figures that Sen. Chuck Schumer saying that the three branches of government are the House, the Senate and the president is "perhaps the dumbest thing I have ever heard a politician say." Burt just imagine if a Republican woman had said that:

She would be called stupid. She would be mocked on cable news and spoofed on "Saturday Night Live." Her credibility would be questioned, and if she were attractive, she'd be discounted as a dingbat or a bimbo.

But that's not the case here. Schumer's gaffe was met with little fanfare or ridicule from the mainstream media. His interviewer, Candy Crowley, a shrewd veteran journalist, didn't even question his error.

Granted, mistakes are made on live television. And Schumer was probably tired. People in the public eye talk so much that they are prone to more verbal flubs than the rest of us. For example, when President Obama said there were 51 states, and mispronounced corpsman ("corpse-man," he said). But while Republican women like Sarah Palin and Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) have been impaled for lesser missteps, Schumer and Obama can always expect a pass.

GOP women have been called names for doing a lot less than Schumer, or for doing nothing at all...

[...]

The most egregious example, of course, is their despicable treatment of Palin. When Palin shouted at a Tea Party rally this past fall that, "We're going to party like it's 1773!" the left was quick to pounce, calling her an idiot. "She's so smart," came the sarcastic Twitter commentary from Markos Moulitsas, founder of the liberal blog Daily Kos.

But it turns out that Palin is smart - smarter than Moulitsas, anyway. The Boston Tea Party happened that year. So even when Palin gets it right, she is accused of getting it wrong, while her smug liberal critics escape relatively unscathed. Maybe if they spent more time studying history and less time trying to humiliate Palin, we wouldn't have such glaring examples of a double standard.

These days, it seems like the last acceptable form of prejudice is expressing hatred toward Republican women without fear of retribution.

[More]

- JP

Commentaries on the Liberation of Sarah - Pt. 2

This is the second in a series in which TX4P recommends some of the best writing which chronicles the liberation of Sarah Palin from the ball and chain of the Alaska governors office to her new role as a leading American conservative coalition builder.

In "Why Palin Quit: Death by a Thousand FOIAs" the WSJ's John Fund says Palin's resignation was not to get a head start on running for president in 2012:

Contrary to most reports, her decision had been in the works for months, accelerating recently as it became clear that controversies and endless ethics investigations were threatening to overshadow her legislative agenda. "Attacks inside Alaska and largely invisible to the national media had paralyzed her administration," someone close to the governor told me. "She was fully aware she would be branded a 'quitter.' She did not want to disappoint her constituents, but she was no longer able to do the job she had been elected to do. Essentially, the taxpayers were paying for Sarah to go to work every day and defend herself."

In "How Is Stepping Down Bad for Palin?" columnist and commentator Andrea Tantaros looks at the impact of the resignation and doesn't see much of a downside:

Whether Palin decides to become the conservative Oprah, a best-selling author, the country’s first female president (or all of the above) she is the next generation, the new guard, and the GOP’s MVP.

From a messaging standpoint Palin is perfect. She is also the only one who can reasonably argue that she hasn't been part of either the Republican or Democratic web of Washington politics.

No bailouts, big spending, or Buenos Aires lust romps.

Her fundraising potential is potent. Her support is solid from the right. She is poised to fill a leadership vacuum and there is no better time than now, when Obama’s numbers (especially with independents) are at the precipice of plunging. The iron is scalding hot and Palin, ever the shrewd politician, knows exactly when to strike.

In "Sarah agonistes" Washington Times columnist Tony Blankley warns against following the conventional wisdom in unconventional times or using it to judge unconventional politicians:

I have had the honor of working for two politicians before they rose to their heights (as well as during their heights) -- Ronald Reagan and Newt Gingrich. And though they were vastly different men, both were considered, for different reasons, to be beyond the political pale in their earlier political years. If only Mr. Reagan could behave more like George Herbert Walker Bush, and if only Newt Gingrich could behave more like Bob Michel, maybe they could succeed better at elective politics.

So, last weekend, the professionals were confidently sneering that Mrs. Palin had made a fatal mistake by giving up the governorship of Alaska, because everyone knows an aspiring candidate for higher office clings to his or her current office while running for the next one.

Well, I'm not so sure being an incumbent is an advantage if the world seems to be going to hell and government is seen to be at least part of the cause for that journey. And though many a conventional politician might be seen as a quitter if he resigned from office -- I have a very strong hunch Mrs. Palin is constitutionally incapable of being seen as a quitter. Because she is not. She is constantly taking on the biggest challenge on her horizon.

Other posts in this series:

Commentaries on the Liberation of Sarah - Pt. 1

- JP