Doug Giles: Why Palin Petrifies Progressives

*
Doug Giles presents his Top Ten reasons why Sarah Palin turns the heads of "progressive womyn" into Claymore mines:

1. Palin’s hot and can rock a pair of heels, hunting boots, or any garment she dons. And you can tell she knows it and likes it. Most of the ladies on the Left, however, cannot—and we all know how jealous and petty some chicks can be when they’re aesthetically upstaged (cat fight).

2. They hate Sarah because she’s supposedly anti-intellectual. However, I’d love to see Tina Fey, Katie Couric or Joy Behag go mano a mano with her on any given topic and see who comes off looking like Snooki.

3. The feministas don’t dig SP because she’s had five kids (one of whom has Down’s Syndrome) and has never considered offing any of them in her womb.

4. She believes in the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, and they hate Christians.

5. She’s a conservative, and they hate conservatives.

6. She’s insanely successful, and she did it without curtsying to their wacked weltanschauung.

7. Her husband’s not some prissy, manicured metrosexual man-child but an ass kicking Alaskan.

8. She hunts and fishes. Her motto: Shoot it. Stuff it. Hang it on a wall, baby.

9. She’s unapologetic to all of the above.

10. And finally, they know that if she ever makes it to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue that she’s going to hand the Dems their shriveled BB-sized cojones on a free market platter while the majority of the USA gives her a standing ovation.

[More]

Boom!

- JP

Lori Ziganto: Fear of Palin Exposes Feminists as Useful Idiots

*
Lori Ziganto slices and dices the two radical feminists who recently lamented whined that leftists have no Sarah Palin "of their own":

Anna Holmes of Jezebel and author Rebecca Traister, started from the premise that the left needs a “Palin of their own.” As usual for the left, everything is boiled down to gender identity politics. However, they failed miserably at their goal, due to being the perpetual victims that they are. Instead, they only exposed why leftist feminism is not only unnecessary, but also unwanted.

Let’s break down their idiocy, shall we? See, I’m willing to offer a dose of reality in response to each of their delusions. I’m good and helpful like that because, as a conservative, I believe that charity begins at home. The intelligent-deficient need aid, too.

From the start, the authors exposed their true agenda. A Palin of “our” own. Everything is about the collective with the left. They fail to realize that Sarah Palin is an individual. A person. And individuals support her, for various reasons, none of which have to do with her fancy womb. Rather, they support her for her conservative principles and her willingness to take on issues head on, without couching them in politically correct and “let’s all get along ” meaningless rhetoric. She stands up for things, unlike the current President (who never stands up for anything.) Admittedly, it is hard for him to stand up, because he’s usually too busy bowing down.

The authors further exposed their own sexist beliefs by saying that Sarah Palin was “chosen by Mr. McCain’s campaign strategists as a cynical rejoinder to the ill-starred presidential bid of Hillary Clinton.” Oh, yes, McCain chose Palin as a “cynical rejoinder” and so that he could attract disgruntled Hillary supporters. Funny, but I don’t remember any articles saying that Obama picked Biden as a “cynical rejoinder.” Nor to attract old white plagiarists with doll hair.

It's a great read, and you can view the unedited original at Human Events.

- JP

Doug Giles: Why Do Feminists Attack Sarah and Not Sharia?

*
Doug Giles, columnist, author, minister, and radio host, tees off on the feminist left and its obsessive hatred for Gov. Palin in his weekly Townhall.com column:

Given Islam’s enslavement of women and the Sharia erection of the Cordoba Initiative’s chief con man, Abdul Rauf, you’d think N.O.W. and their ilk would now be raising more Cain about this Ground Zero Mosque than they are about Sarah Palin.

Why should one think this? Well, it’s principally because Sharia kind of sha-whizzes on hard-won women’s rights, that’s sha-why. Duh. Yet we’re not hearing a whole heck of a lot from the fiery feminists regarding this Ground Zero affront and what it could entail for the girls among us. Yep, we’re hearing crickets from the virulent vixens of the lovely Left who vie for women’s rights.

And Hollywood, where are the bra burners of Tinseltown? I figured they’d be on this topic of Muslim mama oppression like Clinton on a chunky intern, but alas … nada. Why the silence, pussycats? Does it not jive with your agenda? Y’know, the fact that some rapscallion like Rauf can actually table support for Sharia law and then go balls-to-the-wall with building a Mosque within spitting distance from where we were attacked on 9/11, and then you—the supposed champions of chicks everywhere—do not go Twisted Sister over this bloody BS is both odd and revealing.

Nope, the fems’ fixation remains on Palin. Palin is the threat. Palin is the She Devil. Palin is the one who gets the nasty jabs—and not Islam and the potential spread of Sharia from sea to shining sea.

[...]

So, my question is this: From an equal rights standpoint, why in God’s name do you, the Liberal ladies who are supposedly so earnest for fair treatment for the fairer sex, go after Palin and not the women’s rights-refusing Imams who think Sharia is the shizznah?

Read Doug's full column here.

h/t: roy y, s smith

- JP

Quote of the Day (June 19, 2010)

*
Colleen Carroll Campbell:

"Unfortunately, Palin's rise has exposed some ugly truths about the way women often treat each other in public life. From the early Internet rumors about the true parentage of her son, Trig, to this week's flap over her breast size, self-professed women's rights advocates have led the way in vilifying Palin with personal attacks that would be denounced as unacceptably sexist if perpetrated by men. When Palin's name comes up, many otherwise mature women commentators seem unable to restrain themselves from reverting to junior-high mode and savaging with catty insults the classmate prettier and more popular than they."

- JP

Quote of the Day (May 14, 2010)

*
Lori Ziganto:

"True feminists are women like Sarah Palin and Nikki Haley. They are the new faces of feminism. That has a great built-in bonus, too — they are far easier on the eyes and exhibit none of that irksome hysterical screeching like the already irrelevant and soon to be extinct femogynists. They, and women like them, are coming to the forefront now... I’ll stick with Sarah Palin, Nikki Haley, Liz Cheney, Michelle Bachmann, Michelle Malkin and other strong, brilliant Moms. I believe that the left is in for a rude awakening and a nice long time out given to them from said Mommies. Leave it to Mommy to make it all better, as always!"

- JP

Quote of the Day (May 11, 2010)

*
Cassy Fiano:

"One might think that she would be a feminist dream. She’s smart, she’s accomplished, and she’s got a family. She is the epitome of a woman having it all. She’s got a loving husband... She’s got five beautiful children, yet she still has a powerful career. She thinks for herself, took on her own party in Alaska and beat the corruption, and has made her own way in the so-called boys club of politics. But does any of this matter to feminists? No, to them Sarah Palin can’t be a feminist simply because she’s pro-life... It’s funny, because upon a time, feminists despised abortion. Susan B. Anthony was [adamantly] anti-abortion and Elizabeth Cady Stanton rightly called it infanticide. Modern feminists are nothing but extremist liberal harpies who have hijacked the title of 'feminist' and are no more pro-woman than Margaret Sanger was pro-black."

- JP

Quote of the Day (May 10, 2010)

*
Douglas Ernst:

"Hamas let the women out of the house the other day to participate in a few track and field events. Are you impressed? I’m not... I highly suggest reading the book Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia, by Ahmed Rashid if you’d like to see the side of the story guys like Neal Gabler are inclined to downplay or ignore in favor of sliming retired folks attending Tea Parties. While it doesn’t focus solely on women, there are some choice nuggets of information you’ll be able to file away for future encounters with American (liberal) feminists. Although, these days they really only scream bloody murder when Sarah Palin opens her mouth, as opposed to the actions of jihadi head choppers and their ideological half-brothers actually causing someone to scream…bloody murder!"

- JP

Alana Marie Burke: Who's afraid of Sarah Palin?

Redding, California Record Searchlight contributing columnist Alana Marie Burke contends that Sarah Palin is "the best kind of feminist":

There are numerous reasons why so many liberal women hate and fear Sarah Palin. However, with the exception of her pro-life stance and perhaps her Christianity, it is not really her "principle-centered policies" that cause the foam-at-the-mouth hissyfits that afflict Palinophobes. They hate her on a much more personal level.

Palin's folksy demeanor, faulty diction and lack of elitist education, combined with pervasive appeal, are what drive her haters nuts. Ultra-liberal feminists detest that a moose-hunting everymom was able to rise to the top of the heap when so many elitist feminists rest on their lily-white laurels and pat themselves on the back for their "enlightened" political views while accomplishing very little.

[...]

Despite their intentions to tear Palin down, her hate club is doing her a great favor with their incessant chatter, which inflames her base and keeps her in the news. If the chatter continues, before they know it, Palin might be on that 2012 ticket. On the other hand, if Palin chooses not to run for national office, Oprah is retiring in two years and, given the substantial interest in "Going Rogue," Palin might want to take a shot at her spot. Someone get my liberal readers some water; they just choked on their own vitriol.

Palin particularly annoys feminists who can't tolerate the idea that a woman with conviction, guts, ambition and the resources to gain cultural and political power is a conservative and not on board with the militant feminist agenda. What they won't acknowledge is that Palin is the best kind of feminist - one who believes in equality and empowering women without detracting from femininity, which yes, can include babies and husbands without being subordinate.

Ms. Burke's full column is here.

The Making Of An Unlikely Palinista

As someone who describes herself as black, liberal, feminist and a former ACORN/Project Vote employee, Anita MonCrief seems the unlikeliest of Palinistas. She backed Hillary Clinton during the primaries and then gave her support to Obama when it became clear that he had the votes necessary to wind the nomination.

Writing for Hot Air's Green Room, Moncrief says her reaction when John McCain chose Sarah Palin as his running mate, her initial reaction was one of anger:

"With all the liberal self-righteousness that I could muster, I attacked her experience, her knowledge of foreign affairs and all things Palin. It was a purely irrational response born out of the bitterness of not being able to have Hilary Clinton as my candidate. I ignored Palin’s innate charm, grace and beauty. I found myself secretly laughing with her and admiring her spunk but would never admit it."

What changed Moncrief's opinion of Sarah Palin?

As the fight against ACORN became ugly and people began to spread lies and take sides, I finally understood Palin. She is a lightening rod for anyone who does not stand for truth and wants to maintain a status quo or move toward socialism.

When I found out the title of her book was Going Rogue, that stuck in my head, because that was the gist of the situation. Palin defies expectations, speaks from the heart and shoots from the hip. As former McCain staffers began to attack her, I identified with her.

If The Arctic Fox can "Palinize" someone as liberal and feminst as this woman, just think how many independents she has the potential to win over! Read Anita Moncrief's article in its entirety here.

- JP

Independents Abandoning The Dems: A Case Study

We've commented often on the "boomerang" effect of how the radical Leftists are scaring independents away from the Democrats in droves. The hatred and venom the Left never ceases to display for Sarah Palin and any others it perceives as threats to their false gods, including Obama The Almighty, has gone beyond the point of diminishing returns. Even some liberals are being turned off by the radical leftist attacks, as Senneth chronicles in this post on The New Agenda blog:

I have been one of those loyal Democrats most of my life, a left wing liberal, who supported Hillary’s bid for the presidency with joy and fervor. I was dismayed and furious over the treatment Hillary received at the hands of the mainstream media, the Obama campaign, the Democratic National Committee, progressive talk radio, and some of the more prominent Democrats. I actually couldn’t believe what I was seeing. Cognitive dissonance displayed and experienced.

Soon the attacks moved to Governor Palin and her family, not her political positions or ideology, mind you, but her children, her family. It was truly an epiphany for me and lots of other people who, like me, became PUMAs and then Independents, leaving the Democratic Party in droves.

The most troubling of all these attacks for me, at any rate, were those from women – feminists – whom I’d respected for years. Women who had been leaders in the women’s movement and whose voices carried weight. I’ve been a women’s rights activist for years, a leader in my local community and state and the comments and attacks coming from these women leaders were not just troubling, they caused me to rethink my deeply- held beliefs and raised some questions for me as well.

[...]

This brings me to the point of this whole opinion piece: If we, as women, conspire and are complicit in helping other woman fail through attacks, ridicule, and judgmental behavior, how will we – all of us who are women – ever get ahead?

Read this thoughtful op-ed in full here.

Meanwhile, keep pouring on the vitriol against Sarah Palin, leftists. The more you attack this woman, the more thoughtful independents are turning their backs on you in disgust.

- JP

Why leftist harpies hate conservative women

Why do left-wing women hate their counterparts on the conservative side? A number of conservatives have endeavored to explain the phenomenon. Our fellow Texans at Lone Star Times are the latest to give it a shot, and we think they are right on target:

What is it about the female of the species on the port side of the ideological divide that allows them to be seized by fits of hysterical snarkiness and trivial banalities like post-pubescent 14 year old girls ? Maureen Dowd, Jane Hamsher, Ana Marie Cox, et al all seem to regress into a state of suspended eighth-grade angst when confronted by a Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman or now, it seems, Liz Cheney, the latest source of their paroxysms.

The LST piece quotes Ron Radosh, who opines that Liz Cheney's opposition to Obama's foreign policy is what has Mo Dowd's undies in an uproar. Next it references Noemie Emery, who says Liz Cheney is a pedigreed Palin -- a Super Sarah with beltway, rather than backwoods, roots. Finally, the article links to Jennifer Rubin, who believes that strong, successful, feminine, conservative women with loving alpha male husbands and gaggles of children so challenge the leftist stereotype of feminism that liberal women just can't deal with it and lash out those women on the right who have everything the leftist women don't: 

Liz Cheney has a husband and five children. So does Sarah Palin. So does [Michele Bachmann].

Hmmm.

And all three of these women manage successful public careers, are fearless in defending their opinions and find no obstacles in their chosen positions as leaders in the conservative movement.

Who would have thought it ?

- JP

Cleanup on Aisle 9 in the Women's Studies section

A heartwarming tale from Life in 3D:

A woman came in last night looking for a book by some feminist author that I had never heard of before, no big surprise there. So, I look it up in our search engine and the computer says that we might have it in the store. MIGHT have it, not WILL. So I tell her that I can check our inventory and see if it’s there and show her the section it would be in.

But no, this shopper would rather find it herself. Ten minutes later, the bookstore clerk has another encounter with the same shopper, who again refuses help. So a little later the clerk has a third encounter with the shopper who...

...is standing in the middle of Independent Readers YELLING “Is there SOMEONE ACTUALLY WORKING here who can HELP ME!!!!”

This time the shopper does not refuse the offer of help. On the way to the women’s studies section, the customer complains that such an important section should be near the front of the store, not upstairs. She also complains because the feminist author’s book is not on display. After all, the author writes a column for -- cue the herald trumpets -- The New York Times! 

When a search of the women's section fails to turn up a copy of that book, the customer goes all Stalinist on the clerk...

"...and repeats how wonderful this writer is and how we should all be required to read her crap and then says “Why don’t you have 900 copies here?!?! You have plenty of room! Her book should be displayed all over the store to inspire women everywhere about what they can do!”

Unable to resist the temptation, the clerk replies...

“Well, ma’am, we were going to but we’re saving that spot for Sarah Palin.”

I can imagine the PA announcement, "Cleanup on Aisle 9 in the Women's Studies section, please. A customer's head has exploded..."

h/t: Rick Moore at Holy Coast

- JP

Why they hate, hate, hate her

"Everybody Expects…the Liberal Inquisition!" is great stuff from Fire Breathing Christian. An excerpt:

For the American left, reasons for fear and loathing of Sarah Palin are legion; almost too numerous to list. But we’ll try anyway:

She is a woman (which would normally be a plus). She is a fiscal conservative (which offsets much of the aforementioned benefit of being female). She is a social conservative (this more than finishes off any remaining ‘female benefit’). She comes from humble roots and embraces a classically Judeo-Christian ethic. She is a generally happy wife and mother of five. Making matters worse on the last point, the youngest of her children, Trig, was prenatally diagnosed with Down syndrome. The problem for the secular left wasn’t the diagnosis itself; it was that Mrs. Palin had subsequently allowed her son to live.

For this crime she could not be forgiven.

Little Trig became something of an unintended lightning rod as a result. The sweet little boy born to a loving, honorable Christian mother presented to the American left a clear and present threat to the very heart of its liberal orthodoxy…by simply living.

With their foundations shaken and insecurities exposed, ‘progressive’ women lashed out, leading the charge in a wild attempt to eviscerate Sarah Palin. Their seething hatred was proudly and forcefully displayed at every opportunity.

South Carolina Democrat Party chairwoman Carol Fowler pronounced that John McCain had chosen a running mate “whose primary qualification seems to be that she hasn’t had an abortion.” The Washington Post’s Wendy Doniger observed that Palin’s “greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman.” ‘Comedian’ Margaret Cho joined the crowd of merry, blissfully content feminists by chiming in with:

“They shouldn’t have the right to call themselves Christian, for they have no Christ-like attributes. I am a feminist and a Christian, and when I see Sarah Palin, I see neither. And it’s official: She is evil.”

Through this parade of insult and vilification, our nation was exposed to the full force and character of secular liberal womanhood. And it wasn’t pretty. Then again, secular feminism rarely is or wants to be.

Other than the customary "Follow the link and read the whole thing," all we can manage to say in our state of shock is, Margaret Cho is a Christian? Forgive us for being judgmental, but we don't see using filthy language and publicly obsessing over sex as being particularly Christ-like. At least not in any of the Gospels we read. But we did hear that some liberals were re-writing the scriptures. How convenient...

- JP

Aw jeez! Not THIS again...

Remember the old leftist lie about how Sarah Palin was allegedly charging rape victims in Alaska for rape kits? A rape kit is a collection of items used by medical personnel to collect and preserve physical evidence following a sexual assault. The bogus story, first circulated on nutroots websites with reputations for distortion and outright lies, percolated up into the liberal "mainstream" media, which has a reputation for simply reprinting material from their nutroots cronies without bothering to check for such pesky stuff as validity.

That the Big Liberal Lie has been thoroughly debunked matters little to most "feminist" groups of the deranged Left, who perpetuate the myth, according to House of Erastosthenes:

"They’re bringing up the thoroughly debunked urban legend about Sarah Palin and the rape kits — again. And they’ll do it again and again, anytime Palin’s name is brought back into the news and the general public reaction isn’t already quite as negative and visceral as they’d like it to be."

The reaction from conservatives is, "Aw jeez! Not this again." But we shouldn't be surprised. The tactic is right out of Alinsky's Rules for Radicals:

RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

But we shouldn't lay all of the blame on the radical feministas. Hey, if it works for Obama...

- JP

Leftist women's groups don't want to talk about it

Fox News' Greta van Susteren had an idea. With David Lecherman's misogynistic jokes one of the day's hottest topics, surely she would have little trouble getting a representative from one of the Leftist women's groups to accept an invitation to appear on her show to discuss the issue of sexism. After all, feminists say they are against sexism, so one or two of them should jump at the chance to get their message out to millions of viewers, right?

Well, Greta's name isn't Shirley, and no leftist woman's group appears to want to talk about the creepy Dave Lecherman and his sexist jokes:

We called Ms Magazine and they declined. They don't want to comment on ON THE RECORD at 10pm about the very issue I expect to be their mission: fighting sexism. Incidentally, one of my very good friends was the editor in chief of Ms Magazine until a few years ago and I know this is a topic that each woman at that magazine ought to have the courage to take Letterman and CBS on.

We then called "NOW" and we were told that NOW President Kim Gandy is unavailable (personal emergency) but that NOW will be posting something on their website. We asked for a substitute to appear on ON THE RECORD for Gandy and no luck. NOW has a chance to go around the world and speak out on this topic tonight in prime time ON THE RECORD at 10pm but is declining. Go figure..

We called the Democratic Women's Leadership Forum -- and they won't return our call.

Well, I'm shocked -- SHOCKED, I tell you -- that feminist groups appear to put leftist politics ahead of the shabby treatment of women and girls by dirty old men. My gosh, that would make them hypocrites!

Oh, snap... that's right. I must have forgotten my own saying that hypocrisy is a prerequisite for leftism.

Update 1: Props to NOW, the National Organization for Women, which we have just learned has voted Dave Lecherman into its "Media Hall of Shame." Thank you, Lisa Bennett, NOW Communications Director, for putting principle ahead of politics. Reaction from Allah and Ed on this latest development in the "Chronicles of Creepy Dave" is here. Moe Lane weighs in here.

Update 2: I'm no more surprised by the NOW announcement than I am by this tweet from Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO):

"Letterman jokes about Palin's daughter. Way over the line. If it were my daughters I'd be furious. He should seriously apologize."

Having just moved back to Texas about four months ago after seven years in Missouri, I'm one libertarian-leaning conservative who is no fan of McCaskill. But she's right on this issue, and she has the courage to stand up against the hard-left crazies who control her party in defense of Gov. Palin and her daughters. For that show of political courage and intellectual honesty, I must tip my hat to the junior senator from the Show Me State.

Update 3: Yet another advocacy group has denounced Lecherman:

Deborah Donovan Rice, executive director of Stop It Now, an organization aiming to prevent the sexual abuse of children, also denounced Letterman's jokes and praised Palin's response as "spot on."

"This wasn't the usual fun, creative stuff I usually see on Letterman," Rice told FOXNews.com. "This really dropped below the bar."

- JP