In case there was any doubt, Sarah Palin is bat shit crazy. - Page 20 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-16-2009, 09:22 PM   #286
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 09:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoMac View Post
You know, Mr. Supastar, I agree with you on most points as we have similar political views .


This thread has been rather bizarre
people that have always claimed they are against sexism

bending over backwards to defend it, because it is targeted at Palin


people that have been indifferent to it in the past
now are keenly aware and standing up and fighting it, because it is directed at someone they support


and then are a few that are consistent, that just say it is wrong
and their opinion is not contingent upon the parties involved

in the group, I put, The View women.

and The National Organization for Women

Quote:
Letterman said he was referring to Palin's 18-year-old daughter, Bristol -- not the 14-year-old daughter who actually accompanied Palin on her New York trip. Letterman said "I recognize that these are ugly" jokes. NOW agrees. Comedians in search of a laugh should really know better than to snicker about men having sex with teenage girls (or young women) less than half their age.

The sexualization of girls and women in the media is reaching new lows these days -- it is exploitative and has a negative effect on how all women and girls are perceived and how they view themselves. Letterman also joked about what he called Palin's "slutty flight attendant look" -- yet another example of how the media love to focus on a woman politician's appearance, especially as it relates to her sexual appeal to men. Someone of Letterman's stature, who appears on what used to be known as "the Tiffany Network" (CBS), should be above wallowing in the juvenile, sexist mud that other comedians and broadcasters seem to prefer.

On that point, it's important to note that when Chelsea Clinton was 13 years old she was the target of numerous insults based on her appearance. Rush Limbaugh even referred to her as the "White House dog." NOW hopes that all the conservatives who are fired up about sexism in the media lately will join us in calling out sexism when it is directed at women who aren't professed conservatives.
__________________

__________________
deep is offline  
Old 06-16-2009, 09:28 PM   #287
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 06:57 AM


(and to be fair, a few who are consistent in never having given a flip over either)
__________________

__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 06-16-2009, 10:48 PM   #288
Blue Crack Distributor
 
VintagePunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In a dry and waterless place
Posts: 55,732
Local Time: 12:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluer White View Post
What does Palin's embarrassing campaign interviews...or even her assertion that Obama palled around with known domestic terrorists...

have to do with her teenage daughters?
You know, I've actually thought long and hard about this point, and if you don't mind me rambling a bit, I'll explain how I see it, and how I came to those conclusions.

First off, I'm a huge Palin detractor. I think the woman is unintelligent, WAY out of her league in national politics, she tries to be manipulative, she's an opportunist, she has no self-awareness, she lacks social intelligence, and on and on. I also think that she appealed to the lowest common denominator in the US, she was horribly divisive, and she was the farthest from what the US needed in a politician at the time.

Beyond all that though, I try to be as fair-minded as possible, and I try to keep any potential hypocritical tendencies in check. By that token, I feel that male and female politicians should be judged by the same standards, and held to the same standards of behaviour. In light of that, I've never criticized her for trotting her family out on the campaign trail the way that some people have, because male politicians do the same thing, it's part of campaigning. I also never questioned her ability to lead in light of the fact that she has a developmentally disabled infant, because in the same situation, no one would even consider that a father should forgo running for public office.

Still, there was something that just didn't sit right with me in the way that she presented her family and herself to the American public. It was almost as if she was marketed as being a mother who was running for VP, as opposed to a VP candidate who also has a family. The Republican base seemed to eat that up though, and she ran with it. In that way, I think you can say that she exploited her family for personal and political gain, talking about them when she should have been discussing policy, allowing the public and media to become overly familiar with them. Given the circumstances of her family at the time, perhaps a more private approach - more of a separation of the family and the political - would have been prudent. When your public life and your family life overlap as hers did, the target that (fairly or unfairly) seems to point at all politicians becomes diffused, and reaches out to their families, too, unless that politician sets clear boundaries, which she did not. And now, Bristol's become a spokesperson, a public figure, in her own right, independent of her mother. In the media and entertainment climate of our society, that often leaves one open to unwanted/undeserved comments and scrutiny.
__________________
VintagePunk is offline  
Old 06-16-2009, 10:59 PM   #289
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 10:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoMac View Post
You know, Mr. Supastar, I agree with you on most points as we have similar political views. But your inability to admit that you're wrong, that someone else may actually have a valid point, makes you just as bad as those you accuse of not understanding your point.

It's absolutely baffling to me, and must make you a very miserable person to have a debate with in real life.
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 06-16-2009, 11:05 PM   #290
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 10:57 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post

, The View women.

and The National Organization for Women



even the staunchest of her foes can check their hatred and call a spade a spade.

FYM-different story.

<>
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 06-16-2009, 11:05 PM   #291
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 12:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
A-Rod, who doesn't have any connections with hookers
Actually some say he has had such connections. Anyway..the Spitzer thing sure implied hooker/escort in my mind. It certainly wouldn't mean just governors of NY.

Maybe Dave will apologize every night..

NY Times

Sarah Palin was hardly David Letterman’s best friend the past couple of weeks, though she did accept his apology Tuesday for what she had labeled a tasteless joke about her daughter and which Mr. Letterman described as “beyond flawed.” But the Alaska governor has surely done the CBS late-night star some big favors in the ratings.

Monday night, when Mr. Letterman offered his extended apology to Governor Palin and her family, he had his best night yet in the continuing late-night competition against NBC’s new “Tonight” show star, Conan O’Brien. In preliminary national ratings, Mr. Letterman pulled in 700,000 more viewers than Mr. O’Brien Monday night, 3.9 million to 3.2 million, his biggest margin yet over his new competitor. Mr. Letterman routinely trailed the former “Tonight” host Jay Leno by a million viewers or more.

But as he has since his start on June 1, Mr. O’Brien was dominant among the younger viewers most television networks prefer — because most advertisers do — winning by margins exceeding 100 per cent in categories like viewers between the ages of 18 and 34.

Mr. O’Brien’s lead in the most-watched category, adults 18 to 49, shrank a bit to 30 percent (it had been as much as 60 percent) and Mr. Letterman was most competitive in the category of adults 25 to 54, where he trailed Mr. O’Brien by just one-tenth of a ratings point.

But the debate surrounding his comments about Governor Palin, which received widespread news coverage Monday evening leading up to the telecast, seemed to create extra interest in Mr. Letterman’s show Monday night. A protest against Mr. Letterman by supporters of Governor Palin attracted a modest crowd outside Mr. Letterman’s theater on Broadway Tuesday afternoon.

Mr. Letterman planned a special Top 10 list: “Top Ten Things Overheard at the Fire David Letterman Rally.”
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 06-16-2009, 11:10 PM   #292
Blue Crack Distributor
 
VintagePunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In a dry and waterless place
Posts: 55,732
Local Time: 12:57 AM
Oh, Diamond...

CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time Blog Archive - Letterman protest draws more media than activists � - Blogs from CNN.com

Letterman protest draws more media than activists
Posted: 09:04 PM ET

Fifteen protesters showed up Tuesday outside of the studio where David Letterman tapes his talk show program.

NEW YORK (CNN) — A protest rally against David Letterman over a failed joke about Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and her daughter attracted more members of the media than protesters Tuesday afternoon.

A crowd of 15 protesters upset with the late night comic held signs and occasionally shouted as they stood across the street from Letterman's studio.

But they were often hidden from view by the more than 35 members of the media there to cover the protest, and out-shouted by a few very vocal counter-protesters.

Radio talk show host John Ziegler — who is behind the FireDavidLetterman.com Web site that organized the protest, and who is an outspoken supporter of the former Republican vice presidential candidate — told reporters that the turnout at the event was not representative of the number of people who have responded to his site and e-mailed.

He also argued that Letterman should have been fired, and the only reasons that he hasn't been fired were "the media's love of David Letterman and the media's distrust and, I believe, hatred of Sarah Palin."

He also called Letterman's apology — issued on Monday's program and accepted by Palin — bogus and said that the comedian should make a charitable donation to an organization of Palin's choosing.

Ziegler made a film about the 2008 presidential campaign called "Media Malpractice: How Obama Got Elected and Palin Was Targeted."

________

I guess the American public was just so overwhelmed with caring, they couldn't bring themselves to leave their homes.
__________________
VintagePunk is offline  
Old 06-16-2009, 11:24 PM   #293
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 12:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post

even the staunchest of her foes can check their hatred and call a spade a spade.

FYM-different story.
So is a spade a spade regarding those things you've said about Secretary Of State Clinton-or do you say those things for shits and giggles, just to get a reaction, cause you're bored..all of the above?
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 06-17-2009, 12:04 AM   #294
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 10:57 PM
Referring to a female polictical candidate as a 'shrew' and having illict sex with a teenager boarding on rape are two entirely different items.

Maybe in your world, theyre the same.


One is dispicable, the other is not.


You can draw your own conclusions.

<>
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 06-17-2009, 12:07 AM   #295
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,238
Local Time: 11:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
One is dispicable, the other is not.
To some, both are.
__________________
Diemen is offline  
Old 06-17-2009, 01:07 AM   #296
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 10:57 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diemen View Post
To some, both are.
Therein lies the chaism seperating two schools of thought of-

Liberalism vs Conservatism:

One finds describing a public polictical person's behavorial traits (who can defend herself) equal to or as same joking about the subject of potentially raping a teenage girl, and besmirching her character on national TV-(who can't defend herself).

One is much more grievous than the other.

It's that simple.

<>
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 06-17-2009, 02:11 AM   #297
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,238
Local Time: 11:57 PM
First, I never said the two were equal. I said that some find both things despicable, not equally despicable, so quit trying to rewrite my argument into something it's not. Just because one is worse than the other doesn't mean both aren't disparaging and misogynistic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
One finds describing a public polictical person's behavorial traits (who can defend herself)
Oh, so you were merely describing her behavioral traits, now were you? And you really think calling a women a shrew is just describing her behavior?

This is exactly why it's so hard to give your opinion much weight. Do you think that the rest of us in here have no memory? One minute you're complaining about people:

Quote:
disparging women in misogynistic ways
when not only have you done the same in the past (on more than one occasion), but in this very same thread you demonstrate that you still continue to do it. Which highlights that this really isn't an issue about respecting women for you, it's false outrage to try and force this into a liberal/conservative issue.

Again, it does not matter that one is worse than the other. If you're going to get up in arms that someone is disparaging women, your position might look more credible if you're not guilty of doing the same, but at a lesser level. Unless you think it's ok to disparage women as long as you don't go past a certain point.
__________________
Diemen is offline  
Old 06-17-2009, 04:03 AM   #298
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 10:57 PM
again context:

a) hillary's abrasive personality can be considered as shrew like to many american voters -yes. being that hillary is in the field of politics, she doesn't have the luxury of hiding behind gender, it comes with the territory on how one is perceived, therefore she could be described as a shrew or shrew-like, and she has the ratings to prove this public perception.

b) because a polictical candidate is described or perceived a certain way by voters of the opposite sex, doesn't entitle the candidates' supporters to disparge them as sexist or misogynistic- that would make the candidates' supporters guilty of gross inaccuracies and name calling.

c) letterman was both sexist and misogynistic in what he said about sarah palin being slutty and joking about the virtue or implied lack therof of gov. palin's daughter(s).

d) that you're attempting to lump me in the same category as letterman would be unjust and inaccurate to any fairminded observer.

e) as i understand it: a sexist is a person usually male who thinks a woman's role is only in the home, or child rearing. a misogynist is a male who sees and views women only as sexual objects to gratify men. i don't see myself fitting either of those descriptions/definitions.



<>

ps-

i think in the future i will refrain from describing hillary as a shrew, being that it gets some posters up in arms.
i will say that i don't care for her politics and i also don't care for her style because it comes across as abrasive and obtrusive-but i wont call her a shrew anymore, innocous as the word is to those outside of FYM.
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 06-17-2009, 04:53 AM   #299
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 06:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by VintagePunk View Post
It was almost as if she was marketed as being a mother who was running for VP, as opposed to a VP candidate who also has a family.
I agree with you here, but I don't think it's relevant to whether or not Letterman's comments were sexist and/or unduly tasteless. Neither she nor her daughter (I mean Bristol Palin here) chose to have her daughter's pregnancy become a major media story, however inevitable the realities of presidential campaign coverage might be said to have made that outcome. And being a 'family values icon' (or the child of one) isn't a worthy justification for that kind of invasiveness--there's a reason why hounding or smearing children of public figures is generally considered beyond the 'MSM' pale, and it's not meant to be contingent on their parents' convictions or behavior. Besides, this wasn't a case of savagely brilliant humor artfully teasing out some complex point about the role of gender and motherhood in campaign propaganda; it was a garden-variety cheap shot of the tried-and-true "Your [female relative] is a slut" genre. Which of course is one classic form of exploiting sexism to attack someone--typically someone disliked for reasons having little or nothing to do with said relative's sexual behavior. It is true, as you say, that Bristol Palin has since become somewhat of an independently 'famous' figure, but realistically, whatever admiration or contempt she inspires remains heavily bound up in who her mother is.

I do agree that some aspects of Palin's response--the rhetoric of 'joking about rape,' which she knows full well effectively implies finding actual violent sexual assaults funny, or calling Letterman 'perverted,' as if one need be psychologically disturbed to be capable of sexism or crudeness--came across as overwrought, disingenuous, or both; reading those particular character attributes into his 'joke' simply wasn't credible, and there was plenty enough to object to without resorting to that.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 06-17-2009, 06:11 AM   #300
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 06:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
as i understand it: a sexist is a person usually male who thinks a woman's role is only in the home, or child rearing. a misogynist is a male who sees and views women only as sexual objects to gratify men. i don't see myself fitting either of those descriptions/definitions.
Just as a little terminological clarification--literally, a misogynist is someone who hates women, just as a misanthrope is someone who hates humanity in general (and a misandrist someone who hates men in general). While this could certainly entail difficulties relating to women as anything beyond sex objects, the underlying concept really has more to do with generalized, deep-seated feelings of anger and resentment towards women categorically. A sexist, by contrast--at least with reference to women--is simply someone who holds discriminatory views or attitudes towards women, not necessarily consciously...could be anything from believing women categorically unfit for any work except homemaking and childrearing, to 'merely' displaying a pervasive tendency to treat women in whichever sphere in a patronizing way, to applying double standards, again in whichever sphere (e.g., judging female coworkers who show little flair for fashion 'dumpy' and therefore not professionally up to snuff, while shrugging off the same attribute in male coworkers). What misogyny (or misandry) and sexism, like other discriminatory 'isms,' have in common is essentialism: the tendency to assume all members of a given group possess certain qualities--often negative ones, but they could also be theoretically positive ones which become straitjacketing *when enforced as a behavioral standard*--and to then cite these supposedly inherent qualities (or individuals' failures to conform fully to them) as justifications for unequal treatment of said group or, again, members of it who fail to conform to the traditionally expected stereotype.
__________________

__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Closed Thread

Tags
sarah palin

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com