10
   

Palin is not one of the little people

 
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Apr, 2010 02:16 pm
@gungasnake,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scarlett_Johansson

Quote:
Johansson is a Democrat and campaigned for John Kerry in the 2004 United States presidential election..... Johansson is a Democrat and campaigned for John Kerry in the 2004 United States presidential election.


http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l75/hyperion_prime/scarlett_johansson_pics_47.jpg

Your argument is invalid.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Jul, 2010 12:26 am
Quote:
Today’s additions to the category of No Good Can Ever Come of This:


The New York Times
Gail Collins


»
— “Mel Gibson is on the phone.”

— “The Bachelorette is close to selecting the man of her dreams.”

— “Bristol and Levi are back together.”

Let me go out on a limb and say that Sarah Palin was probably not happy to learn about her oldest daughter’s re-engagement to her baby-daddy via an eight-page cover spread in Us Weekly.

“It is intimidating and scary just to think about what her reaction is going to be,” Bristol confided. “Hopefully, she will jump on board.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/15/opinion/15collins.html?hp

If memory serves this is the same Sarah Palin who was sold as being worthy of being VP of the USA partly on account that she is such a great mother. This mother, who's daughter is afraid to tell that she is getting married. McCain has much to answer for before he kicks the bucket.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Jul, 2010 05:16 am
Perhaps, neither of these two kids have jobs or is in school, so getting back together will give them something to do.
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jul, 2010 07:27 am
Katie Couric recently interviewed Gloria Steinem.

Here is an excerpt from that interview on abortion:

On Sarah Palin:

COURIC: While we’re on the subject of reproductive rights, can you be a conservative feminist? Sarah Palin recently I think rankled some traditional feminists by calling herself a feminist, despite the fact she doesn’t espouse many traditional feminist points of view.

STEINEM: Well, we’re free to call ourselves whatever we wish. But I think her calling herself a feminist has mostly to do with how many votes Hillary Clinton got in the presidential race. Because yes, you can be a feminist who doesn’t agree with abortion, who would never have an abortion. But you can’t be a feminist who says that other women can’t and criminalizes abortion. 1 in 3 American women needs an abortion at some time in her life. To make that criminal and dangerous is not a feminist act and that is the position of Sarah Palin.

Alternet has the full transcript of the interview.
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jul, 2010 09:20 am
@plainoldme,
Quote:
But you can’t be a feminist who says that other women can’t and criminalizes abortion.


This is such a no-brainer, even I would have answered the same.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jul, 2010 12:22 pm
@plainoldme,
Thanks, pom, I'm going to look at that transcript...

here's the full link -
http://www.alternet.org/reproductivejustice/147478/feminism_is_alive_and_well_..._even_sarah_palin_wants_to_be_one/
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Jul, 2010 12:48 pm
@plainoldme,
Getting back together again is also lucrative for them. The Palins have all learned a lesson or two about how to cash in on things.

Quote:

For Bristol Palin and Levi Johnston, celebrity cures all
By Ruth Marcus
Wednesday, July 21, 2010

I owe Sarah Palin an apology.

Two years ago, when the news broke about her daughter's pregnancy, I slammed the newly selected vice presidential candidate for doing her daughter a terrible disservice. Palin's seeming lack of concern for Bristol's privacy brought out, though I didn't know I had one at the time, my inner Mama Grizzly.

"My first thought on hearing the news was: What was Sarah Palin thinking?" I wrote then. "Assuming, as the campaign says, that she knew about her 17-year-old's pregnancy and informed [John] McCain in advance, how could she expose her daughter to the inevitable spotlight that Palin's vice presidential nomination would bring?"

How naive of me.

Palin's failed candidacy and her ascendance to the ranks of political celebrity were, it turns out, the best thing that could have happened to Bristol Palin and Levi Johnston.

In acknowledging Bristol's pregnancy, Palin beseeched the media "to respect our daughter and Levi's privacy as has always been the tradition of children of candidates."

How naive of her.

Forget tradition. Forget privacy. In our celebrity-drenched culture, Bristol and Levi quickly figured out what Sarah and I both failed to understand: Bristol's out-of-wedlock pregnancy was not an embarrassment. It was a marketing opportunity.

Think about it. A teenage single mom with a high school diploma. A father who dropped out of high school in his junior year. These are not the makings of a stable economic path.

If Sarah had followed my advice and told McCain "thanks, but no thanks" about the vice presidency -- as she claimed to have done with federal funding for the bridge to nowhere -- Bristol would have had a future to nowhere. Levi, too.

Instead, Palin did Bristol and her boyfriend an unintentional, lucrative favor. Bristol became a paid abstinence ambassador with the Candie's Foundation, which works to prevent teen pregnancy. She signed up with a speakers bureau to preach the gospel of abstinence -- at a reported $15,000 to $30,000 a pop. She made a guest appearance on ABC Family's "The Secret Life of the American Teenager." She posed for Harper's Bazaar in Carolina Herrera and Isaac Mizrahi designs.

Levi also seized the moment. He showed all (Playgirl), told all (Vanity Fair), retracted some. He appeared in an ad for pistachios, standing next to a bodyguard and cracking open a nut with the voice-over, "Now Levi Johnston does it with protection." Classy.

And then, much as the unhappy couple had monetized their breakup, the newly -- and, I fear, temporarily -- happy couple monetized their reunion. It was announced on the cover of Us Weekly, complete with Bristol imagining the wedding, herself in white, Levi and baby Tripp in matching camouflage vests. The New York Post estimated that the couple was paid $100,000; Us Weekly denied it. Meanwhile, they are said to be peddling a reality television series.

Bristol and Levi represent the perfect, well, marriage of politics-as-infotainment and low-rent celebrity culture. Other political offspring have leveraged connections and fame to prosper outside the family business -- but at real, or at least nominally real, jobs. Think Ron Reagan Jr. as TV host, George W. Bush as baseball team owner. Other political relatives and hangers-on have capitalized on their proximity to political scandal. Think Jenny Sanford as memoirist or Andrew Young, whose best-selling account of being Official Beard for John Edwards is soon to be a major motion picture.

Bristol and Levi managed to meld these two strands of opportunism. They trade off the connection without the nuisance of an actual job even as they profit from their own tackiness, not the sordid missteps of principals. A reality show would be the perfect summation: "Bristol and Levi Minus 7," perhaps, or "Real Housewife of Wasilla."

Almost 50 years ago, in his prescient book "The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-Events in America," historian Daniel J. Boorstin lamented that "the machinery of information has brought into being a new substitute for the hero, who is the celebrity, and whose main characteristic is his well-knownness. In the democracy of pseudo-events, anyone can become a celebrity, if only he can get into the news and stay there."

Boorstin might not have imagined that things would descend to the point of Bristol, Levi and the uncommonly beautiful Tripp, but he would recognize the forces that created them. There is something quintessentially American about this grubby, unabashed entrepreneurialism.

As for Sarah Palin, Mama Grizzly took care of her cub after all. I refudiate my previous criticism.
[email protected]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/20/AR2010072004427.html
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Jul, 2010 01:21 pm
@firefly,
Yes, they have learned that lesson!
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Sun 25 Jul, 2010 10:41 pm
@plainoldme,
Quote:

Newsweek
Are Palin’s ‘Mama Grizzlies’ Feminist?

It’s nice that right-wing women are embracing feminism after demonizing the term for so long. Now let’s see what they can do.
by Eleanor Clift July 16, 2010

It’s not often that I get invited to breakfast at the Four Seasons with a baroness, and I was curious. So were a few dozen other women and three brave men who sat down to fruit and pastries, and to hear from Baroness Mary Goudie, a member of the British House of Lords and an activist on human-rights issues from sex trafficking to maternal health in Afghanistan. A feisty lady who relishes spirited debate and laughs easily and often, she won over everyone in the room as a self-appointed leader of women’s causes around the world, including getting more women on corporate boards.

These are issues that cut across political lines, but the women at the breakfast were mostly working for nonprofits, and it was clear from the conversation that their sentiments were on the progressive side. Goudie was there to promote her blog about shared global concerns and how they relate to women and children, and to create synergy with like-minded advocates across the pond. There was lots of agreement and female bonding until one of the men asked a question that he likened to tossing a grenade into the discussion.

He wanted to know what the baroness and others thought about Sarah Palin and her ability to command attention. There’s a women’s explosion happening, he said, but it’s not happening in the progressive sphere. Why is all the energy among women on the right, the cohort Palin dubs “Mama Grizzlies”? Surely progressive women love their children and their way of life and the Constitution every bit as much as the self-appointed Mama Grizzlies. Goudie ducked the question, but as the breakfast concluded and she was bidding farewell to her guests, she confided to me, “The Mama Grizzlies are winning.”

Whether they will win at the ballot box in November is an open question. Some, like Nevada Senate candidate Sharron Angle, who opposes abortion in all instances, including rape, and who wants to phase out Social Security, may prove too wacky for the voters. But win or lose elections, the Mama Grizzlies have proven adept at breaking through the noise and getting more than their share of attention, just like their benefactor, Sarah Palin. Like Palin, they have found their voice. They don’t want anybody telling them how to raise their children, or taking their guns away. Thirty years late to the battle for women’s rights, they’re claiming the mantle of feminism.

It’s nice they’re embracing feminism after demonizing the term for so long, and I welcome them to the arena. Let’s see if they can do for women what their sisters on the left have done since the ’70s, breaking down the barriers for women in all areas of American life including politics. Palin has George W. Bush’s disdain for intellectual elites, and she lives the rhetoric. She’s undisciplined intellectually, but she’s got street smarts, and they count.

She’s like Oprah staying ahead of the curve in the way she sees things. Call it EQ—emotional intelligence. She knows better than anyone in public life how to navigate the new social media, and she resonates with enough people in the Republican Party that she’s the wild card for 2012.

The women candidates she considers Mama Grizzlies would have been out there anyway; I don’t think she inspired them to run. But she’s given definition to a movement that would otherwise be just a bunch of kooks, or one-offs. She’s fenced off a wing of the GOP that she owns, and in politics, when it’s your turn to ride the rocket, that’s what you do. A Republican source says Palin is nothing new, she’s really Pat Buchanan in drag—the same issues except that her reality show is a lot more gripping. The media went overboard for Buchanan in 1996 when he won the New Hampshire primary, defeating establishment favorite Bob Dole. But the insurgent campaign of a former Nixon speechwriter can’t compare with the ongoing soap opera of the Palins. Bristol and Levi together again!

When I ran the Palin-as-Buchanan theory past another Republican, a woman this time, she said that was an insult to Buchanan, who is deeply serious and has thought about these issues. She doesn’t agree with his conclusions, but he rode the rocket at a moment in time, just as Palin is poised to do. This friend does corporate focus groups that have nothing to do with politics, and at the end she likes to ask what the participants think of various people in the news: “When you mention her name, they all smile, even if what comes out of their mouth is that she’s terrible.”

A big part of Palin’s appeal is how well she works with today’s culture, which is shallow and quick. Twitter is 140 characters—which gets me back to the serious do-gooders who worry about girls in Afghanistan. They don’t have the same ability to get to the heart of things, plus they’re dealing with issues most voters would rather avoid, and that includes Palin, who quit public office when it got harder than tweeting.
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/07/16/are-palin-s-mama-grizzlies-feminist.print.html



I particularly like the line, "A big part of Palin’s appeal is how well she works with today’s culture, which is shallow and quick".

How true.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Tue 27 Jul, 2010 03:47 pm
@firefly,
The obsession of Left-wing women with Sarah Palin is quite stunning and deserves some objective expert analysis.
I'm no expert on the psyche of a woman, but I've been around long enough to know that a good looking woman's harshest critics are always other women.
Clift is a shrill harpy who happens to be homely. Not her fault, and it really has nothing to do with the fact that she is almost always wrong, but she like many of her "sisters" have a visceral loathing for Palin that can't be explained by ideology alone.
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jul, 2010 08:11 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Clift is actually giving Palin credit for a lot of things in that article.

I really do think that women are less distracted by Palin's visual appeal, and those who disagree with her do tend to voice it in strong terms. She is a good looking woman, and, if that were not the case, I think she would have disappeared from sight when McCain lost. I do think that part of her popularity, since she was nominated as a V.P. candidate, stems from her uncommon attractiveness, particularly for a female in politics, as well as her obvious ease in front of an audience. Cameras love her, and she knows how to work a crowd. This has helped to turn her into a celebrity, and for that reason, she's gotten a disproportionate share of media attention for someone with a relatively sparse resume, and no substantial record of accomplishments while she held office.

I have no visceral loathing for Palin, but, on the other hand, I have no real regard for her either. I don't share her ideology, but I also don't think she has a well conceptualized ideology. She presents no thought out programs or approaches toward solving major problems. Despite the fact that she's had plenty of time to bone up on things, she remains uninformed and incredibly shallow. I mean, it would be one thing if she were running for president of the P.T.A., but people bandy her name about as a possible candidate for President of the United States, and I find that thought frankly ludicrous. And the media, even on the left, continues to support this possibility, and continues to trail her with cameras, even though every poll taken shows a majority of people do not feel she is qualified to be President. If she looked like Eleanor Clift, the media would not be doing that.

I want to see females in the political arena, but I guess it bothers me that this woman, who gets so much attention, sounds so shallow when she opens her mouth. I suppose that's part of her appeal in some quarters, no one can accuse her of talking over anyone's head. And her ghost written speeches don't have long boring passages really devoted to issues, they're spiced with snappy one-liners. That's good as entertainment, and as a rallying force, but not the sort of thing I can accept in a possible candidate for high office.

If the Republicans had any other exciting possible candidates, or simply any impressive new stars that really had something to say, I really think the media focus on Palin would fade fast. She helps to fill a media void, and she's a useful fund-raiser, but, even for the Republicans, she's a very mixed blessing.



0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jul, 2010 09:03 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
It takes a shallow man to say a shallow thing.

Why men think women are jealous of other women is beyond me. Jealousy is such a waste of time.

Women appreciate and admire the beauty of other women . . . when they have beauty. palin must be worried about her hair because she is wearing extensions, rats, falls and more. she also wears 6 and 7 inch heels! Just be yourself!

While not identical twins, sarah palin and Tina Fey do resemble each other. palin entered beauty contests and Tina considered herself homely.

Women who have worked hard to educate themselves worry that sarah palin's vapid speech patterns and fakery will drag us all into the past.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Thu 5 Aug, 2010 12:04 pm
Quote:

The Washington Post
The Plum Line
by Greg Sargent
August 3, 2010; 11:48 AM

Still more proof Sarah Palin is toxic outside her bubble

Okay, here's still more evidence, as if you needed it, that Sarah Palin is increasingly toxic to voters who reside outside the Palin Nation bubble.

Pew Research just released a new poll finding that more than twice as many Americans see a Palin endorsement as a negative for a Congressional candidate than view it as a positive.

The numbers: Thirty eight percent say they are less likely to back a Congressional candidate if Palin "campaigns on their behalf." Less than half that amount, 18 percent, say they are more likely to do so. Forty two percent say it would make no difference, only slightly more than see it as a downer.

No one is contesting the fact that Palin is a major draw among GOP primary voters. But the larger story here -- one that goes directly to the heart of her presidential aspirations -- is that she's successfully tightening her emotional grip on her devoted legions of supporters at the expense of just about everyone else. Far more see her as a turn-off than as a turn-on.

Palin supporters get very, very angry when you point this out. But the evidence is overwhelming at this point:

* A recent NBC/WSJ poll reached the same conclusion as today's Pew poll: It found that a majority of adults nationwide would look negatively on candidates endorsed by Palin.

* A recent Gallup poll noted a striking disconnect in public attitudes towards Palin: While her favorability rating is far higher among Republicans than that of all the other 2012 GOP contenders, she's also far and away the least liked of all the 2012 hopefuls among Americans overall.

* A recent poll of New Hampshire voters from the Dem firm Public Policy Polling found that 51 percent say they're less likely to back a Palin-endorsed candidate. Tellingly, among moderates that number jumped to 65 percent.

* Multiple other polls have found her negatives on the rise with the broader electorate.

This all supports what I've argued here before: That Palin is better off staying in her current role of celebrity quasi-candidate. This has allowed her to insulate herself from direct media cross-examination and to communicate directly to the Palin Nation mob, which is growing more transfixed. But the rest of the world continues to sour on her. It's hard to see how she'll succeed if she ever steps outside the bubble she's crafted for herself.

There's a tremendous amount of media discussion about whether Palin will run for president and about how much of a political "rock star" she has become. It's odd that the larger and arguably more important story about what she has wrought for herself never enters into the conversation.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/08/more_proof_sarah_palin_is_toxi.html
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Thu 5 Aug, 2010 12:15 pm
@firefly,
Palin will keep feeding the GOP fire going; she earns big bucks to speak, and she loves the adoration of her crowds.
0 Replies
 
hingehead
 
  2  
Reply Thu 5 Aug, 2010 06:33 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
finn wrote:
I'm no expert on the psyche of a woman


That's all you needed to say. Everything else you said was code for that.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Aug, 2010 06:51 pm
@DrewDad,
DrewDad, I just scrolled up from the last post, and found your doozy. Now, I'm dizzy!

On second look, I believe she's a figment of some guys imagination; she's too perfect. Clear skin...
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Aug, 2010 06:58 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Are you talking about Scarlett? I think that photo was airbrushed. Not that there's anything wrong with her very elegant and voluptuous body, it is just, as you pointed out, that her skin is too perfect.
0 Replies
 
CostaCoffeeBob
 
  2  
Reply Sun 5 Sep, 2010 01:00 pm
Sarah Palin? Just what does she represent? The 'Tea Partyists' - who are they and are they 'Agin the Democrats in government, or are they just agin Mr Obama?

I ask this as a British Citizen of the UK. American politics seem to be confusing. The Presidential elections 2 years ago appeared to want to see the back of Dubya Bush and the Republicans. Mr Obama and the Democrats appeared to be on a tide of popularity. Now there seems to be a concerted attack on Obama and the Democrats - or is it just against the President.

Some on the Religious Right in America appear to be willing to believe anything they are told about Mr Obama.... that he is....

(a) The Anti-Christ
(b) He eats human babies for breakfast and lives in a coffin like Dracula.
(c) He ain't human, but is an alien entity from the Klingon Home World.
(d) That he ain't even American born.... or that he's a Muslim???
(e) That he is a friend of Santa Claus, so therefore is a Commie because Santa Claus gives away free presents and does not charge hard cash for them (so he ain't a capitalist).
(f) That some American would rather see Homer Simpson or Krusty the Clown in the White House.

Wow!! Where will this take the Tea Party-ists... and would they rather see Mrs Palin, or Mrs Clinton in the White House? Is Mrs Palin a 'Red Neck Good 'ole Boy' sort?

Is Mrs Palin's grasp on foreign affairs that strong? I think that Mrs Palin's grasp and understanding appears to be somewhat simplistic - a 'Hockey Mom'. Foreign affairs for any political leaders is far more complex than a simplistic, "good 'ole boy" understanding of other countries and cultures. Mrs Palin comes across as someone who only understands a narrow filed of matters pertaining to her home State of Alaska, rather than the greater United states and all its communities.

I find all this very interesting the current political undercurrents going on in the US.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Sep, 2010 02:49 pm
@CostaCoffeeBob,
CCB, Your interpretation of American politics is spot on! How we got to this point in our history only shows how divided a people we are. We used to be a proud people who have accomplished much in this world into WWII, but the spoils of war and our economic growth did something to the American psyche.

We are now hell bent on destroying our own country with lies, innuendos, and a federal deficit that grows every minute of every day, and we're now at a point where the interest payment on the loan costs more than what we spend on national defense. All this while our schools get underfunded, our infrastructure destroys itself, and 25% of our citizens goes jobless.

The wrong-headed priorities of our governments, and our citizens, will eventually destroy this once great country.

I"m not sure all the wake-up calls we've been hearing for the past several years has done any good. Even as more Americans lose their jobs, homes, and retirement savings. We're still battling where a building should be built or not in NYC, gays and lesbians continue to fight for equal rights, and we have a war in Afghanistan that most Americans are against, but our government expands the war.

That downward slide is getting too steep for any kind of recovery.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Nov, 2010 08:58 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QF8ZKDsiaMU&feature=related
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Lipstick vs. Uppity - Discussion by A Lone Voice
Where is the outrage? - Discussion by Gelisgesti
Sarah Palin lies - Discussion by nimh
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Sarah Palin, too weird. - Discussion by dyslexia
Troopergate report: Palin abused power - Discussion by blueflame1
"I fear for my country" - Discussion by BumbleBeeBoogie
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/13/2019 at 02:10:46