Responding to Gail Collins ridicules Palin; ducks Obama questions, a commenter writes - - -
Palin should prepare for a wave of sexist and misogynist comments and the vast majority will come from the Left. Most of the knives stuck in her back will be placed their by Lefties (including many feminists). The few placed by Republicans will be put there by the crooks in Alaska that she smoked out and sent packing.
She is the sort of woman that "mainstream" academic feminists hate the most. She commits many "sins."
1. She rejects the academic feminist trinity of misandry, chronic anger, and victimization.
2. She is completely comfortable being a woman. She is not debilitated by the secret self-loathing so common in radical feminists.
3. She got married and has children, clear evidence that she suffers from false consciousness and submits to American phallocracy.
4. Rather than be a victim, she takes action and gets things done. Female success does not bring success to the feminist movement (as defined by the academics) because it is about wallowing in the righteous anger and self-pity that comes with victimhood.
Fortunately, the "mainstream" academic feminists -- the well fed, generously compensated, and expensively educated shrews of journalism, academia, and feminist organizations -- are a minority.
There is a larger and more relevant group of feminists. I call them "empirical world" feminists -- women like my wife and daughter who live and work in the real world. They think this woman is great because she has adhered to her principles AND gotten things done in politics.
This is no easy task and Sarah Palin is no everyday Governor.
We have more to learn about Sarah Palin and she might or might not be the right person for the job. But, it is appalling that the putatively open-minded and pluralistic sages of the Left have had such a Pavlovian response to someone who is actually living out feminist ideals.
I expected more of an NYT editor but should have known better by now.
Folks, within minutes of receiving that on-the-money comments, I was alerted to this post by Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs - - -
Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 10:57:26 am PST
Sarah Palin (GOV-Alaska-Republican), supports gay rights, says Anchorage Daily News.
Quote "Gov. Sarah Palin vetoed a bill Thursday that sought to block the state from giving public employee benefits such as health insurance to same-sex couples."
Quote ""It is the Governor’s intention to work with the legislature and to give the people of Alaska an opportunity to express their wishes and intentions whether these benefits should continue," the statement from Palin’s administration said."
Coghill said he’s interested in a new plan that would allow state employees to designate one person — maybe a same-sex partner, but also possibly a family member or roommate — who would be eligible for state-paid benefits. But the employee would have to pay to add that person to his or her benefits."
Sarah Palin’s veto gave gays the same rights as married couples in Alaska.
A vote for McCain/Palin is a vote for gay marriage.
Interesting. There’s nothing else on the page. This sure looks like the work of the dastardly right-wing anti-gay attack machine, doesn’t it?
But look who’s really behind this.
In the Linux console, if you enter the following commands, you can learn the secrets of a political dirty trick. First, look up the host of ‘sarahpalingayrights.com’ to get the site’s IP address.
sarahpalingayrights.com has address 184.108.40.206
Then use the same command to look up the domain name pointer of that IP address.
220.127.116.11.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer obamadefense.com
Well, well. “Obamadefense.com,” eh?
And what happens if you enter obamadefense.com on your browser’s address line?
Why, you’re redirected to none other than FightTheSmears.com, the official Barack Obama site that’s supposed to be defending him against smears.
Looks like they may have a second purpose: to generate a few smears of their own.
Folks, let’s hope the Obama campaign is not behind the smear.
Team Obama needs to respond immediately to what Johnson has posted.
While we await their response, here in full is the actual news story on which the smear is based. You may not believe what a distortion the smear is -----
Same-sex benefits ban gets Palin veto
FIRST ONE: Attorney general told her the bill was unconstitutional.
By KYLE HOPKINS
Anchorage Daily News
(Published: December 29, 2006)
Gov. Sarah Palin vetoed a bill Thursday that sought to block the state from giving public employee benefits such as health insurance to same-sex couples.
In the first veto of an administration that isn't yet a month old, Palin said she rejected the bill despite her disagreement with a state Supreme Court order earlier this month that directed the state to offer benefits to same-sex partners of state employees.
Advice from her new attorney general said the bill passed by the Legislature was unconstitutional, she said.
"Signing this bill would be in direct violation of my oath of office," Palin said in a prepared statement released by her administration Thursday night.
For supporters, the Supreme Court ruling was considered a victory for gay rights and civil liberties. To opponents, it equated same-sex partners with married couples, despite the state's ban on gay marriage.
The Republican-controlled Legislature passed the bill barring regulations implementing same-sex benefits during a November special session. The measure would have prevented the commissioner of administration from taking action on the new benefits plan.
Rep. John Coghill, R-North Pole, sponsored the bill. In a phone interview Thursday night, he said that Palin, also a Republican, faced a constitutional dilemma but he's still disappointed by her veto.
"I would have like to have seen her stand up to the courts," Coghill said.
The Supreme Court ruled Dec. 19 that the state has to offer the benefits starting Jan. 1.
"It is the Governor's intention to work with the legislature and to give the people of Alaska an opportunity to express their wishes and intentions whether these benefits should continue," the statement from Palin's administration said.
Coghill said he's interested in a new plan that would allow state employees to designate one person -- maybe a same-sex partner, but also possibly a family member or roommate -- who would be eligible for state-paid benefits. But the employee would have to pay to add that person to his or her benefits.
On Dec. 20, Palin signed a bill that calls for an advisory vote on whether there should be a constitutional amendment denying benefits to same-sex couples. The vote, set for a special election on April 3, will be nonbinding but is intended to help guide legislators, Palin has said.
Palin's veto wasn't a sure thing, said Allison Mendel, a private lawyer who handled an Alaska Civil Liberties Union lawsuit that led to the Supreme Court ruling:
"There was a lot of doubt. And she put off doing it for a while, obviously studying the issue."