For some reason, Corrente allows a female governor (Sarah Palin, naturally) to be smeared with "sexpot." The smear comes from "Senior Fellow" Sarah who, when not blogging incessantly on football, likes to claim she voted Hillary Clinton for president.
She did not vote.
When she was telling that lie and encouraging others to do the same, we wondered if the idiot grasped that in some -- not all -- states, voting for Hillary (not a candidate) would mean the vote would go to Barack? Who knows with Sarah?
But last week she was attacking Sarah Palin again, spewing her hate again, and some were holding her accountable. As always, the strongest stands were taken by the ones you've learned to count on:
Abusrd
By gqmartinez on Thu, 12/11/2008 - 2:20pm
Palin's pick wasn't a ploy for women. She helped energize a good deal of the GOP base. Just because Democrats hate Palin doesn't meant that the GOP did, and with a GOP in tatters, McCain needed anything he could get.
You're comment comes across as more of a grope than McCain's pick of Palin. But I'm sure you can find a way to dehumanize Palin. After all there are claims that she is a pawn of the dominionist movement (no comment on Obama's prayer circle, eh?), and that she charged rape victims for rape kits. Sorry, that "experience" line won't work since she was the only one with any executive experience, and was Chief executive of a state bordering two nations in a very strategic location.
By all means, though, continue your dehumanization, demonization, devaluing of Sarah Palin. It does help the soul to treat her with contempt if you view her as nothing but a pretty face.
And called out for using "sexpot," Sarah attempted to downgrade what she did by watering down the definition, "Definition of sexpot: A woman considered to have sex appeal." In fact (Webster's) the definition is "a conspicuously sexy woman."
Some refused to put up with the nonsense:
If that is what you think a Democrat is, then
By basement angel on Thu, 12/11/2008 - 5:25pm
you certainly missed the mark by voting for Obama - because that is not who is by any stretch of the imagination.
Palin was picked because of her Christian background and her ability to unite the Christian right base around McCain - she was successful at that. McCain got a lot more support from those people than he would have otherwise.
I don't get the left's animosity towards Sarah - I really don't. And considering that we nominated Obama, who had less experience than she did, I don't see how we can carp about that either. The left's bahavior towards Palin has been so atrociously sexist that I wind up admiring someone with whom I have very little in common. I certainly respect her more than the people who voted for Obama - something I find utterly mystifying. I didn't vote in the presidential election. I couldn't cast a ballot for either of them.
But you saying that McCain's nomination of her was the equivalent of grope is just out and out bullshit. I think your real anxiety is over the fact that she stood up for herself and feminism and the left deteriorated into a misogynist clusterfuck and sounded more like Claytie Williams than any Democrat I've ever known. That "periodic" remark is one of the most disgraceful things I have ever heard any politician say - as retrograde as anything that ever came out of Jesse Helms' mouth.
I'm embarrassed by Obama and by his supporters. I'm hopeful that this scandal takes him down and allows us to proceed with something that resembles our old party.
Which led Aeryl to insist that Sarah "can defend herself [. . .] But, Sarah didn't vote for Obama." You're right, Aeryl, because Sarah didn't vote in the presidential election this year.
Texas is Sarah's state and she wants credit for voting for Hillary for president in the general election.
The Director of Communications for the Office of the Texas Secretary of State, Randall Dillard, advises us, "In Texas , a voter may choose between any candidate on the ballot, or write-in the name of a certified write-in candidate. For the Nov. 4 presidential election, the Texas ballot included candidates nominated from the Republican, Democratic and Libertarian parties. Voters could also choose from one of seven certified write-in candidates for president. A vote for anyone other than the names on the ballot or the certified write-in candidates was not counted."
Cynthia McKinney and Ralph Nader are two candidates who could have used votes. Instead, Sarah taught everyone what a 'protest' vote really was, what a wasted one really was: Going to the polls to vote and voting for someone who is not on the ballot and will not receive credit for your vote. That's why there is no "Hillary Clinton: 1 vote" on the state's official results.
Sarah did not vote for Hillary because Hillary did not and could not receive a vote.
Your vote is your vote. That's a community mantra. So is, "Use it wisely."