Palin s/b "gangraped by black men."

I’m down with a fever and likely this will be my only post for the day; if I feel better later I will record and post Compline, but right now kind of out of it. And cranky.

Just three thoughts.

1) It seems like President Bush – who tried in 2003 to prevent the economic meltdown we’re in today – has pulled everyone’s asses out of the fire. He will get no credit for it. President Bush appears to be the last grown-up left in Washington, but he will get no props. Credit and props will go to anyone else…even to Pelosi and Reid, who yesterday wanted to run from DC as fast as they could. The little bit of reading I’m doing, I see second-string players from France being quoted in press accounts of today’s activity, but not Bush. It’s not surprising. But it is tiring. Krauthammer says “History will Judge”. Well, if the history books are all written from one perspective and the internet becomes heavily regulated, and the left’s proclivity toward throwing things down memory holes continues, history won’t be able to judge. Yes, it’s tiring.

2): Sandra Bernhard, who I thought was funny about 25 years ago, but not since then, has decided to personify the “sick-with-hate” left in a rant that suggested among other things, that Gov. Sarah Palin – who has the temerity to be a woman and a feminist who is free, and not stuck on the Official Feminist Plantation towing the Correct and Official lines and living the Correct and Official Lifestyle – ought to go to New York and “get gang-raped by black men.”

How disgusting. How low-class. And racist, too. Bernhard says about the worse thing you can say: Palin should be gang-raped. But she goes out of her way to specify; she should be gang-raped by black men. Apparently that makes it even worse, in Bernhard’s little mind. So, Disgusting. Low-class and yes, Racist.

Can you imagine if anyone had ever – ever – said anything even half as heinous as this about Hillary Clinton, the justifiable outrage and screaming we’d be hearing in the press, on the talk shows, on Oprah?

But Sarah Palin is the wrong sort of successful woman, so this is taken with a shrug and a smile by the left. And the right is “over-reacting.”

It’s so infantile. Sandra Bernhard is another perpetual adolescent, standing at a microphone saying “twat” and thinking that makes her “edgy.” (Why is the left convinced that if they swear and show a little T & A they’re “edgy” – oh, right, they’re perpetually 14 years old).

Bernhard is infantile and tiresome. If only her mother had allowed her to say “poopyhead” when she was five; she might have it out of her system by now, and would not need to stand before a microphone running through all of her “edgy” words.

And these hysterical “sophisticated” women need to grow up, too. Do they realize that they make all women seem silly and less credible when they show themselves off as shrews and hysterics? Do they realize that when they say it’s okay to do these things to Palin, they’re saying “it’s okay to do these things to all women?” Asshats. Disingenuous, intellectually dishonest, emotionally infantile asshats.

3): Barack Obama is an untruthful and empty suit: He doesn’t want to discuss his plans for economic recovery. So, he’s voting “present.” Again. Oh, and he “supports” what Bush and his guys are doing. But he does not mention Bush by name. Can’t give the president any credit. Asshat. What a statesman. What a diplomat. What a fraud.

Obama, Untruthful: Untruthful, here, and afraid of this woman and her truth. Julie at Happy Catholic – who is normally apolitical – finds Obama’s response “shocking”. Yeah, well…he’s pro-choice…on infanticide. NRO’s The Corner says he’s just lying. There is audio.

If the Obama camp is going to just outright lie, then expect them to start calling McCain a liar. I’ve noticed that whatever they’re doing, lately, they accuse others of doing. And to think, I was initially intrigued with this guy.

Obama, Misleading: Even the Washington Post admits it, while noting that yes, McCain also tried to stave off this economic crisis and Congress blocked him, too:

One element of the Obama campaign’s brief against Mr. McCain is that he supported repeal of the law separating commercial banks from investment banks. “He’s spent decades in Washington supporting financial institutions instead of their customers,” Mr. Obama said yesterday. “Phil Gramm, one of the architects of the deregulation in Washington that led directly to this mess on Wall Street, is also the architect of John McCain’s economic plan.” Would it be churlish to point out that another author of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley law is former congressman Jim Leach, a founder of Republicans for Obama? Or that Obama advisers Lawrence H. Summers and Robert E. Rubin supported the repeal — which was signed by President Bill Clinton? – [Emphasis mine -admin]

It’s a reasonable question which candidate has been more attentive to the brewing problems on Wall Street and which has a better prescription for them. But Mr. Obama’s attack does not give a fair reading of the McCain record.

Obama, Empty suit. Untruthful, blithering empty suit with too many dubious connections. Ask him about the AIG bailout, he votes “present.” If Palin had answered as he did, she’d be excoriated as “stupid” and “not ready.” But he’s The One. Put him in the WH with a Dem controlled Congress and a few judges to name to the SCOTUS and you can just turn out the lights.

Ace has Obama still doubletalking on the economy.

Lorie Byrd has More thoughts on McCain and the economic crisis

I’m going back to bed. Newsbusters has more on Bernhard, if you can stand it.

About Elizabeth Scalia
  • Bec

    Sandra B. looks exactly like some of those poor homeless meth addicts who would come into the library where I used to work.

  • Pingback: Wizbang

  • culperjr.

    I know that our Liberal Overlords have decreed that we cannot question their patriotism, but are we now, FINALLY allowed to question their decency?

    Who am I kidding?

    I am sure that all the usual suspects will rattle off the usual excuses. We should “lighten up.” We should “chill.” If we see racism in any of this, it is all in OUR dirty minds.

    I think I understand it now: Sarah Palin brought on this virtual gang-rape by her behavior, wardrobe and because she “was asking for it.”

    Am I a good feminist now?

  • http://mutnodjmetsmusings.blogspot.com/ Mutnodjmet

    I share your opinion. Actually, I have gone from admiring Obama early in the election cycle to downright despising every aspect of his campaign, and activley trying to defeat the Obama/Biden ticket.

  • saveliberty

    I am saying prayers that you will feel better soon, Anchoress.

  • Pingback: Brutally Honest

  • Susan K.

    Is there anything left to shock us decent people? Glory be! Dear Anchoress, get better real soon. Just to cheer you up, this week I ordered a bunch of Monk’s Coffee for Christmas presents. I am a tea drinker, but friends and family are coffee drinkers.

  • http://strangemonkeydoll.com/ Countgrecula

    I’ve noticed that whatever they’re doing, lately, they accuse others of doing.

    That was my first impression of Obama the candidate. He was giving some speech somewhere saying “We’re not like the other party… that lies… and tortures… and starts stupid wars!!” Perhaps I paraphrase a bit. But that was the gist.

    This is no great American healer.

  • Pingback: Media Mythbusters Blog » Blog Archive » I love it when the Anchoress gets cranky

  • http://www.pursuingholiness.com Laura

    On 2) – How despicable. Not surprising, though. The left is so fond of saying “it’s the hypocrisy,” that makes them so angry. I think there’s more than one way to take that claim; it just reeks of cognitive dissonance.

    I’m praying for you – get well soon!

  • corrineL80

    I am a Catholic and a woman. I am also a Democrat. I do not appreciate Bernhard’s type of humor and find it crass.

    Religion informs our views on life and death and it informs us how we treat our fellow humans. Every 4 years, Democrats and Republicans go after each with renewed anger. As the campaigns move towards the home stetch, attacks from candidates and supporters get more and more hateful and untrue. Lets be frank with each other, both our candidates stretch the truth and suffer from convenient amnesia about their records.

    I was pleasantly surprised when I first found your site, being Catholic myself. But upon reading your posts I have to admit being quite taken aback. We will each see our own candidates through a prism and that will not change. I do not agree with many of Senator McCain’s views and tactics just as you would not of Senator Obama’s.

    Gov Palin’s religious and cultural views can’t be more different from mine and as a friend of mine said “Her God is not my God” even though we are both Christians. For one, I certainly do not believe that it is through God’s mercy that Muslims are converted to Christianity. Unlike Gov Palin, I do not see war as a task from God. It rings as true as saying you have a fever because God was angry with you and so made you less physically capable to blog today.

    We will not see eye to eye on many issues and that is not to say I am evil or that you are. But as I read your site, I increasingly feel that we tread on dangerous grounds when we cloak our views in a religious coat. I do believe there is good reason to seperate Church from state. Jesus was a merciful saviour but he certainly had a temper when it came to elders who abused their power and used religion as a way to maintain the status quo and gain riches for themselves.

    It does make me uncomfortable when I see your posts and that of others and the language it uses when describing the works and lives of others who do not share your views. To see them next to blogs and links on Catholic faith heightens the discomfort. I am still trying to find the Christ I grew to know and love on this site because it would greatly sadden me if I have to think “her god is not my god” yet again

    [If you stick around, you'll see that I don't usually write as angry and without patience as I have the last three days, but I'm also dealing with a fever these past days and something's got to give. In this case, I'm out of patience, and it's reflected in my posts. As to Sarah Palin believing that "war is of God" I think you'll find at this link that she does not think that way at all - but they'd like you to think she does. It is very interesting to read a side-by-side comparison of the sorts of questions the press asks Palin vs what they as Obama.

    I would agree with you that war is not "from God" or "of God," but sometimes they need to be fought and then we pray - as Palin did - that we're doing the right thing. I don't really understand all of your post, but that is partly because I'm 101.4 right now and not clear on much of anything, but I think if you check my archives you'll see that I too am in favor of the separation of church and state...but I also do not believe the false narrative that it is written in the constitution. It is not. The phrase originated in a letter from Thos. Jefferson to a correspondent. I would not worship as Palin does, but in the end it is not her religion - or any of the candidates religions - that speak to me. Oddly, although I am a religious person, I never think much about other people's religion. What matters to me is what they believe about governance, ethics, fiscal management and security. I started out very intrigued with Obama and not like McCain much at all. That has changed. Thanks for commenting, and welcome - admin]

  • http://irasciblechef.com irascibleChef

    It’s all very, very sad!

    The reason I find this so sad is because it’s not about argument or people who are even interested in changing their map if it’s wrong. People on both sides have it all figured out. The debate is over, science has been decided, no more talk.

    When there’s no more talk, discussion or debate, it’s only a numbers game, whichever side has more wins. Whomever has the biggest club wins. It’s not about the truth, it’s about who can make you believe what? Who has the time to figure out the truth? Magic, slight of hand, and the biggest club, is what it’s about right now…

    —IrascibleChef

  • Pingback: locomotivebreath (my wallet hurts!) 1901

  • Kryllion

    I don’t like this at all.

    It is deplorable to make a joke about someone being raped, even though the constitution protects jokes. This was more than a joke, however, it was also a political statement.

    Bernhardt made her joke with the goal of whipping up the energy of people who already did not like Sarah Palin – but really she made the joke with the goal of making her grossly left-wing audience laugh, which gets them to buy things, which earns Sarah Bernhardt money.

    The joke was intentionally shocking, adolescent and crass, and demeaning toward black people, women and specifically Gov. Palin. The rape joke did nothing positive or beneficial, it merely served as a tool for Bernhardt to try to prove her “edginess” to the audience at Gov. Palin’s expense.

    The real problem, however, is not with the rape joke, but with its social resonance.

    A number of media outlets felt that rape joke warranted repeating and commenting on. For-profit media outlets do this because headlines about rape jokes by B- (or C-)list celebrities draw readers/viewers, who in turn earn the media outlet ad money. This re-publishing of the rape joke expands the audience exponentially.

    The media mention is almost immediately picked up on by the Fourth Estate, who generally operates “causally” (note: not ‘casually’, ‘causally’… bloggers typically have strong feelings about their subject matter and, much like the for-profit media, but for different reasons – causal reasons – repeat and comment on the rape joke. In this case, The Anchoress used the rape joke as a vehicle to express her feelings about “the left”)

    Blogs are then read by other bloggers and linked to – the rape joke gets repeated and commented on again. Now… with each step in the process, people effectively have less liability and therefore increased license to say what they like. FOX, for example, does not really have the freedom to call Obama or women “asshats”. They would be put out of business. The Anchoress does have this freedom, and it is well within her right to excercise it. She can do this because she has less legal exposure than FOX. As readers/responders to the blog, we don’t even have any real credibility to worry about, so we can go on to say anything we please, although it may not be posted if the blog editor feels it is inappropriate.

    Unfortunately, rape jokes do draw viewers to media outlets. Equally unfortunately, making sweeping negative generalizations about left or right-wingers draws readers to political blogs. So – the media and blogging community has taken one already divisive rape joke and used it as a launching pad for one half of the country (in this case, “the right”) to level criticism at the other (“the left”).

    Sandra Bernhardt made one completely reprehensible joke in front of – what kind of crowd does she draw these days? A few dozen people? A couple hundred? It has sadly morphed into countless wisecracks about half of America, and untold numbers of disdainful responses from the left in retaliation.

    This is how a country gets divided. One irresponsible joke is made by a fading comedienne to make money. Repetition by for-profit media companies to make money. Repetition, inflammation and sweeping generalizations by opinionated bloggers to further a cause (and sometimes to make money, and sometimes to feel self-important).

    The appropriate (if somewhat old-school) response to the rape joke is to boycott Sandra Bernhardt – not buy her albums, not go to her shows, write letters to media outlets like CNN who have her on their network (market forces, remember) – not to use it to load up the arsenal in a political war against our own country.

    For what it’s worth, I chastise the left for this stuff, too.

    John

  • Pingback: Charles Gibson’s Holy War & Sarah Palin | The Anchoress

  • Pingback: Sierra Faith

  • nohype

    The level of hatred toward Sarah Palin is bizarre and fascinating. I think that Barack Obama is spectacularly unqualified to be president, but I do not hate him. I see people who do not respect him and have contempt for him, but not much hatred. Why the hatred toward Sarah Palin? Why the desire to see her humiliated and destroyed?

    Maybe the statement of Carol Fowler, that Palin’s “primary qualification seems to be that she hasn’t had an abortion,” holds part of the answer. Sarah Palin stands as a living rebuke to those who have CHOSEN to engage in the baby-making act and then have CHOSEN to kill their babies that resulted from the first choice. There is something unnatural about this second choice that we can rationalize in our conscious minds, but deep down our animal brains know that this action is not right. It violates the very logic of evolution.

    When a person is rebuked, when do they object most strenuously? I think it is when they are in denial. When you are told something that deep down you know is true but you do not want to admit it even to yourself, you object and attack the messenger. I wonder if something like this is not source of some or much of the hatred of Sarah Palin.

  • gcm

    I’m not sure if you are familiar with Grassroots Films, but I think everything they produce is great (my favorite is God in the Streets of New York. They have produced an election video that is a must see in my opinion. Sorry for the off topic post…

  • Pingback: Tolerance « MaggieLomas

  • Pingback: Pajamas Media » Sandra Bernhardt Gets Away With Racist Anti-Palin Tirade

  • Pingback: Little Miss Attila

  • Pingback: That Girl Needs a Visit to the Woodshed « Obi’s Sister


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X