Today's Assy McGee Award® goes to Ann Althouse, earned by this response to the new Obama ad that rightfully highlights the ever new depths of sleaze and cynicism to which John McCain has sunk. The Althouse post embeds the Ad, in case people would like to see that too. One thing Harrogate will give Dr. Althouse. She's got her talking points down pretty good. For the last several days Repugs have been defending McCain's sleaze and dishonor by calling Dems whiners. Althouse takes the baton seamlessly:This ad strikes me as a big whine: Hey, no fair. Your ads work better than mine. Quit it. Or I'm telling
Meanwhile, the Runner-Up goes to Carly Fiorina, who accuses the SNL Palin/Clinton skit of . . . Wait For It . . . SEXISM.
SNL, asserted Fiorina while talking to Andrea "Too Many Balloons" Mitchell, was. Drumroll.
dismissive of the substance of Sarah Palin
UPDATE: Harrogate here would like to add that the SNL Skit did not deny there is substance to Palin. Au contraire (Harrogate and oxymoron got As in a Graduate Level French Class), SNL did a great job of pointing up the nature of Palin's substance. "Please, ask this one about dinosaurs" identified her red meat, extremist substance.
13 comments:
Wait fo it....5
r
7pncydh0-wt
comments by solon and sweet todler j
Proofread, baby!
Hey, give Sweet Toddler J a break, Roof. She's not even 2. She's clearly a genius for being able to type, so give her until 3 to improve her proofreading.
And seriously, how is "being dismissive of her substance" being sexist? As someone who often pointed out the sexist treatment that Hillary Clinton received, I want to suggest that Palin's people actually think about what it means to receive sexist treatment. Being questioned for her lack of substance is not sexist. In fact, I think it is called what happens when you run for political office.
I question the lack of substance of Baby J's post not because I am openly babyist but because it is obviously 8pncydh0-wts at stake here.
I call her out not because she is a baby but because I have been provided little proof of her infant-dentials.
ANSWER MY QUESTIONS, BABY!
Also, to quote David Letterman, "It took TWO people to write this?"
Roof-
J is a wee bit insulted that you referred to her as a baby. There is only one baby in the house hold and that is Sweet Baby l. Sweet Toddler J will expect an apology.... She tells me a Giraffe or an Elephant would be appropriate.
And M., Well, we are back to the politicization of sexism. We all know that the McCain does not really care about sexism; it only cares about winning an the women are now supporting Palin, I mean McCain. And since Clinton relied on these arguments throughout her campaign it is a viable for the Republicans to exploit it...oh the consequences of our own arguments...
If you take issue with this you may want to take issue with those who support Palin...
The best way to strike back is to force the McCain campaign to take sexism seriously by forcing them to adopt equal wage laws... HAHAHAHA!!!
Read carefully, Roof: she is not a baby! She is a toddler, hence the name change from Sweet Baby J to Sweet Toddler J. Modify your argument accordingly.
And Solon, I thought I was taking issue with those who support Palin. . .
M.
We have been agreeing too much lately. Even if it appears that we agree, it is best if we disagree. I am just doing my part.
Afraid of revealing the true nature of our relationship, Solon?
Last night on The Colbert Report, the "Word" was : How Dare You.
And the subjct was sexism.
At one point he flashed images of Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, and John McCain and said these guys should know sexism, they've been outspoken feminists for two weeks now.
Then came the words "Two weeks longer than Sarah Palin."
It is deeply sad but also somehow awesome that Colbert and Jon Stewart remain the premier site of political information and commentary to be had on television.
It's only sexist if "lack of substance" refers to a "lack of junk" (i.e., no twig and berries).
So, what you are saying, oxy, is that she HAS substance, it is just inverted and tucked up into her political abdomen like a, um.... No, I can't think of a fit metaphor.
With proper vetting we could have investigated my long-held (3 week) suspicion that she was born both WITH and WITHOUT substance and that her party and her doctor made an arbitrary decision to assign her substantiality.
And to think, one day long ago, you held her roof...
How can i look her in the eye and tell her what you said...
The world no longer holds meaning...
Yes, but Solon, we've known that for a while now, haven't we?
Post a Comment