[Editor’s Note: Please accept my apology for any mental image the headline of this article may have inadvertently caused]
Sarah Palin has taken great pains to cast herself as a new kind of feminist. Her crusade for a version of conservative feminism has spawned a movement of “mama grizzlies” who she regards as the defenders of traditional values. So it is interesting to look back a few months and recall how Palin stepped forward to fulfill her role as a women’s advocate.
When the Anthony Weiner story broke, Palin was quick to judge the congressman who had done nothing illegal and did not even have any physical extra-marital encounters. Nevertheless, Palin pounced on the scandal with a harsh condemnation complete with a sexually suggestive pun. Here is what Palin said about Weiner:
“From henceforth after his personal indiscretions were disclosed, he was going to be rendered impotent basically there in Congress and he wasn’t going to be effective…Obviously it was the right thing to do. Day late dollar short though, I think he should have resigned right when all of this came to light.”
However, Palin’s assessment of the Cain scandal, which does involve potentially criminal behavior and was described by the victim as physical, has not raised the same measure of indignation. Here is what Palin said about Cain:
That’s right. Palin has not bothered to comment on a case of alleged sexual harassment and, perhaps, assault. Even though she previously disparaged Cain as the “flavor of the week,” she cannot bring herself to make a statement on behalf of a victimized woman. Palin’s silence on this matter is deafening. If she expects people to give consideration to her views, she would be well-advised to express them.
Of course, it may not be her fault. Since bowing out of the GOP primary, Palin has all but disappeared from public view. The press is finally giving her the level of attention that she has always deserved – none. Since she is not an expert on any social or legal matter, and she holds no position of authority, her opinions are no more valid than any other media celebrity. So we should not expect to hear from her again unless she is appearing on a panel with Paris Hilton and Charlie Sheen.
We must consider ourselves fortunate that she has kept her mouth shut. This is conduct to be commended, not criticized.
There is a 99.9% probability she would want to be on his staff.
Anthony Weiner eventually admitted that he did commit the distaseful crap that he was accused of. There lies the difference. Herman Cain continues to say that these accusations are bogus, and here is quick reminder for you: In this country, you are not guilty until proven innocent. We don’t live in North Korea.
And the fact that she hasn’t been quoted about the Cain accusations means nothing. She hasn’t been quoted about the NBA lockout, either. So what? Now chew on that while you and your minions continue to giggle over your infantile little sexual innuendos.
Are you sitting, Scott? I tend to agree with you on this one. Kind of a non-story. And partisan commentators from both sides tend to mum up or lighten up when it’s their own.
Sarah who?
Maybe Sarah said nothing about this because no one asked? We can only hope!
You sure lost me on this one, Mark.
For one thing, why comment on the fact that someone you have been begging to just shut up, and someone you have been begging the media to stop making waves about and stop keeping her in the limelight, has not made comments on something? That’s absurd and more than a bit hypocritical.
Secondly, to characterize her completely correct use of the word “impotent” as a sexually suggestive pun is ridiculous. “Nyuk nyuk, she said impotent, nyuk nyuk.”
Third, to implicitly criticize her for making sexually suggestive puns while feeling the need to point our your own sexually suggestive pun is simply more hypocrisy.
And thirdly, as soon as a writer feels the need to say “no pun intended” two things become obvious. There was indeed an intent to pun and the pun was so lame that the person making the pun needs to bring it to our attention.
I’m no Palin fan, and I’m often a fan of your writing, but you seriously shot yourself in both feets with this one.
Maybe that should be “fourthly”.
There is nothing hypocritical about noting when someone who claims to be an advocate for an issue ignores it when it suits her purposes. It is Palin who is the hypocrite. The fact that I don’t want to hear from her has nothing to with whether she is consistent or whether the media covers her. That is outside of my control, but I am free to comment on it.
As for her “impotent” comment, both she and Judge Napolitano (whose program she was on) laughed when she said it. If you don’t think it was a deliberate choice meant to ridicule, you’re welcome to your opinion.
My feet are fine, and thanks for your support.
Ah, that old and oh-so-mature “I’m not but she is” defense.
The hypocrisy was not in the noting, although without noting you wouldn’t have hypocrified.
The hypocrisy was in this conflict:
You say:
And yet your own response to the serious issues with the Cain campaign is to focus on not only Sarah Palin, but on her lack of response.
I didn’t have an issue with whether or not she and her cohorts had giggled at the double entendre she used, but found it ridiculous for you to attempt to ridicule her for using a sexually suggestive pun when you had used one yourself that was so awkward you felt the need to awkwardly point it out.
If your feet are fine, it is only because your gun control is not.
Maybe Sarah and Herman should be running mates given she love black men and he love white women it would be fun in the white house again