Just in case you haven't heard...Follow

Oh please. She was hot. Take a look at the Hawaii governor, Linda Lingle. Very high approval ratings, smart woman, has done a great job out here. The only problem is she's really hard on the eyes. Sarah got it based on MILF status.

Guys like Totem don't call her a "cougar" like they do Palin, though.

They have a smart, attractive, Republican woman that had the added bonus of being black in Condi Rice, but she said she doesn't want to be in politics any more.

Really, I think they asked all the hot Republican ladies until they finally found one dumb enough to say yes.

Am I reading into this, or are you inferring that you don't have to be black to be 'affronted' by Obama's nomination as well as Palin's?

Lol, I'm not sure anymore. As a person that is gendered and has skin color, I'm not affronted by Obama's nomination at all. I don't think I'm affronted by Palin's either. I do think it was a stupid decision.

Whether the republican party went along with the decision because she was 'female' may very well be. If that is somehow an insult to women every where, well that's questionable, personally I think it's more of an insult to republicans everywhere.

Where the original comment stemmed from was Ambrya saying that 'as a women' she was affronted by how she viewed the republican agenda in regards to putting Palin on the ticket. Even if she is correct in her assessment, I question why being a women matters when deciding if the decision is a correct on or not. An individual is not being 'more duped', or more negatively impacted, in this situation, because they are female.

Interesting aside: The two tightest Governor races going on today are Washington and North Carolina - both are women democrats running against male republicans. As a Mainer I'm affronted!

Why would you think that, paranoia aside?

I think you're missing the meaning of the word "affronted," which means offended or insulted. Not "duped" or "negatively impacted." The woman isn't "more duped," but she is more affronted that they would try to dupe her based on her sex.

As I tried, apparently unsuccessfully, to explain before: it's a matter of being personally offended instead of offended in a more general sense.

I'm affronted by Palin and I'm not even American.

I am just left feeling as if history let us miss out on the "dream team" of a mix of Bush and Palin. Imagine that for a dynamic duo. Actually as Bush is republican, is the party just not making an affront to both sexes? And you voted for Bush ...

I'm reasonably certain that the combined stupidity of those two in close proximity to one another would create an intellectual black hole that would suck any remaining intelligence out of every person within a 1000 mile radius.

I dunno, I was fairly offended by Palin also. The Republicans honestly expected the women of this country to relate to her.

'Zactly.

ETA quote.



Edited, Nov 4th 2008 1:47pm by Samira

That makes sense if you take the naive position that men and women have been treated equally in politics, ever, at any point in history.

ETA: It's fairly obvious that she was chosen based on her gender, based on our knowledge of the recent political landscape (including Hillary, etc.). If they chose a mimbo, it wouldn't be because he was a man, since a man is generally accepted as the "norm" anyway.



Edited, Nov 4th 2008 12:53pm by trickybeck

That's because a dim-witted, good-looking guy on the ticket for VP is nothing new--it's practically de rigeur, or do we need to repeat the name Dan Quayle again? But this is the first time (with the exception of the Mondale/Ferraro ticket, which frankly never had a chance) that there has been a woman VP nominee with a legitimate chance of being elected.

There are dozens of serious female politicians out there. Some of them are actually even Republicans. Had ANY of them been chosen, I would not be offended as I am with Palin. Because, however much I might have disagreed with them on their positions, at least the implicit message wouldn't be that the role of women in politics is to look good and stick to the cue cards, because you're too dumb to do anything else.

If they had held up a woman who is actually intelligent and competent as the standard-bearer for women in politics, we wouldn't be having this discussion. I would have been PLEASED by the selection of such a candidate, for the exact reason why I am DISPLEASED by Palin. It would have said to me, "Yes, women are serious political players and we are making sure we have them on our team in important positions." I might not have voted for her ticket, but I would have respected her.

I'm not a big fan of Hillary Clinton--I think she's far too divisive a figure to be an effective leader, and I'm glad she didn't get the nomination. But never for one minute did it seem that she was being presented as a potential candidate just because she looked good, never once did she give the impression of being anything other than intelligent, serious, competent, and capable of doing the job.



If I wanted to feel "victimized" I wouldn't be standing up saying F'UCK NO to the attempt at pandering. Acknowledging that an offense exists is not the same as allowing oneself to be victimized by it.

Edited, Nov 4th 2008 11:02am by Ambrya