Skip to main content

And they say mainstream media isn't biased!

Anyone who thinks the Right Wing is "crying wolf" about media bias and the mainstream media's lack of any semblance of balance, check this out.

First, search CNN or MSNBC, and probably others (I haven't gotten that far yet), and see if you can find anything on Bill Maher's vulgar reference to Sarah Palin during his HBO special. I have tried since this morning, and haven't come up with anything yet. This is what he said, along with a link if you have the stomach to watch:


This is NOW's response. The link will probably be down by the time you check...NOW membership seems to be pretty upset too!

I've got a few things to say on the latest "controversy" getting everyone all fired up:

1. Listen, supposedly progressive men (ok, and women, too): Cut the crap! Stop degrading women with whom you disagree and/or don't like by using female body terms or other gender-associated slurs. OK? Can you do that, please? If you think someone's an idiot or a danger to the country, feel free to say so, but try to keep their sex out of it. Sexist insults have an impact on all women.
2. We're on to you, right-wingers:
a. You're trying to take up our time getting us to defend your friend Sarah Palin. If you keep us busy defending her, we have less time to defend women's bodies from the onslaught of reproductive rights attacks and other threats to our freedom, safety, livelihood, etc. Sorry, but we can't defend Palin or even Hillary Clinton from every sexist insult hurled at them in the media. That task would be impossible, and it would consume us. You know this would not be a productive way to fight for women's equal rights, which is why you want us stuck in this morass.
b. As usual, you're looking for any way to discredit NOW. You claim we care and work only for liberal woman, but that's a LIE. We have defended Sarah Palin and other conservative women from sexist attacks. Maybe not on your schedule, but we've done so. And by the way, all those laws we advocate for -- we don't ask that they include a clause saying only certified liberal women can benefit from them. Conservative women benefit from them, too! Just because we don't open up a Palin wing on the NOW website doesn't mean we don't think that every single woman -- right, left and in-between -- deserves equal pay, full reproductive rights, justice in the courts, etc. So knock off the facetious whining that right-wing women are not represented by NOW's work.
c. Prior to the emergence of Palin on the national scene: Where the heck were you when Hillary and Nancy Pelosi and other women were being demeaned in sexist ways? Did you speak up once on behalf of a woman politician before you learned the name Sarah Palin? Did you work toward equality for women in any way prior to August 2008? It would be nice to think that you've suddenly discovered sexism and are interested in joining us in the struggle for full equality. But this really smacks of the worst kind of hypocrisy: Folks with no history of working on an issue trying to discredit those who have been working for decades on the issue.
Ridiculous.That's all I have to say on the matter. Now, back to business.


After several posts disagreeing with her, she responded:

This is the level of professionalism that NOW has been reduced to? I don't care who it is about, what it is about, which side of the political spectrum anyone is coming from. The vulgarities spewing forth from
Publish Post
Bill Maher's, and other mouths is unconscionable.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America This, in my opinion is where our focus should be. Throughout our country's great history, we have slowly given many of those rights rightfully reserved to the States respectively to our Federal Government. Using the current debate as an example, if a state decides to have universal health coverage, so be it. If they can make it work, good for them. I do not believe it can work and I believe that any state that attempted it would become bankrupt (can anyone say CALIFORNIA?) quickly. Nonetheless, it should be a state's choice...it is the State's right! Our fifty United States need to take their rights back. Individually, as their citizens, through their legislators decide.

Who is serving whom?

Our Founding Fathers were very careful when they came to establish this great nation. Through the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, and through the correspondence among the Founders, the words to describe their vision were chosen carefully. The words of personal letters, public addresses, and our founding documents were carefully crafted as they were expected to live for the ages. In this, our Founders succeeded, as these documents are as relevant today as when they were written. Initially, from the First Continental Congress, through the early 1800’s, following the War of 1812, being a member of Congress was basically a part-time job. Then, as now, Congress sat in regular session for about six months per year. Pay for Congressmen at the time was $6 per day they were in session. It is difficult to give a direct comparison in today’s dollars since most colonial Americans still used barter as a primary means to acquire goods. However, an ill...

Please, think before you post.

Just yesterday, a family member of mine posted on Facebook how the GOP needed someone better than Trump or Palin. Of course she was referring to their appearance at the Conservative Political Action Conference, or CPAC. In my comment to her post, I asked what specific issue she had with Palin. One of her other FB friends and I started a back-and-forth about politics in general. One of her friends agreed with my post that too many people dislike Sarah Palin, but when pushed, cannot give a reason why. My family member finally deleted her initial comment, and thus all of the posts saying that she was just trying to be funny. How funny is it to throw something derogatory out there, without even a generalization as to why you don't like a potential candidate, and then delete it when challenged? Have we become such a non-thinking society that we cannot have a civil discourse about issues? "Being funny" has become, it appears to me, the news source of choice for a lot of A...