Thursday, November 15, 2012

CONSERVATIVE OUTREACH CONTINUES. The "Ladyparts! Huh! We'll show you ladyparts" campaign for women's votes spreads to the Daily Caller:
“In his first press conference since the election, President Barack Obama challenged Republicans who are calling for Watergate-style hearings on the terrorist attack in Benghazi to ‘go after me.’ Obama defended U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, whose remarks on Sunday morning news shows five days after the Sept. 11 attack have been widely criticized by Republicans..."

But did you catch the sexism? Can you imagine the president infantilizing a male cabinet secretary that way? He basically suggested Rice couldn’t fight her own battles. She needed a man to step in and fend off her critics. Mr. President, you just set back women a 100 years.
My eyes stopped working good after that, so
I may have fantasized the later section where the Caller accuses Obama of holding a door open for Hillary Clinton.

UPDATE. Holy shit this is apparently a Thing: Fox News feminazi Kirsten Powers rages over Obama's "chauvinistic" defense of Rice, possibly burns bra. She also denounces the lapdog press over Benghazi, says "the White House press corps should have flown into a frenzy." Solution: Bring back Jeff Gannon!

102 comments:

  1. i actually can't catch the sexism anymore, i had it when i was nine.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well, there,'s also this:

    5.) Tweet of Yesterday – Jamie Kirchick: An idea: Let’s shoot rockets into the houses of every comfortable Western critic of Operation Pillar of Defense and see how they react



    I fear I endorse turning enclaves of right-wing nitwits into blockaded settlements to see how they'd react.

    ReplyDelete
  3. redoubt1:52 PM

    You didn't miss much. Sad Said screed went flying off in a bunch of different directions, none relevant. (It was, of course, written by a guy.)
    Can you imagine the president infantilizing a male cabinet secretary that way?
    Nope. Can't imagine.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Mr. President, you just set back women a 100 years.

    Yeah, nothing shouts "sexism" like indicating that you might appoint another woman as Secretary of State, regardless of how much a bunch of reactionary misogynist anti-choice grandstanding assholes like McCain and Graham barf out attacks on her "incompetence" for repeating what the CIA told her, thereby somehow retroactively causing Benghazi from her perch as UN ambassador. Judas Iscariot on a jet ski, don't these Daily Call'er a Slut for Wanting Insurance Coverage for Contraception people have a meeting of their local "defining legitimate rape" club to attend, or something?

    ReplyDelete
  5. sharculese2:03 PM

    Only if we can drop bunker busters on the McMansion of every snarling reactionary outraged that people want to live in humane conditions, too.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Leeds man2:15 PM

    Grasping at shadows of imaginary straws.

    ReplyDelete
  7. wileywitch2:17 PM

    When a man who is high ranking in an organization, defends a woman of lesser rank in his organization from a witch-hunt that is largely being launched at him in retaliation for his having been elected to his job, yet again; it is "sexism" for him to do so because had he not defended her he would have been "throwing her under the bus."


    Who can tell which is worse in the mind of a wingnut? As a feminist I can say that if President Obama were defending me and my job that way I would NOT say, "Who's my Daddy?" in public.

    ReplyDelete
  8. It's almost adorable when conservatives try to do feminism. They think it's just "screech at a man for coming within 100 feet of a woman" or something. It's like some dumb bloke who thinks that forensic investigation works like on CSI.

    ReplyDelete
  9. sharculese2:39 PM

    Republican outreach is cargo cult by design. They can't properly execute the re-gender argument, because they have no clue was sexism looks like, but they know it's effective when used against them. For example: can you imagine the right directing the same level of frothing vitriol at a man for repeating a talking point that was only later proved inaccurate?

    ReplyDelete
  10. an you imagine the right directing the same level of frothing vitriol at a man for repeating a talking point that was only later proved inaccurate?

    Hell, if it had already been repeatedly proven inaccurate, he'd be part of their presidential ticket.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Halloween_Jack3:39 PM

    This is the Daily Caller that's saying this. The Daily Caller, whose idea of gender inclusivity, to go by the right-hand list of star bloggers on their site, is to stick Ginni Thomas (wife of Clarence) all the way at the bottom, and whose entertainment news prominently features "Judge: Jenna Jameson owes $92k over a movie called 'Zombie Strippers!'" and "Petraeus isn't the only one who traded up: 20 ugly celebrities with super hot lovers [SLIDESHOW]" along with their ten favorite sexy beer commercials. Tu quoque may not be much of an argument, but it's not as if they presented an argument themselves in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Halloween_Jack3:54 PM

    ...also in Daily Caller fail: the "I'm big in Japanthe intertubes" argument.

    ReplyDelete
  13. synykyl4:11 PM

    Even if Obama had set them back 100 years, women would still be 500 years ahead of where the Republicans want them.

    ReplyDelete
  14. vista4:22 PM

    I can see where the Daily caller would be horrified that a leader would defend someone of lower rank; since most conservative and business leaders' normal behaviour would be to throw junior under the bus or say they weren't aware of what was going on, rather than take any responsibility.

    ReplyDelete
  15. You'd think they'd at least be better at tu quoque, given all the practice they get. It's almost like they don't understand the other side - like they've never seriously spoken to a liberal or Democrat. Odd, huh?

    ReplyDelete
  16. reallyaimai4:48 PM

    I saw some interviewer brace John McCain on exactly this point--he pointed out that many had excoriated Condi Rice for her "mushroom cloud" comments and, in fact, she had turned out to not know what she was talking about and Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction so why was he bitching about Rice giving her briefing based on the best available information she had been given. McCain looked baffled to be called on such old shit and just began bloviating about how many respectable people had believed the same stupid stuff so the "cases are not at all the same."


    aimai

    ReplyDelete
  17. You wouldn't have heard of any of those journalists praising Lil' Luke. They all live in Canada.

    ReplyDelete
  18. beejeez4:53 PM

    Oh, give them a break for trying; they don't recognize accepting responsibility when they see it.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Another Kiwi4:56 PM

    I think it's time to stop printing pixels and reclaim all these from the Daily Bawler. They have hardly been used after all. However I suggest liaising with the Smithsonian who may want it for their "Conservatives Try Humour- An Epic Fail Throughout History" exhibition.

    ReplyDelete
  20. satch5:00 PM

    I know this is slightly off topic, but John McCain showed a lot more class in defeat that Romney, with his sniveling explanation that Obama won because he gave people stuff. Too bad McCain and Graham are such gutless punks on Benghazi.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Jay B.5:11 PM

    Lost in all the sexytime talk where McCain was making sweet love to his favorite partner -- the idiot media -- and Barry was protecting his woman there's a little something most people are missing: What she said was almost perfectly correct and sounds perfectly true even now.

    ReplyDelete
  22. M. Krebs5:25 PM

    What's the deal with the name "Daily Caller" anyway? It just makes me think of a talk radio addict.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Uncle Kvetch5:33 PM

    Ladyparts! Huh!

    Good God, y'all
    What are they good for?

    I'm sorry. So very, very sorry.

    ReplyDelete
  24. satch5:38 PM

    Well, McCain managed to approximate class for about two weeks after his loss, though he's made up for it since by being a complete asshole on so many subjects it's impossible to keep up.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Sorry, I can't get past the rush of blood clouding my vision after reading that twit's "a 100."


    "A hundred" OR "100," not both, son.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Gromet6:29 PM

    Seriously, why aren't they applauding a president who demands he be held accountable for the actions of the Exec branch? I thought the GOP was the party that LOVED taking responsibility. I really worry about them; they seem to be pathologically unaware that they are incoherent.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Gromet6:31 PM

    I am shocked, shocked to find those on the political right are clueless, incoherent, vindictive, and wasting our time.

    ReplyDelete
  28. sharculese6:36 PM

    Lindsey Graham is trying to have it both ways, claiming that he is totes super mad at Barack Obama for betraying democracy but that it doesn't change the fact that Susan Rice is history's greatest monster.

    ReplyDelete
  29. chuckling6:49 PM

    Yes, the actual facts, which one can easily find by reading the transcripts of her remarks, are an almost universally missed aspect of this story.

    ReplyDelete
  30. KatWillow7:02 PM

    Obama promised people "stuff" like health care, education, assistance after a natural disaster, a living wage... and Rmoney promised his people "stuff" like no taxes for millionaires and billionaires and corporations, no regulations for millionaires and billionaires and corporations, more trillion-dollar bailouts for millionaires and billionaires and corporations, and much MUCH more! Too bad there are more Regular Americans than there are millionaires and billionaires and corporations.

    ReplyDelete
  31. tigrismus7:14 PM

    But did you catch the sexism?

    No, but thanks for mansplaining it to my frail little lady-brain. Maybe "the buck stops here" doesn't cover does?

    ReplyDelete
  32. montag27:22 PM

    Well, it is the burp! brainchild of Tucker Carlson, after all. I'm sure he considers it clever, although he's very unlikely to have considered all the ways in which that name could be parodied. M'self, I prefer the "Daily Cholera," which seems to define its editorial policy....

    ReplyDelete
  33. montag27:29 PM

    There is a phrase for what's going on here: flailing wildly.


    Which is pretty much what I would expect from their 14-year-old senior editor, Jamie Weinstein.

    ReplyDelete
  34. (1) I noticed the same thing, but simply chalked it up to the modern Right's total inability to understand numbers.


    (2) Did it really take until "a 100" for a rush of blood to cloud your vision? Because everything went mauve for me at "sexism."

    ReplyDelete
  35. I came right here to comment on that. "a 100"? Doesn't Carlson have enough money to hire a fucking copy editor?

    ReplyDelete
  36. redoubt7:56 PM

    The GOP loves taking money. Responsibility, not so much.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Carlson is never wrong, so why would he need a copy editor?

    ReplyDelete
  38. I'm pretending I didn't see that. It's better that way.

    ReplyDelete
  39. ADHDJ8:42 PM

    In the Winglish dialect, it's customary to deliberately mispronounce/spell a word, or to use the word "literally" in a statement like that. This indicates that you are using Winglish "not subject to the rules of arithmetic" numbers rather than English ones.

    So in this context the more correct spelling would be "ah hunnerd". "ah hunnerd" (aka "LITERALLY a 100") would be similar to "40 days" in Christianity, or "10,000 things" in Taoism. It's not really meant to refer to the number which is smaller than 101 and bigger than 99.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Jesus why don't they all take a vacation?

    ReplyDelete
  41. montag29:52 PM

    To suggest they need a vacation is to also suggest that what they are doing constitutes work, a presumption with which I would take exception. This is just whining in print form. These professional layabouts wouldn't recognize work if it cock-punched them.

    ReplyDelete
  42. BG, ribbons in my hair10:03 PM

    And if he didn't defend her, he'd be accused of exactly the same thing.

    ReplyDelete
  43. KatWillow10:20 PM

    Imagine an uptight christianist woman talking about her daily bowel-movement. That's what "The Daily Caller" makes me think of.

    ReplyDelete
  44. M. Krebs10:25 PM

    Hell, the actual facts are an almost universally missed aspect of damned never everything these days.

    ReplyDelete
  45. M. Krebs10:34 PM

    One would expect sane, reflective people to take a few months to shut the fuck up and think about things. Sadly, these are not those people, and its not the first time they've demonstrate the fact.

    ReplyDelete
  46. skylights10:36 PM

    Oh man, the cargo cult analogy is brilliant. Good on you, sharculese. It also conjures an accurate and appropriate visual of Republicans as hapless, backwards ignoramouses.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Spaghetti Lee10:51 PM

    whose remarks on Sunday morning news shows five days after the Sept. 11 attack have been widely criticized by Republicans..."



    Well, the guy in the last thread was still bitching about Robert Bork and Ted Kennedy, so I guess this qualifies as a step forward.

    ReplyDelete
  48. reallyaimai11:26 PM

    Perhaps someone else has noted that their newfound love of feminism--which they imagine consists of letting people kick the shit out of Susan Rice so she gets what she deserves for daring to get out of the kitchen, is nicely marked in the Republican party's refusal to reauthorize the violence against women act. I doubt if they will reauthorize until the act officially instigates violence against women and calls it "feminism." At that point they will all sign on.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Chris Anderson11:36 PM

    "Republican outreach is cargo cult by design."

    Really a pithy, accurate analogy. It's too bad more people wouldn't get it without looking it up.

    ReplyDelete
  50. El Manquécito12:21 AM

    How about even sense once in a whale? Is that two much to ask?

    ReplyDelete
  51. Another Kiwi12:55 AM

    Let's not forget their spirited defence of Sandra Fluke whom they disagreed with while defending her right to speak, and continue to do so.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Pope Zebbidie XIII6:40 AM

    Only people who were born after 1980. It was a more common term in the 60s and 70s as it had only recently been discovered and anthropology was very exciting to the public at the time. Lots of TV programs..

    You might be amazed at what people know of even without higher degrees.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Pope Zebbidie XIII6:43 AM

    ...once in a whale?

    Alas Breitbart is still dead.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Pope Zebbidie XIII7:10 AM

    Corporations may be people too my friend, but there weren't enough of them.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Pope Zebbidie XIII7:11 AM

    I've heard they're good for shutting things right down.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Egghead.


    They better not try to teach MY kids that "Winglish" shit in school. They can learn our way or go back where they came from.

    ReplyDelete
  57. reallyaimai7:34 AM

    Actually, while I can see Kat's point, I kind of see it as a genteel way of referring to a Belle du Jour's "gentlemen callers."

    ReplyDelete
  58. El Manquécito8:25 AM

    Surely it can't be anything to do with her being 'high yaller'. Is there a chart somewhere about when racism trumps sexism turned all inside out and wingnuttee?

    ReplyDelete
  59. Given that they're so refreshingly outraged over intelligence failures that get Americans killed, maybe someone can tell McCain and Graham to pretend Susan Rice was the National Security Advisor who helped the president ignore "Bin Laden determined to attack inside United States," so naturally she should be promoted to SoS.

    ReplyDelete
  60. sharculese9:31 AM

    Okay, so VAWA is tangential to my area of expertise, and all year I've been saying that OF COURSE we'll get it reauthorized, it happened without issue in 2006 and Republicans haven't gotten THAT crazy. So realizing it's November and it still hasn't happened yet has been a huge bucket of cold water dumped right on my head.

    ReplyDelete
  61. satch9:32 AM

    Come come, Ms. Willow... nothing builds character like having to pull yourself up by your own bootstraps without help from a sloth-promoting federal government, working two or three jobs because one of them isn't enough to get by on, all while overcoming the natural advantages that the already wealthy have in access to quality health care, education, and the network of similarly situated privileged contacts to help a body along. No one knows this deeper in his bones than Son-Of-The-Soil, Regular Guy Mitt Romney, and it's ever so unfortunate that now, since his tragic loss, we will never learn the salutary benefits of hard labor, and the freedom that comes with it.

    ReplyDelete
  62. satch9:40 AM

    Why, yes... it's called "The Paper Bag Test", although she would become an instant right wing heroine if she'd just come clean admit that she lied to the country because Obama's Chicago thugs were holding her children in a secure, undisclosed location...

    ReplyDelete
  63. brandonrg9:51 AM

    Ta-Nehisi Coates made some excellent comments on this in regards to racism back in April, but I think it applies here as well:

    http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/04/racism-vs-the-race-card/256072/

    "I think this sort of thinking is endemic to how the conservative movement thinks about racism. For them it isn't an actual force, but a rhetorical device for disarming your opponents. So one does not call Robert Weissberg racist and question his ties to National Review because one seeks to stamp out racism, but because one hopes to secure the White House for Democrats. Or some such. Even if you have a record of calling out bigotry voiced by people deemed to be "on your team," it doesn't much matter because there's no real belief in it existing to begin with."



    Sexism and racism are just seen as political tools or cards to be played in an argument, not actual challenges people face.

    ReplyDelete
  64. TomParmenter10:11 AM

    John Frum, he come.

    ReplyDelete
  65. IanY7710:13 AM

    Heads I win, tails you lose. If Obama doesn't defend Rice, he's "throwing her under the bus!!". If he does, "WAR ON WOMEN!!! NEENER NEENER!!". I hate to say it, but Republicans are masters of this.

    ReplyDelete
  66. TomParmenter10:16 AM

    Kirchik sighting! Excitement!

    ReplyDelete
  67. The Dark Avenger10:52 AM

    After his brother David arrives in New Guinea.

    ReplyDelete
  68. Lurking Canadian11:36 AM

    Let us stipulate for a moment that the spokesperson in question had been male and Obama had NOT defended him. He would then be accused of shirking his responsibility, not understanding where the buck stopped, being a "fake president" and so on.

    The real crime here is presidentin' while black. If the wingnuts are going to feign outrage no matter what he does, there's no reason to expect them to have any kind of an impact, except upon their own already deluded followers.

    ReplyDelete
  69. BigHank5311:43 AM

    Not to mention that it's impossible for Exxon-Mobil to squeeze its 300,000 lb ass into a voting booth. So far, anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  70. reallyaimai12:23 PM

    I don't think it was as much as two weeks. He gave an ok concession speech that rises in one's estimation after seeing Romney's, but he was right back on the talk shows bitching about Obama within a week of coming back to Washington. If that was more than two weeks after losing it was probably because he was chained up in a closet somewhere cutting bits off of life sized Obama and Palin dolls while Megan and Cuntry first held the door closed.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Why, yes... it's called "The Paper Bag Test"

    I thought that was, "Do people have a hard time distinguishing between you and a paper bag full of shit? Then you too could be a GOP member of Congress."

    ReplyDelete
  72. DocAmazing1:41 PM

    I have memories of having been interested in ladyparts and having been shut right down.

    ReplyDelete
  73. TheIllogicalOne2:59 PM

    Is this the only thing Graham is trying to have both ways? It would be irresponsible not to speculate...

    ReplyDelete
  74. tigrismus3:32 PM

    Kirsten Powers rages over Obama's "chauvinistic" defense of Rice

    I just can't get over this. Obama is a chauvinist for recognizing that these idiots are using Rice as a means to attack him indirectly, but when John McCain calls her "unqualified" and "not too bright" it obviously makes him a staunch feminist in Powers' book.

    ReplyDelete
  75. Duncan4:25 PM

    You might be right on the other stuff, but using "literally" to mean "totally" or "figuratively" or "kind of" knows no partisan or ideological or educational boundaries.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Duncan4:28 PM

    That's cute. I remember when some hack from Newsweek, back around the time of the second Intifada, was saying that if his audience thought that Palestinian kids were "unarmed," he could throw a brick at them and see if they really thought so. Someone in the audience stood up and said, OK, but then we'll retaliate by shooting at you with an attack fighter jet. (This was before the days of Predator drones.)

    ReplyDelete
  77. Duncan4:33 PM

    "a president who demands he be held accountable for the actions of the Exec branch" - I think he takes responsibility but not the blame. (Some here may be old enough to remember where I got that.) And does that mean he's ready to be held accountable for, oh, I don't know, violating the War Powers Act or killing American citizens without due process?

    ReplyDelete
  78. montag24:52 PM

    Oh, indeed. I suspect that there's a mandatory Feigned Outrage 101 class for all College Republicans, with a prerequisite Hyperbole 100. Once they pass WhackJob and Oddjob, they go on to BagJob.

    ReplyDelete
  79. AGoodQuestion6:15 PM

    That was pretty evident in the last election, and it results in a lot of breathtaking projection. They were already working the line that Obama was a sexist. Why? Because Hillary was a woman and Sarah Palin was a woman and Obama said something about lipstick and that lady got a backwards B cut into her face shut up yes she did. And they knew that Obama wouldn't shoot back that his opponents were all racist, because you just don't. Nice plan.

    ReplyDelete
  80. AGoodQuestion6:31 PM

    I really worry about them; they seem to be pathologically unaware that they are incoherent.


    That's a feature, not a bug. It allows them to keep talking without even passing out from embarrassment.

    ReplyDelete
  81. AGoodQuestion6:39 PM

    hate to say it, but Republicans are masters of this.


    Masturs they may be, but in the end they're just bating us.

    ReplyDelete
  82. reallyaimai8:17 PM

    How did I miss this brilliant post? I would like to daub myself with mud, stick a few sticks through my nose, and build a model airplane and radio out of coconuts and pandanus leaf while praying to this comment to drop me some army meals.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Leeds man8:18 PM

    Obviously, you're not old enough to remember that "responsibility" and "accountability" lost all meaning decades ago. Not to mention "transparency". Luckily, we still have "blame", which can be shared by everyone.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Chris Anderson11:45 PM

    I was born in '71 and learned the term from a sci-fi novel in the early eighties. I forget the title. The plot involved an elaborate live RPG with players and actors. The actors played zombies, witchdoctors and so on, in a setting with "cargo cult" themes, among others. On top of all this was a murder mystery that worked itself out as the players attempted to complete their adventure under pseudo-real duress with actual killings added to the mix.


    It seemed like a good book at the time; I'd like to find it again and see how it fares many years later.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Chris Anderson11:51 PM

    I looked up that name, and was fascinated. I hope I remember to read further on the subject.

    ReplyDelete
  86. eohippus1:02 AM

    That was 'Dream Park' by Larry Niven and a co-author.

    ReplyDelete
  87. smut clyde3:22 AM

    "the White House press corps should have flown into a frenzy."

    I find myself wondering whether Kirsten Powers visualises the WH press corps as a hen-house, as a murder of crows, or perhaps as a scold of jays. Any of these would be fine, but I would like to know.

    ReplyDelete
  88. smut clyde3:37 AM

    Does 1985 popular music not count?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WA_6IDZ1rww

    ReplyDelete
  89. wileywitch10:49 AM

    Flying monkeys, perhaps?

    ReplyDelete
  90. Provider_UNE6:17 PM

    If only this Rice was white, or Republican...
    ...

    ReplyDelete
  91. M. Krebs7:35 PM

    Or black and/i> Republican. There's a truth table here and only one box says SKREE!

    ReplyDelete
  92. Tudor Jennings8:46 PM

    Typical sexist liberals! Mind you, what do you expect after all their nanny-state whining about the so-called invasive procedure of wanding a woman's **** to see if she 'deserves' to be allowed to kill an innocent child - I mean have a legal abortion.

    ReplyDelete
  93. farrah1236:10 AM

    Find Free Online Jobs from home and Part time Online Jobs without investments

    www.jobzcorner.com

    ReplyDelete
  94. AngryWarthogBreath8:17 AM

    As Joe Biden has shown us all.

    ReplyDelete
  95. tim1179:32 AM

    Most of he coursework is in Bagjob, right. Since upwards of 80% of the conservative "movement" is about the grift, at least 90 percent of coursework is about he grift, right?

    ReplyDelete
  96. tim1179:35 AM

    You must be married

    ReplyDelete
  97. tim1179:38 AM

    Don't forget he also promised himself and his family an elimination of their tax liability when the Ryan budget "zeroed out" capital gains taxes. Romney had an 13 million dollar bet on this and he is taking that defeat badly

    ReplyDelete
  98. M. Krebs5:32 PM

    Huh. Never heard of these Gravity Pirates. An aussie band, I'm guessing?

    ReplyDelete
  99. this is the best comment of all

    ReplyDelete