Monday, September 15, 2008

Exposing McCain's Vagina

Sarah Palin at 26 weeks pregnant? Is it true? Inquiring minds should want to know.


I admit it. The header on this post is tacky. But given that McCain is refusing to go anywhere without his new Vagina, Sarah Palin, I don't see why I can't continue the theme here. I mean, really. If he can flash his Vagina at every campaign stop, is it really so wrong for bloggers to take a poke at it?

McCain is clearly trying to capitalize on the Vagina Mania that has resulted from the Palin Pick. He is flaunting his Vagina everywhere, and acts all indignant when someone rubs it the wrong way. This is a departure from the standard thinking of the Conservative Male, who has always implied that anyone showing off their Vagina is just asking for it.

The GOP can't expect to have it both ways. On one hand, they are telling us what a tough cookie Sarah Palin is, even as they try to shield her with the other. The security around McCain's Vagina is tighter than a chastity belt. 

She's hardly allowed out alone, and the media deserves a rap on the knuckles for being afraid to look mean by asking the hard questions about what little they know. Take for instance this whole business of Sarah Palin's five month old baby. When it was implied that the child might actually be her daughter Bristol's, the cry of outrage was deafening. 

"Of course that baby came out of McCain's Vagina!" they insisted.

After all, how dare anyone suggest that a fundamentalist Christian, anti-abortion, abstinence-advocating,  Republican politician would attempt to pass off her daughter's pregnancy as her own to save political face.

How dare they suggest that said politician's visual absence of a pregnancy until the surprise last minute announcement, combined with said daughter's eight-month absence from school be anything more than a coincidence! 

How dare anyone be so cynical as to doubt that a politician hungering for the second highest post in the land would cover something like that up! 

God forbid someone actually examine the whole situation in detail! To do so would be to risk being called a sexist. Or worse, mean!

It would take a brave person indeed to examine these allegations.  Unfortunately, you won't find anyone like that in the media, which is handling McCain's Vagina with a kid glove, as opposed to the standard latex. 

But today someone sent me a link to a Web site that has finally done what the media is failing to do - take a good hard look at the possibility that Sarah Palin may not be Trig's mother, but his grandmother.

The Web site is www.palindeception.com and I insist that you visit it, because you'll find analysis and questions regarding this situation that you won't find anywhere else. The authors are not crackpots; they are a husband and wife team who have some knowledge to back up their suspicions. The woman is a mother and lactation counselor, her husband a physician. Both allow for the fact that Palin may be telling the truth, while examining facts that look very sketchy when you take them as a whole.

To those of you who think my posting this is just awful, awful, awful let me just ask you to consider this: PalinDeception.com raises some very good questions that need to be addressed. If Sarah Palin lied about giving birth to Trig, it is no small thing. It is huge. Because a person who would implement this kind of cover-up - a person this willing to sacrifice principle for power -  is capable of doing anything to keep that power.

And we know what we call that kind of person, don't we? 

That's right. We call them Karl Rove.

Think about it. Study up. And don't be afraid to question, even if the media is.



15 comments:

Christopher said...

I think your concluding sentence summed up the larger problem: the media will always be afraid to question. Let's say, hypothetically, that Bristol Palin is now really pregnant with her second child. I think we've already gotten a taste of how it would play out if that came out. McCain's Vagina could say, "Haven't we all been young and irresponsible?" and then insist that campaign was about issues, not whether she hid away her daughter. She could even blame the "liberal media", saying she wanted to "protect her daughter" from scrutiny.
Don't get me wrong. I think you didn't just hit the nail on the head, I think you buried the nail when you said, "a person who would implement this kind of cover-up - a person this willing to sacrifice principle for power - is capable of doing anything to keep that power." I think we've gotten a taste of that as well. Palin has used her children as political tools when it's convenient. She paraded her soldier son, trumpeting to the world that he was being deployed on September 11th. It was a contrived and shameless exploitation of a national tragedy that's already been shamelessly exploited by Palin's party. But when questions came up about her daughter, she declared her whole family off-limits. And most of the people in the media scurried around like a bunch of obedient lapdogs, grovelling at her feet and begging forgiveness.
We do want to know. We deserve to know the truth, even if some of us have become so cynical and so jaded that we believe the truth won't make any difference.

Morgan said...

The double standards are getting ridiculous. In addition to the media not picking up on your EXCELLENT example of Palin exploiting her Soldier Boy Son while shielding her Baby Mama Daughter, they are ignoring the fact that the same GOP that cried out for more vetting of Obama is trying everything possible to keep McCain's Vagina from being vetted at all.

It kind of smacks of racism - it's OK for the media to go after a black guy, but unseemly for the media to question the honor of a well-coiffed white woman.

There's a good article in the NYT today that sheds more light on Palin's governing style:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/politics/14palin.html?pagewanted=1&bl&_r=2&ei=5087&en=0a08e0fcae834dd5&ex=1221537600&adxnnlx=1221490895-UwISxWo/U76Aof85i7OZ3Q

I think my favorite part of the story is how she tapped a high school chum as the head of the state agricultural department based on the woman's "childhood love of cows."

Of course, the True Christians™ and other right-wing nut jobs will dismiss the story simply because it appeared in the Times, simply because they want to believe the myth that's swirling around this woman.

They see her as a savior of sorts. Who says Fundamentalists don't have false idols?

Oh, and Chris, you're right about the spin, too. Even if Palin is exposed as lying about the kid they'll find some way to twist it to where she still looks like a victim, even as they continue to try and portray her as tough as nails.

It's an interesting balance, but people are buying it. Then again, people can be awfully stupid.

laughingwolf said...

times like this, i'm glad NOT to me american :(

that's not to say i won't reapply once the dust settles....

Christopher said...

Morgan, thanks for providing the link to that article. And questioning the source just because it's the New York Times is something I've already had to deal with. When they published an article about Palin wanting to ban books in her local library, I got an e-mail from someone who dismissed it as "propaganda from the New York Pravda". What I didn't understand, though, was why anyone would try to question the veracity of Palin banning books. I would think her opposition to literacy would be something her supporters would want to push.
I don't know whether it's racism or not. I think you're right in calling it a double-standard, though. In all their talk about Palin, Republicans keep emphasizing her "experience", even though she hasn't got any real experience. Just about everything she's said--from her claims to never working with lobbyists to being opposed to earmarks to stopping the "bridge to nowhere" is a bold-faced lie. And yet no one calls her on it.
There is definitely racism in this race, though. Just look at the pin the Texas GOP was allowing a vendor to sell at their convention:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/obamapin
Sure, it was an "independent seller". Do you think they'd let Democrats get away with that same lame-assed excuse?

Morgan said...

That button doesn't surprise me a bit, but in the interest of fairness (which is something you won't find on the right) I don't think the GOP is alone in its racism where Obama is concerned. The Clinton campaign and its surrogates used horribly racist tactics, from Clinton's dismissive comparison of Obama's S.C. primary in to Jesse Jackson's similar victory to the elitist label and subsequent poster showing Obama with is nose in the air. Those of us in the south knew quite well what the Clinton campaign was trying to do. Without coming out and saying it, they were implying to blue-collar voters that Obama as just another Uppity Nigger. I never could forgive the Clintons for that, and it's the one reason I wasn't completely disappointed when Obama snubbed Clinton. I think despite the pressure to tap Hillary, he realized that down deep they were no different that the right wing racists he'd have to deal with in November. And he was right.

Christopher said...

That's a very good point. Even if it weren't racism, I can never forgive Hillary especially for playing a destructive long-term strategy. Once she was so far behind in delegates she couldn't catch up she didn't gracefully step aside. She continued fighting, apparently with an eye on giving McCain a win in 2008 so she could aim for 2012.

laughingwolf said...

Complete article is on Huffington Post


This is from Eve Ensler, author of "The Vagina Monologues"

I don't like raging at women.

I am a Feminist and have spent my life trying to build community, help empower women and stop violence against them. It is hard to write about Sarah Palin.

This is why the Sarah Palin choice was all the more insidious and cynical.

The people who made this choice count on the goodness and solidarity of Feminists.

But everything Sarah Palin believes in and practices is antithetical to Feminism which for me is part of one story -- connected to saving the earth, ending racism, empowering women, giving young girls options, opening our minds, deepening tolerance, and ending violence and war.

I believe that the McCain/Palin ticket is one of the most dangerous choices of my lifetime, and should this country choose those candidates the fall-out may be so great, the destruction so vast in so many areas that America may never recover.

But, what is equally disturbing is the impact that duo would have on the rest of the world.

Unfortunately, this is not a joke.

In my lifetime I have seen the clownish, the inept, the bizarre be elected to the presidency with regularity.

Sarah Palin does not believe in evolution.

I take this as a metaphor.

In her world, and the world of Fundamentalists, nothing changes, gets better, or evolves.

She does not believe in global warming.

The melting of the arctic, the storms destroying our cities, the pollution, and rise of cancers, are all part of "God's plan".

She is fighting to take the polar bears off the endangered species list.

The earth, in Palin's view, is here to be taken and plundered.

The wolves and the bears are here to be shot and plundered.

The oil is here to be taken and plundered.

Iraq is here to be taken and plundered.

As she said herself of the Iraqi war, "It was a task from God".

Sarah Palin does not believe in abortion.

She does not believe women who are raped, or incested, and ripped open against their will, should have a right to determine whether they have their rapist's baby or not.

She obviously does not believe in sex education, or birth control.

I imagine her daughter was practicing "abstinence", and we know how many babies that makes.

Sarah Palin does not much believe in thinking.

From what I gather, she has tried to ban books from the library, has a tendency to dispense with people who think independently.

She cannot tolerate an environment of ambiguity and difference.

This is a woman who could and might very well be the next president of the United States.

She would govern one of the most diverse populations on the earth.

Sarah believes in guns.

She has her own, custom, Austrian hunting rifle.

She has been known to kill 40 caribou at a clip.

She has shot hundreds of wolves... from the air.

Sarah believes in God.

That is, of course, her right, her private right.

But when God and Guns come together in the public sector, when war is declared in God's name, when the rights of women are denied in his name, that is the end of separation of church and state, and the undoing of everything America has ever tried to be.

I write to my sisters.

I write because I believe we hold this election in our hands.

This vote is a vote that will determine the future, not just of t he U.S., but of the planet.

It will determine whether we create policies to save the earth or make it forever uninhabitable for humans.

It will determine whether we move towards dialogue and diplomacy in the world or whether we escalate violence through invasion, undermining and attack.

It will determine whether we go for oil, strip mining, coal burning or invest our money in alternatives that will free us from dependency and destruction.

It will determine if money gets spent on education and healthcare or whether we build more and more methods of killing.

It will determine whether America is a free open tolerant society or a closed place of fear, fundamentalism and aggression.

If the Polar Bears don't move you to go and do everything in your power to get Obama elected, then consider the chant that filled the hall after Palin spoke at the RNC, "Drill Drill Drill".

I think of teeth when I think of drills.

I think of rape.

I think of destruction.

I think of domination.

I think of military exercises that force mindless repetition, emptying the brain of analysis, doubt, ambiguity or dissent.

I think of pain.

Do we want a future of drilling?

More holes in the ozone, in the floor of the sea, more holes in our thinking, in the trust between nations and peoples, more holes in the fabric of this precious thing we call life?

Morgan said...

i don't know if I entirely agree with Ensler's perspective, even if I do admire some of her earlier work. I mean, forgive me for saying this, but what she draws from the call to drill is part of what's wrong with modern feminism. It borders on the silly.

When I hear someone call to drill, I don't think of rape. I think of oil, and the only problem I see is a continuation of reliance on a fuel that is in finite supply. Ensler's Vagina-centric perspective is a bit annoying. And, dare I say, silly. As a woman this kind of thing just makes me roll my eyes.

I do agree with her take on Palin, though. I think the possibility that this woman may ascend to higher office bodes ill for all of us, but especially for women. I want to see a woman in power as much as anyone else. But I don't want it to be The Church Lady.

laughingwolf said...

much as i disliked hillarious clintstone, palin is far worse!

as for ensler, i agree, just posted it as further proof thinking folk have no use for palin....

Morgan said...

Hilarious Clinstone. Har, har, har!!

Please tell me you saw the SNL parody, Wuff. Tina Fey and Amy Poeller just nailed those two.

Oh, and don't take me wrong. I appreciate your sending me the Ensler piece. I was glad to read it, even if my eyes did get temporarily stuck in a rolled-up position.

Christopher said...

It cracks me up that the McCain campaign has complained that Tina Fey's impersonation of Palin was "sexist". Obviously they'll paint anything as sexist.

Oh, and Morgan, you seem to have political crystal ball. Karl Rove has criticized the McCain campaign for not being honest. And you know, when Karl Rove calls you a liar...

JohnR said...

Morgan: I think you are getting a little unhinged on this one.

The so-called experts are a woman and a mother and a lactation specialist and the husband is a physician.

And their expertise is what exactly? Is the physician an OB/GYN or a gastroenterologist?

You are starting to sound like an ex-smoker who wants every one to stop.

McCain played this brilliantly. Obama/Biden are now running against Palin. Everyone has determined that McCain will die in office despite the odds being 70% against that happening.

We know what you are against. Tell us what you are for. How about a post on what makes Obama (phony as Palin, McCain, and Biden) such a good choice.

Is Eve Ensler crazy or what?

Morgan said...

Karl Rove calling you a liar is like....Karl Rove calling you a liar.

And I cannot believe McCain said the skit was sexist. Say what???

To JohnR: Before you claim my mind is unhinged, you might want to open your own and at least read what the authors of PalinDeception.com have to say. Once you do, you're welcome to refute the points they raise on the Web site and I'll happily debate you, as I'm sure the authors would since there's also a Palin Deception blog linked off the Web site.

Too much just doesn't add up, and if you read the site you'd know that. Unless, you don't really want to be forced to question whether Palin is lying. But I can't make that decision for you.

Now, per Obama. Do I see him as a savior? No. But I've yet to see one politician as a savior. Do I see him as a better choice than McCain, who tarnished what maverick reputation he had when he sold himself out to appease the mouth-breathing, fundamentalist Christian base with this baffling selection of a running mate who happens to be the personification of every criticism he had of Obama.

The answer is "Yes." I've said it before, JohnR, if McCain had chosen a Lieberman or woman based on some other criteria than having a vagina then I would have given him serious consideration. But this move to become Panderer in Chief has put him squarely out of the running as far as I'm concerned. I simply cannot stomach the notion of a President Palin, and I don't think you can either.

Obama is the lesser of the two evils here, because as far as I'm concerned what Bush has done to this country is truly, intentionally Evil. McCain would just bring more of the same. Obama's road would not be perfect, but it would be at least in another direction.

That's my take on it, anyway.

And yes, Eve Ensler came across totally crazy in that Huffington Piece. Geesh.

PalinBabyQuestion said...

Here's another website that's collecting and publishing information about this

www.geocities.com/palinbabyquestion

PalinBaby Question said...

Here's the updated website address:

http://www.palinbabyquestion.com