A "1970s feminist" democrat writes that she will vote for McCain

[RagingInMiami]

by Jane Becker

I wrote a commentary about Sarah Palin who fascinates me even as her social policies repel me.

She intrigues me because she embodies everything I, as a 1970’s feminist, hoped that women would be able to achieve: she nurses an infant as she governs a state.

But she has been roundly vilified by those who consider themselves liberals, as well as by members of the liberal press—and she has been supported by the right wing conservatives whom I have always disdained.

I find myself defending the Republican Party.

So I had to sit down finally and consider the question of whether or not I could actually cast a vote for McCain-Palin. And the answer is yes.


http://www.blogher.com/democrat-votes-republican

[donco6]

1. Another vagina-voter.

Sign her up Frenchiecat.

[Nikki Stone1]

79. Actually, she's not. Did you read the article?

I disagree with her, but here is what she says:

"We need a President who can reach across Pennsylvania Avenue and reach across the aisle in Congress…someone who has proven him or herself capable of forging compromises between opposing parties, someone who can generate discussion (unlike House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi who shut off the lights in Congress and then asked demonstrators if she could “drill their heads).

Both Joe Biden and Tom Daschle have gone on record as saying that John McCain would make a good Democrat—that’s how good his record is. He has brokered agreements between Republicans and Democrats in Congress and gotten behind campaign financing. He is a respected—and proven—leader, respected by both parties.

Now, I don’t agree with him on the war in Iraq. But the Democratic Party asked me to vote for John Kerry, who supported the war in Iraq and the Democratic-controlled Congress has voted over and over not only to authorize this war, but also to keep funding it. So, where’s the difference between the Dems and McCain there?

McCain is against a woman’s right to chose. Yet the Democratic Party asked me to vote for Bob Casey, who is one of the most vehement anti-choice politicians around. And he’s not the only anti-choice Democrat in Congress to feel that way. So where’s the difference between McCain and the Dems there?"




I don't personally buy the Kerry remark, but I think she's spot on with Bob Casey. It is Casey that brought the suit against Planned Parenthood that became the infamous "Webster decision" in 1989 that started the crumble of Roe v. Wade. And it was one of our own!

[Lorien]

2. She missed the whole point of the feminist movement

that gender SHOULD NOT MATTER when it comes to doing a job!

[SemiCharmedQuark]

6. She was already going to vote for McCain, but she doesn't know why.

[annabanana]

37. There's just "something" about Obama.. She can't put her finger on it. .

[Skittles]

84. he....he's all TALK

and....um.....well, he TALKS to much :rofl:

[BR_Parkway]

87. Well, he talks with lips that are darker than a lot of ofther peoples

"There's just something about him I can't put my finger on"

Not to knock the historic campaign of Hillary, but there's a part of me who wishes that this year hadn't had any women at those top tiers - just to see how far some would go to not vote for a black man. I mean, we've had a pair of white millionaires running for both tickets for how many successive contests?

[Skittles]

95. white millionaire men

say it like it is

[knixphan]

16. Zactly.

[ColbertWatcher]

26. It sounds like all she knows about "feminism" is ...

... that it's a word that has something to do with women.

[otherlander]

30. Great post.

:thumbsup:

[bean fidhleir]

75. Precisely. She sounds like one of the supremacists we used to run into

(too often). Women who were unclear on the meaning of "equality"

[Nikki Stone1]

80. Actually the bulk of the article is about why she is voting MCCAIN--Palin disappears

after the first paragraph or two.

[Catch22Dem]

3. She's vilified by liberals becuase she's a right-wing religious-nut conservative

You dumbfuck! Not because she's a woman!

JesusFuckingChrist!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[bluestateguy]

4. How selfish. She is not the one who will have to worry about abortion being banned.

It sounds like she is well beyond child-birthing age. This is my hypothesis as to why MOST of the PUMA's seem to be older women. Younger women who might have supported Hillary in the primary have more at stake. They understand the real world implications of a McCain win.

[Canuckistanian]

29. Right

She is so far removed from the intense movement in the 70's, she's lost the basic message.

McCain represents a return to the 60's, not the future.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

5. She says she had already decided not to support Obama pre-Palin.

"You do realize that I had already said I would not be voting for Senator Obama long before Governor Palin was announced as the VP pick, right?

You do realize that I had already indicated I was leaning toward McCain and was waiting for both VP picks, right?

My intent to vote for Senator McCain was only strengthened once Governor Palin and Senator Biden were selected.

You may not realize that I am a very conservative Democrat, which also plays a part in my decision to move from Clinton to McCain. "

[Cerridwen]

7. Anyone still want to argue that "all feminists" think alike?

That feminism is a monolithic mind set?

Anyone?

By the way, I might add that a 1970s "feminist" might conceivably *snort* be past the time when conception is an issue. And, as has been the case with some women who proclaimed themselves "feminist" to obtain the privileges feminists fought and died for while sweetly stating "I'm not a feminist...but;" she got hers, 'fuck you' to the rest.

What? You think only men do that shit?

[bobbolink]

13. On the other hand......

"Liberals" are much more concerned about that than about poverty and homelessness.

Where does that fit in?

[Cerridwen]

14. "Liberals," maybe. Feminists and feminisms got there eventually...

it was an, you should pardon the expression, evolutionary experience.

The history of the women's movement is one of naivete and learning; both politics and social realities. The difference between feminists and politicians; feminists learned and adapted and included.

There are also feminismS. Note that ending 's'. There are so many issues to address and so many "theories" on how best to address them. The "conventional wisdom" that feminists are of a hive mind and can only do one issue at a time is a corporate media catapulted idea. Many "liberals" too, believe it.

[TahitiNut]

20. The test of a "liberal" isn't whether they advocate for their own interests ...

... but whether they advocate and support equitable treatment for ALL. Thus, a white female "feminist" is not necessarily a liberal any more than white male klansman is. It's a commonly mistaken assumption, though.

[bobbolink]

22. Very well put!

May I quote you?

[TahitiNut]

25. Sure. It's a theme I thought I'd develop some time in a thread ... when it's calmer on DU.

It's pretty clear to me that, even on DU, the word 'liberal' is ill-understood.

[Fumesucker]

63. Given that I've seen it used as an insult here...

Yes I would say liberal is misunderstood.

[otherlander]

35. Another great post!

Taking a stand for the rights of women or the rights of the mentally ill wouldn't make me progressive, because I could just be doing that out of self interest. But advocating for the rights of racial minorities or homeless people would, because I am neither of those so it couldn't be self-interest.

I kind of wonder about some women who are feminists: Would they still be feminists if they were born male? Usually the way to tell is whether or not they care as much about groups that they aren't part of.

[TahitiNut]

42. I was a card-carrying member of ACLU, NAACP, and NOW for decades.

I allied myself with GLBT activists in both California and Washington. As a straight white male, I regard myself as a liberal ... a steadfast independent liberal. I have ALWAYS supported organized labor, even though I was in management for the large majority of my career. I'm a LIBERAL. I refuse to call myself a "moderate" or a "centrist" or any other weasel-word ... because I'm a LIBERAL. When I read John Rawls, I thought my mind (and heart) had been read. It perplexes me when folks whine about how THEIR interests "got thrown under the bus" ... when it CANNOT be about anything but the interests of ALL. Equitably. Fairly. In justice.

I am NOT colorblind or gender-blind or blind to ANY of the wonderful array of differences we have that make us a fascinating and exciting PEOPLE. I wallow in diversity ... I don't 'tolerate' it. Vive la difference! It makes us a fascinating 'family' ... and makes Thanksgiving FUN. (A stranger is only a friend I haven't met.)



In a sense, however, I've lied if I've suggested that I don't see such stances as being in my own interests. I do. It's because I know that human relations are NOT a zero-sum game. There is no "win-lose" ... there's only "win-win" and "lose-lose" ... and I want to win.

[bobbolink]

48. You have a great beginning on an essay on Being Liberal here...

I hope you will develop this, and begin writing.

THIS is the sort of thing we need to be discussing!

:yourock:

edited to say... let me make that GREAT essay!

We do a lot of putting down the other side... if we REALLY want to make our party relevant, this is what we need to be developing.

You do have a great start here......I want to see the rest of it. :hi:

[otherlander]

50. Thanks, bobbolink!

That's all I wrote, though. :hi:

[bean fidhleir]

89. "a white female "feminist" is not necessarily a liberal" Not so, TN

I'm a "Second Wave" ('70s) feminist myself, and I can tell you with certainty that the defining qualification for being a feminist was and is: belief in equality for all.

There are people calling themselves feminists who are actually something else, just as there are plenty so-called "liberals" who are the lip-service kind Phil Ochs sang about.

[Indenturedebtor]

67. Bobbo that is not even remotely true

One of the top issues for Liberals is Socialised Healthcare, and most of them deal with providing jobs, affordable housing, accessible education, etc. Affirmative action is not a top issue.

[bobbolink]

69. "Not even remotely true" ?????

Just for example... there are many other clues... This is how the "liberal" media deals with homelessness, compared with other issues:

The NationDemocracy NowCommon-dreams.orgTruth-out.orgMother JonesNY TimesTime
Abortion101024529102770146620,2213649
AIDS97122229801620152933,45920,371
Christian Coalition636971180807183126,8641219
Cuba4404332900230031216,3834586
Gaza3456622290164021788211711
Haiti18136993493213187961257
Hamas192360133014202053716853
Health care101041190405790949645,7149986
Human rights 3700 1709 48,000 10,500 9777 40,905 13,263
Homelessness 72 18 325 212 319 3573 163
Racism 1720 222 1720 736 280 10474 1599
Sadr City66713878513802504681161
Wind power247391510759836446,4853147
World Trade Organization511200361098711,27367,1632843

edited to say: The table doesn't format right, but I cleared up both homelessness and racism so you can see the difference in coverage.

You're so certain, so you will probably continue to argue it. Just look right here at DU, and see the number of threads, not to mention the number of posts per thread, about poverty, and you will see for yourself.

If you care, you will see it.

Otherwise, I'm not willing to argue the matter.

It's very clear.

[Indenturedebtor]

71. But we already know what needs to be done

There is no controversy on the left about affordable housing and national healthcare. Sure, arguments abound about how to get those two things, but most democrats and pretty much all liberals are for it.

[bobbolink]

73. Could you please point to ONE speech by Obama et al. saying that?

Could you please point to threads right here on DU (and mine don't count) of DUers campaigning for low-income housing?

National healthcare? middleclass topic.

Low-income housing... that's for us poor scum, and we don't count.

Show me.

You very slyly IGNORED what I posted about the LACK of articles in "progressive" literature. That doesn't fit in with your sneering at me, so you act like it wasn't even posted. You want a dialogue, then be honest about it.

[Indenturedebtor]

77. Here's a link fo you

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/poverty/

[bobbolink]

81. EVERY candidate has mention of poverty somewhere on their website.

Hell, I even went to McCain's site and saw his speech about NOLA, and other mentions.

One mention on a website does NOT constitute a dedication to poverty, which I'm very sure you understand.

I reminded you about the homeless people who counted the articles about homelessness in LIBERAL news....... waaaaay overshadowed by just about every other issue. You don't reply to that.

I don't know why it's so difficult for you to understand and to admit that poverty and homelessness just don't rank among "progressives"... it's quite obvious. And, as I said before, it shows right here at DU.

So, you can rag on me all you want, and try to beat me down, if that is your pleasure.

The POINT IS.... poverty doesn't matter that much to "liberals", and homeless people saw it and noticed it enough to even do a study about the media.

Whether you "approve" of my pointing this out or not, doesn't change the reality.

POOR PEOPLE SEE IT.

Do you really believe they are going to keep standing in 4 hour, 6 hour and longer lines to vote, when they keep seeing that they/we don't rate a mention in stump speeches, when we aren't mentioned during an acceptance speech, when the FACTS of our lives aren't written about in "liberal" media?

You (pl) keep pushing at us to "vote", yet you don't bother to give us much to vote FOR.

You can argue, you can put us down.. but the facts remain.

Give us something to vote FOR.

Not against... stop with that childish "so, you think McCain will do better for you?" crap.

GIVE US SOMETHING TO VOTE FOR!

[Indenturedebtor]

83. Do you imagine that I'm wealthy?

As I think I said upthread, the progressive media is not the final word on what progressives care about. But what exactly do you think that more education assistance, public transportation, raising the minimum wage, socialised healthcare, etc are about? You think it's just about the middle class? That everyone who isn't poor doesn't give a shit about poor people?

Let me clue you in on something: a lot of poor people think that they're middle class. A lot of rich people think that they're middle class. Stump speeches are geared to include the taret audience. But look at the actual platform. What exactly is it that you want to see? Unfortunately populist candidates that use the same speech but say "poor" instead of "middle class" don't make it as far. Most people don't wan't to think of themselves as poor. Hell I'm going bankrupt as we speak, but I don't like to think of myself as poor even though I technically qualify.

Anyways what do you want to see? A speech? What difference in platform if any?

[bobbolink]

90. "What exactly is it that you want to see? "

Action

Words are cheap, as the saying goes. What we DON'T see is actual efforts to eliminate poverty and homelessness, either in the party or in most individual instances. DU is a very good example of that. Poverty is on the bottom of the list here and as a matter of fact, RARELY makes ANY list of what people consider "priorities".

If you're so certain that Dems are working hard to eliminate poverty, why doesn't your name show up on any of the action threads where a simple PHONE CALL to a representative on a specific bill might make all the difference in passage of a bill FOR POOR FOLK? Where have YOU participated, if you want me and others to take you seriously on this?

Great job on dismissing the coverage of poverty issues..... not that I'm surprised. I could post the most clear-cut argument, and you'd dismiss it because you don't want to hear anything outside your own frame of reference. And THAT is precisely why the Dems are losing the poor vote... yet, all Dems want to do is to BLAME us for their ignoring us.

You can ignore me and shut me out and bad-mouth me all you want. It doesn't change the fact that poor people aren't STUPID and we see that we're being ignored, and will react accordingly, just as anyone else does. What will it take for you to understand that shutting people out doesn't make them support you and YOUR causes?

Here are the words of the group of poor people who did that important media study. Ignore them at your own peril:

As anyone can see, there isn’t much difference between the left media and the mainstream media in terms of priorities. At The Nation, there were 13.5 hits on “AIDS” for every one on “Homelessness,” at Democracy Now there were 12.3, and at the New York Times, there were 9.4. At Commondreams.org there were 4.1 hits on “Hamas” for every one on “Homelessness,” while at Truthout.org there were 6.7 and at Time there were 5.2 (only Mother Jones had more hits for “Homelessness” than for “Hamas.”).

On the surface, at least, the millions of Americans who become homeless every year would seem to be just as unimportant to the left as they are to the powerful corporate oligarchs who control most of our nation’s media. But what kind of social justice movement doesn’t care about the poorest of the poor? At the Homelessness Marathon, we think that’s a question worth asking.
http://www.homelessnessmarathon.org/

[Indenturedebtor]

92. Yes but I'm not terribly involved in general

I'm going bankrupt, trying to find another job, and working on a business. Long story short I'm trying to not go homeless. Dems haven't been truly in power for a long time. I for one carefully reviewed Obama's proposals on poverty issues before I chose him, once Edwards dropped out. I'm not the one trying to browbeat here, or shout you down.

I simply think that saying that Dems and Liberals don't care about poverty is not at all true... and it's insulting. Should it be more of an issue? Absolutely.

But you still didn't answer my question: what do you want to see on Obama's platform that isn't there already?

[bobbolink]

94. Well, guess what... I AM homeless, and doing what I can to get some of you to pay attention.

So that IF you end up homeless, you won't face as much prejudice and ignorance as I have.

IF you do, you'll then see what I'm talking about.

[Hello_Kitty]

55. Sarah Palin is a member of Feminists For Life

It's an organization that appropriates the language of the women's movement to advance an anti-choice agenda.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

59. All feminists are voting against Palin.

If they're voting for Palin, they ain't feminists.

:shrug:

[FVZA_Colonel]

8. She's being "vilified" because she's a fucking joke.

And the "vilification" is actually the media doing the McCain campaign's own job.

[wuushew]

9. What an idiot

I would love to hear how McCain will advance feminism by raining radioactive death on the women of the middle east.

[angstlessk]

10. like a DU'er saying...'I'm outta here'..and we say...don't let the door

etc....she leaves 20 more arrive...so what a hillbot voting against her best interest...welcome to Kansas, Dorothy

[Cerridwen]

19. Ya know what?

Stop with the 'hillbot' shit, k?

1 - the primaries are over

2 - those who supported Senator Clinton did so for more than 'vaginal' reasons

2a - one of those reasons had to do with a woman's autonomy of her own body.

3 - women, as evidenced by this article, don't all think alike, act alike, and are damned tired of being told by others that we do.

4 - that whole 'hillbot' thing is a creation of an anti-Clinton crowd receiving more press than their numbers warrant. Its intent is to divide.

5 - quit helping the divide.



edit - errant apostrophe

[angstlessk]

23. I apologize for the 'hillbot' remark..of course those who will vote for mcsame

are NOT Hillary Clinton supporters or they would now be voting for Obama...you are correct! Who they are might be better framed along with those lefties who became neo cons and now want to bomb all of the middle east?? Not the same people---same faces, same names. It is like their brains were re-wired?

[Cerridwen]

28. Thank you. I very much appreciate having a real discussion.

Re-wired? Naw. I think we're seeing people scramble to protect their own self interests at the expense of others. This idea that we have to protect our 'individual' rights and that 'individual rights' only exist in a vacuum. The whole idea of the health and wealth of the collective is now the evil of "communism/socialism".



Sad, isn't it?

[angstlessk]

38. I agree..it DOES take a village and not two parents to raise a child

it is the individualism which is causing all the horror not collectivism...ask a crip if he is the 'good guy'...ask the blood the same question...this us vs them mentality it is not working for America and did not work for Europe for more centuries than we can count here in our 250 year old 'democracy'

[Cerridwen]

40. It is successful at keep "us" stirred up as "they" go about their

every-day activities, though, don'tcha think?

Very sad we allow ourselves to be divided against each other rather than against those who most benefit from our division.

[angstlessk]

43. well, the us vs they regarding the income disparity is taking hold..so they must invent a new

us vs them...women against the???? religious right? against the media? against men...that will not work out well!!!

[Cerridwen]

45. Unfortunately, that's an old one.

Women against union workers; white women against women not white; certain classes of women against other classes of women.

The sad part is; we buy it every time.

Every f.r.e.a.k.i.n.g. time.

[alarimer]

58. I think those Clinton voters who are now voting for McCain were never Democrats at all.

They were always Republicans (or possibly "independents"). But not liberals and certainly not Democrats; it is possible they do not agree with much of the Democratic platform. How could they? Clinton and Obama have very similar positions on a lot of things.

[bobbolink]

76. Yeah, Randi says that, and she was here in Denvoid and didn't bother to look up the reference to the

Salazars... their own COUSIN is voting for McCain, and has said so publicly.

There are "Dems" who are doing that....anyone who really knows about the DLC shouldn't be surprised.

[hvn_nbr_2]

11. If she's a 1970s feminist, I guess she won't ever need a coathanger. nt

[GreenPartyVoter]

17. Touche

[Mandate My Ass]

12. She doesn't embody anything of the sort

as an astute DUer posted earlier, if Sarah Palin is anything, she's a Phyllis Schlafly wannabe. She only has a voice because of what feminists before her fought so hard for - and yet she works to throw all other females - present and future - under the fundy, patriarchal bus.

:puke:

[Kitty Herder]

33. Well said. nt

[tigereye]

15. oh for Christ's sake

no real feminist would vote for McCain, esp. with this nutjob on the ticket who is against everything feminists worked so hard for.


What a load of crap.

[mmonk]

56. Bingo. Right answer

from this male's point of view.

[tigereye]

57. glad to have you on board, sir!

:patriot:

[mmonk]

61. Proud to be on board.

Palin would be a backwards trajectory for women's rights.:hi:

[tsuki]

18. She's a "1970's feminist" who jumped the shark a long time ago.

She is voting against women's rights; to choose, to receive equal pay, to be free of a mind numbing, misogynist religious patriarchy.

Yep, that's where she left her feminism, in the 1970's.

[orleans]

21. *i* know feminists and this asshole is no feminist.

[Solly Mack]

24. So a woman nursing a baby while governing is the culmination of her hopes

on equality?

She should have aimed higher

[REP]

27. To quote Parker "Tonstant Weader Thwowed Up"

The pinnacle of the equal rights movement was to be handmaid to the patriarchy? Mkay.

[Pale Blue Dot]

31. ...

:rofl:

[Kitty Herder]

32. Why would a feminist vote for anti-feminists like McCain and Palin?

That's so self-defeating. It boggles the mind.

If Sarah Palin "embodies everything (she), as a 1970s feminist, hoped that women would be able to achieve," she wasn't hoping for much.

Palin is so stridently anti-choice, she almost makes the pope look moderate. She belongs to a church that says a woman must obey her husband. Rumor has it that her hubby is the "shadow governor." She is no feminist. I'd go so far as to say she's anti-woman.

[HughMoran]

53. She wouldn't

This is a thread about a liar.

[Skittles]

85. correct

[SunDrop23]

34. She's as much a feminist as I am the staring center for the Lakers. (nt)

[Pacifist Patriot]

36. So it makes her a 70s feminist and a mindless idiot. World has all kinds of folks in it.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

39. the 1970's are calling. they say they finally found Jane Beckers feminism

she might need it back someday

[Raksha]

41. I was a 1970s feminist, and now I'm a 2008 feminist.

And I'm NOT voting for McCain!

[Mad_Dem_X]

44. She is not a Democrat. And she is not a feminist.

Shame on her for turning her back on her country.

[ismnotwasm]

46. Exactly

What she is, is full of shit.

[RetroLounge]

47. And the comment is priceless

Do you mind if I link your post when people ask me to explain how I (a 45 year old Democrat lesbian feminist with 4 daughters and 2 sons)can vote the McCain/Palin ticket? At least until I finish my own post...

:puke:

RL

[Dr Fate]

49. I guess she is a 1870's "Feminist" if she supports McCain. n/t

n/t

[MoeHayNow]

51. I've seen no reason

for a woman to cast a vote for McCain simply because he has a woman running as his veep.

Wouldn't it be better to not vote than to vote in ignorance for McCain?

[HughMoran]

52. Thanks for posting what a moron thinks

I'm so fucking thrilled to see this post.

:eyes:

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

54. If you read the rest of what she writes...

Becker says she is just tired of partisanship. At age 50, she is "past" it, now.

Well too bad for you you're tired of it, lady. I guess you're just too old to care, eh? Nothing worth fighting for anymore, I guess. Let's just all be nice and get along. All this bickering hurts my head.

As a 70s feminist who's older than you, I say FUCK THAT SHIT!

Maybe it's because six months after I began to call myself a feminist, I realized I am a humanist. I couldn't see that men really had it any better than women, we just had different advantages and disadvantages; and that none of us would be better off until we were all better off. And I stopped blaming men for the aspects of life that they couldn't control any better than women could.

Or maybe it's because I'm not a shallow bimbo living in an historical void, who believes - like Becker does - that the Clinton and Bush administrations fostered partisan politics and destroyed the relationship between the executive and legislative branches.

I guess Clinton just should have ceded control to Gingrich and everything would have been ducky. I guess the Congressional Democrats shouldn't have shut down the government to protest Bush's policies. Y'all remember when that happened, don't you?

Listen, Miz Becker. Partisanship exists because inequality exists. It's not just kids throwing temper tantrums, it's people fighting for their country, their families, their lives. You go ahead and opt out if you want to. I wouldn't trust you next to me in the foxhole.

[seaglass]

66. Um, Obama's argument during the primary was a post-partisanship

argument that was accepted and promoted by many of his supporters on DU. That is one of the main reasons I did not support Obama during the primary.

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

68. Same here

I spent little time in GDP during the primaries and stopped posting altogether because I favored Clinton, and I considered many supporters of both candidates to be a total waste of my time. My main concern about Obama was his ability to fight to win. Of particular concern was his undercutting of 527 support and his nonpartisan rhetoric (which frankly I regarded as nothing more than a marketing position to differentiate him from the other candidates).

Now I believe he is a fighter because his campaign has exhibited unexpected and effective strategies for countering right-wing attacks. I have concluded that he knows what he's doing, and that he's doing it smarter than I would have done it. That's a relief, because I'm not a professional politician. I'm the base, and while I participate in the process, I'm not an insider and I don't participate in it at anywhere near his level. I can tolerate his post-partisanship because I believe he can command it in support of populist interests.

But Miz Becker, she just wants everyone to stop yelling. She is not smarter than Obama, she's not even smarter than me, and I don't want her fighting by my side.

[TexasObserver]

60. It's a favored meme of the GOP. Claim you were once a liberal, or a feminist, or such.

Then attack those who ARE liberals or feminists.

[Ganja Ninja]

62. This woman is nothing more than an operation chaos dead ender.

She was posing as a Hillary supporter and and bashing Obama back in the primaries. Now she pretends Saracudda has won her over. Bullshit!

[democracy1st]

64. I guarantee she's not telling you her real reason for not voting Obama in 08

[Vinca]

65. This woman is no feminist. Taking choice away from women

puts us back to the days of back alley abortions and teenage girls bleeding to death in their bedrooms.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

70. If that woman was ever a Democrat OR a feminist, I'm Betty Friedan. -nt

[Eric J in MN]

82. Exactly. We have no proof that she ever did anything....

...for the Democratic Party or the feminist movement.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

72. Someone's in a higher tax bracket......

Awww.......give me my break.....

[LynnTheDem]

74. And when Sarah Palin orders all abortions for ANY REASON abolished?

What will that 1970s "feminist" think then?

So much for women's rights then, huh.

[SmokingJacket]

78. That might be the most vapid and lunatic thing I've ever read.

Gack!!!

[MsTryska]

86. she's a shill.

actually i wouldn't be surprised if she is a middle aged pudgy white person with a penis putting on a drag show for the interwebs.


or she coulda just gone to Republican Journalism School.

[blogslut]

88. She sounds like Ann Althouse

A self-absorbed female that dons her feminist hat when it benefits her personally.

Here's her blog:

http://thedamedomain.blogspot.com

Note the entry where she declares she's leaving the Democratic party. Four days before it was announced that Governor Palin would be Johnny McSame's running mate.

[vanderBeth]

91. She's not a feminist.

Maybe in 1970 but not today. No REAL feminist would vote for McCain. She is a woman is too old the be concerned about women's issues anymore.

[Breeze54]

93. Jane Becker is obviously senile or drunk!

:silly:

[deaniac21]

96. Plain and simple, anyone that doesn't vote for Obama is a racist.

[nc4bo]

97. First it's Sarah of Moose now it's Sarah of the Arc, nailed to the Cross, .........pfft. nt

next thing you know she'll rise from the dead in 3 days and create a pipeline in 6 days.

[SuffragetteSal]

98. Obama inspired me to

go out into my community and be a part of it, find ways to help my neighbors and neighborhoods, volunteer at the Food Pantry (which I do) and I felt hopeful. After listening to Palin I didn't feel inspired at all - ummm..pitbull jokes and lets all go shoot something...she doesn't represent anything I want to be a part of ever.

[Fla Dem]

99. Actually if you take the time to read the whole blog and the comments you would

come away with a feeling of pride for the women that debated the Obama side. Some of the writing was the best I have read in defining why a woman would vote for Obama. Further it was all done pretty much civilly (a little snarking), but for the most part intelligent, simply stated, well thought out, nicely articulated, and where necessary, attributed points.