Leftwing of the Far Right Pandering: Befuddled Palinite Tries to Pinkwash Sarah Palin With OCIHACOSP. LOL!

Pandering.

This post is one in a series on political pandering.

1 - Academic Showbiz, Celebrity Profs, and Crankage-Creep on the Left
2 - Prophetessor West: Crankage-Creep Part 2
3 - Crankage-Creep Part 3: Black Whackodoodles, Advanced Tokenism, Minority Authenticity, and Blackaphilia
4 - (Not) Queer Like Me

Just when you thought the mindless meme of a Palin-Bachmann catfight was so last month, Michele Bachmann's recent signing of the litmus test proffered by Christian sharia group THE FAMiLY LEADER, has provided another jump-off point for Bachmann-Palin comparison. Rick Santorum also signed it, but you will not hear much about that, since it doesn't generate eyeball counts.

Des Moines Register:

It notes, as the first piece of evidence toward its thesis that "the Institution of Marriage in America is in great crisis," that "Slavery had a disastrous impact on African-American families, yet sadly a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household than was an African-American baby born after the election of the USA's first African-American President."

Signers agree to support making divorce more difficult and reject "Sharia Islam and all other anti-woman, anti-human rights forms of totalitarian control." And they agree to call for "humane protection of women and the innocent fruit of conjugal intimacy — our next generation of American children — from human trafficking, sexual slavery, seduction into promiscuity, and all forms of pornography and prostitution, infanticide, abortion and other types of coercion or stolen innocence."

Lovely.

Meanwhile, this link to a blog by M. Sheppard kept showing up in my referrers today: Gays Commence Bachman Destruction-Palin's Advantage Is Their Love.

The threat of Bachman winning the nomination has been recognized by the Beltway insiders, who have commenced their hatchet jobs "The rise and fall of Michele Bachman" already. This would be a drop in the bucket compared to the unleashing of the full fury of a community which felt threatened. A Bachman nomination could, without a doubt, result in an election defeat worse than Mondale's as the Obama team would not, as the courtly Reagan did, to not unduly humiliate Mondale by him losing all 50 states, refuse to campaign in Minnesota.

On the other hand Sarah Palin is seen as a moderate on social issues by many in the Gay and Lesbian community, including some high profile media personalities. Hillbuzz, a significant Gay voice is hugely supportive of Palin, as is Tammy Bruce and, eccentrically and perhaps for libidinal reasons so is this gay site "Oh Crap I Have a Crush On Sarah Palin". It would be difficult for the leftist Gay sites to attack Palin as homophobic, when everything she has done in public life (and private) points to the other direction.

E for effort; F for the Private School Vouchers Grad analysis.

I really love it when white social conservatives purport to appoint pre-approved minority leaders for us, such as Herman Cain, Alveda King, Tammy Bruce, and cetera. It's even funnier watching the response when their choices are invariably rejected, and sent packing.

In fact, I would say "the leftist Gay sites" generally don't care one whit about what race-baiting conservogays like Hillbuzz and Dummy Bruce have to say about anything, let alone their unyielding love for Sarah Palin and her ridiculous, eyeroll-generating policies. In fact, I'm probably the only one who pays them any attention.

With this latest litmus-testing stunt, THE FAMiLY LEADER reveals the converging points of the far right's slavery-nostalgic, anti-Black pathologies. Though, somewhat predictably, the single-issue name brand gay sites today seemed utterly oblivious to the slavery-bait in the pledge (which can be downloaded at Think Progress.

(And although he showed up to their latest Presidential Lecture Series, no word yet on whether the only Sharia-baiting, gay-hiring, self-identified emancipated slave in the race thinks about this comparison of today's Black families to a whitewashed, agenda-laden, pandering caricature of the slave household. I'm guessing, probably not.)

Black-interest sites like Jack and Jill Politics chimed in with stuff like this:

Given that families were broken up regularly for sales during slavery and that rape by masters was pretty common, this could not be more offensive. I mean, putting aside the statistics on this, which are likely off-base, I could not be more angry. When will Republicans inquire with actual Black people whether or not we’re ok with invoking slavery to score cheap political points? It has to stop. It is the opposite of persuasive and is another reason Republicans repel us. It’s hard to believe that Michele Bachmann would be foolish enough to sigh this pledge.

But proving Bachmann may be crazier and more hardcore than Sarah Palin, she has.

What do you think? Will this torpedo her primary bid or propel her forward with the GOP base?

Those have got to be rhetorical questions. The answers would be: NEVER, and NO. Why bother asking.

Sheppard, on the other hand, indulges a delusional fantasy that the extremism of the Bachmann candidacy is really acting as a red herring to promote a more electable Governor Guess-Who as the more desirable Christian conservative. Since she's so popular with and loved by eccentric queers such as yours truly. Read/weep:

The media, at least some anyway, had a residual shred of decency, and Washington Beltway insiders Douglas Kahn and Eleanor Clift "Bachman's Rise And Fall" couldn't stomach the charade and ran a column, which is quite prescient in retrospect (although it would be hard not to have come to their conclusion give Bachman's record).
but the Gay community sounded the real mass alarm, followed very quickly by a wider commentariat-including Rachel Maddow who has a foot in both camps, and who confirms the tenor of my previous post that the Gay community will show Bachman no mercy, and have influence out of all proportion to their numbers.

This leaves Palin, who is adored by many in the Gay community, once again showing her brilliant strategic qualities, as she has let each new bright shiny object rise and self-destruct whilst finalizing her decision to run or not.

If she does she can only look better for Bachman having self-destructed, and will appear in an even better light to the Gay community. Further, whilst her support from those quarters will be even more firm, the possible antagonism by the liberal Gay element will be blunted by the comparison with Bachman, whom a cynic might think is deliberately making Palin, whom she secretly wants to win, look good in contrast.

I would suggest Sheppard read what Tea Party Express's Pwn(ed) Professional Black said about this conundrum of inelectability.

I hate to keep sounding like a broken record on this topic, but I must ask. Is Michele Bachmann the NEXT Sarah Palin? Several patriots have said, “I adore Sarah Palin. But, she has been so destroyed in the media, she would be a disaster as our republican presidential candidate”.

Well to all of you who subscribe to this opinion, have you seen the shock and awe campaign launched by the liberal media to destroy Bachmann, since officially throwing her hat into the presidential ring a few days ago?

If Bachmann becomes our nominee, suddenly the liberal media will portray Sarah Palin as the far more reasonable candidate rather than the ultra-conservative idiot nut case, Michele Bachmann.

Should we kick Bachmann to the curb adding her with Palin on the list of unelectable candidates on our side; considered too toxic, too tea party and too conservative to win?

Talking loud with nothing to say, Lloyd Marcus concludes, "Patriots, let's go for the gold and select an unapologetic conservative who will speak to ALL Americans without pandering to any group."

And that would be whom, Lloyd? Just as Palin's followers and defenders whimper about "sexism", both Marcus and Herman Cain talk incessantly about race. They should revel in their quota slots as martyrs of Black liberals, while they still can.

White social conservatives rather legendarily resent and hate nonwhites who talk about race -- in ANY context, with a special rage reserved for we Black nonwhites. The leftwing of the far right types will temporarily allow it from the few Black people trying to impress them, in this Age of Obama. But eventually, they'll get the Condi/Colin/Kicked-to-the-curb treatment when defeating Obama stops being the goal.

And yet, have I not predicted many times over that Breitbart/HotAir tokenists like Sheppard would use Bruce's Sarah-crush and Palin's near-silence on gay issues to do exactly what Sheppard does, above? Yes I did. Oh, yes I did.

OTOH, Sheppard can put down the oxy pipe and read what this author has had to say about Palin's leftwing of the far right politics for the past three years.

Poor Palin diehards. I know they are getting desperate in their zeal for Esther/Deborah/Moses 2.0. But I didn't think any were so desperate to try and hammer and saw this blog into being even remotely pro-Palin politics.

Rotfl!

Sarah Palin Gets Gay-Baited

Sarah bestowed a couple new endorsements, today, using one as a platform to soapbox about the true real feminism, or something. The other, Karen Handel, is said by her opponent to be a pro-homosexual, ooo.

This morning’s endorsement of Karen Handel by former Alaskan governor Sarah Palin has already ratcheted up the tension level in the Republican race for governor.

A formal response by the campaign of Nathan Deal, the formal congressman, expresses disappointment – and immediately accuses Handel of voting to fund gay “outreach” to “kids.”

It’s disappointing that Sarah Palin has chosen to back the most liberal Republican in this race.

In past races, Karen Handel endorsed taxpayer-funded domestic partner benefits and gay adoption — and she’s been caught lying about it. Just last night, Handel finally admitted she’d written a check to a gay rights group — when previously she said the check was a forgery and she never lived at that address.

The endorsement is getting mixed reviews by the easily-led who populate Mrs. Palin's FB. Let's hope her froth-mouthed followers don't turn their legendary pitchforks on her again, like they did over the Fiorina endorsement.

When all else fails, gender-bait, race-bait, gay-bait, sex-bait, liberal-bait.

Don't social conservatives have anything better to do?

Palin and "P0rn" Part 1: Don't Hate Sarah Palin Because She's Not Afraid of Her Beauty

A version of this article was first published as Palin and "P0rn" Part 1: Don't Hate Sarah Palin Because She's Not Afraid of Her Beauty on Blogcritics.







When you've been blogging about the "Sarah Palin" phenomenon for a year and a half you notice something: when someone asks "Is Sarah Palin _______?" the answer, whatever the question, is usually "no".

Julia Baird's article in the current Newsweek recalled this theory when she reprimanded everyone to stop ogling Republican women.

There seems to be an insistent, increasingly excitable focus on the supposed hotness of Republican women in the public eye, like Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, Michelle Malkin, and Nikki Haley—not to mention veterans like Ann Coulter. The sexual references are pervasive: they come from left, right, and center, and range from gushing to highly offensive. Harper's* asked, “Is Sarah Palin Porn?” as others quizzed the former governor about whether she had breast implants.

Right Wing News compiled a list of the hottest conservative women in new media. Playboy even ran an outrageous piece titled “Ten Conservative Women I’d Like to Hate F--k,” which read like a sick attempt to make rape cool. “We may despise everything these women represent,” wrote the author, “but goddammit they’re hot. Let the healing begin.” Moron.

I didn't see any analysis implied by (one of) her title(s) "why we sexualize GOP women", though Gloria Steinem's Women's Media Center offers one. A corollary question seems also studiously avoided by anyone doing these sexism-watches: what do you call it when Republican women, or any women, sex themselves up, or sign on to being sexed up in the service of something else? Like, say, winning a political campaign for top office in the world's most powerful nation? Since the announcement of Sarah Palin for VP in 2008, not only feminists but the voting populace in general have been grappling with these questions of sexism, objectification, and one's own participation in being on display, like never before.

It's funny reading this in Newsweek, which has been raked over the coals by socially-confused conservatives for it's own "sexist" Palin covers. Who could forget the ignorant mountain/molehill conservative screamers on Fox, crying "sexism" because Newsweek didn't retouch my favorite cover photo? In the upside-down universe of Neo-PC Conservatopia, showing natural beauty, and thus one's humanity, is now "sexist". Every woman, they said on Fox, should be mortified by that cover. (Weren't.)

Then, there was the infamous cover photo originally taken from Runners World. Oh, the wails of "sexism" we heard from conservatives, suddenly sounding like the same feminazi threats they believe are policing their thoughts and destroying the very fabric of humanity with our calls for the end of gender inequities.

From Palin's own Facebook entry:

The Runner's World magazine one-page profile for which this photo was taken was all about health and fitness - a subject to which I am devoted and which is critically important to this nation. The out-of-context Newsweek approach is sexist and oh-so-expected by now. If anyone can learn anything from it: it shows why you shouldn't judge a book by its cover, gender, or color of skin. The media will do anything to draw attention - even if out of context.

This charge of sexism rings hollow, coming from someone paid to bloviate by Prince bin Talal of NewsCorp, whose own country does not allow women to drive, much less vote, or run for public office, or appear in public alone.

Was the Newsweek cover mean-spirited, below the belt, relevant to nothing, and a cynical (albeit successful) ploy to sell print copies of magazines? Yes. "Sexist"? No. Palin posed for that campy Runners World photo shoot of her own volition, of her own agency.

But is Sarah Palin p0rn, or not? If the Oh Crap theory is correct, we already know the answer. A better question is, Do people make porn out of "Sarah Palin" or the Sarah Palin public image? Obviously, the answer to that is "yes".

Jack Hitt's hit fluff — in the June '10 Harper's, not The Atlantic — doesn't answer what it purported to ask, either, though he did manage to write a money shot. While Mrs. Palin saw sexism in the Newsweek cover, Hitt sees in it the same pR-n Palin saw in Levi Johnston's Playgirl poses:

She seethes at the mention of her daughter’s old boyfriend, Levi Johnston, cattily characterizing his Playgirl photo shoot as “aspiring porn.” Her Facebook updates are as bitchy as those of any fourteen-year-old girl. And her treacly tweets are classic examples of what the philosopher Daniel Dennett calls “deepities” — vagaries that can easily pass as profundities ....

She can also do, by her own standard, some “porn.” She showed off major leg in a racy spread in Runner’s World, wearing a pair of tight, short shorts, with an American flag chucked on a chair like a sweat towel. In other pictures, she wears skin-tight leggings and assumes saucy “warm-up” positions. For her fans, it was an issue to keep in that special place where Mom never looks. When Newsweek ran the tight-shorts pic as a cover image, Palin swiftly denounced it as “sexist.” But she recently showed up at John McCain’s side in Arizona and thrilled her followers by wearing a black leather jacket, cut in butch style, with zippered accents defining her breasts. Palin knows her fan base, and she knows what they want: a brief tour of Google reveals dozens of Photoshopped Palin fantasy images — and it’s clear that they’re not posted by her enemies.

Oh, the act of defining "Sarah Palin's breasts". Ah, the fortunate jacket that got the honors, the one that sends site stats through the roof, the one Ms. Palin made look so, er, showstopping; no, not "butch" at all but rather femmed-out biker-girl.

As for those p0rn-based photoshop fakes with Sarah's noggin on them, an old email sig of mine reads: "All photos SFW, no fakes/photoshops, ever." Their persistent demand in trade determines, in part, what kind of images I'll put on my own site for both lofty feminist and practical reasons. Who wants a bunch of catcalling repressives trolling one's site for nonsense?

This brings us to the central question of this post: how do you theorize-so-you-can-talk-about-it all those second wave concepts — "objectification" "ogling" "the gaze" "sexism" — when the object embodies such in-yr-face agency? when the objectified individual is running for governor, senator or VP? when the objectified subject wink-winkies at the voting populace or steers movement conservatism from behind Facebook or uses the word feminism to argue against women's physical autonomy while so evidently comfortable in her own skin?

I enjoy this about Sarah Palin or at least the consumable, tabloidable, retweetable "Sarah Palin" image. She's got "it", she knows it, and she's not afraid to strut it. If it shows in a body-hugging leather jacket, or a t-shirt at a horse race, in a form fitting shimmery dress suit at a VP debate, or in Naughty Monkey red pumps that still have people like J. Hitt fidgeting two years later, then great. If it doesn't show, equally great; she doesn't seem to give a dern about it, either way.

Like it, hate it, be turned on by it or try to ignore it; Palin's rare form of straight-girl camp is worth paying attention to, if only because we have not seen the last of it. (And what self-aware queer doesn't appreciate watching a wry game of dress-up at the viewer's expense?)

For Part 2: In light of a pR#n undercurrent strong enough to spawn look-alike stripper contests, a complete news cycle ruminating on her cup size, a Hustler video series, a line of sex toy dolls that aren't her, and those silly photoshops; as a conservative feminist doing something different with gender imagery and the politicized female body in the public sphere, and with children sexting themselves to each other, just what is porn, anymore?

Do you, like Justice Potter Stewart in 1964, know it when you see it?

Is Sarah Palin pornography?

Do we know Sarah Palin when we see her? Well?

[Eyeroll] Another Conservative Male Discovers Misogyny [/Eyeroll]

(This Is Why I Tend to Be Dubious About "Kill Him" Reports)

Mark Whittington of Associated Content says,

Commentator Tammy Bruce, who is both a feminist and a conservative, suggests that this kind of thing reveals an undercurrent of misogyny that has existed in the Obama Campaign since the primary fight with Hillary Clinton. Bruce said, "It transcends gender and race. It transcends class. The truth of the matter is, is that one of the most popular t-shirts when Barack Obama was running in the primary season was a t-shirt that said 'bros before hos.'"

O'rly, Tammy.

Never heard of it 'till now. Do tell us all about it.

I say something similar about the "kill him" remark; there are two being reported, now.

It's certainly not that I put it past any of these angry/bitter Palinites that show up in droves to see their magical messiah. But like the "bros before ho's" claim, I want corroboration and proof, because unlike speech on a t-shirt, people who are calling for Obama's death need to be put away, AWAY from normal people, ASAP. By end of business, today.

Hell, these rightwingers drooling for Palin love torture so much, send them to Gitmo where they'll have a grand old time without all that pish-posh of enduring something as tedious and silly as having their rights read to them.

Calling for people's death -- especially that of a presidential candidate -- is not protected speech, anyway, so I don't know who these conservatives think they are kidding, trying to change the topic to bro/ho t-shirts, allegedly all over Obama rallies. Why aren't they all up in arms over the t-shirts at pullinforpalin.com? Oh right, conservative white males with that legendary entrepreneurial spirit run that one, and there's no Black English anywhere on it, so that gets a pass from the Tammy Bruces and Mark Whittingtons.

We can't afford to f' around with ANY of this stuff -- not bros before hos, not illegal, criminal calls for people's DEATH, come on, now. The climate is already a tinderbox, as it is.