Posted on 09/13/2010 4:08:01 PM PDT by Bigtigermike
RUSH: Okay, so The Chicago Boyz blog explaining that it's the threat to status, status anxiety that causes elitists of all ideological stripes to oppose people like Sarah Palin, Christine O'Donnell, Sharron Angle, any number of them. Then there's a Le•gal In•sur•rec•tion blog with a poster named Bill Jacobson who's associate clinical professor of law at Cornell who goes even further. He says: "The 'nuts and sluts' defense is a common employment law tactic whenever a female employee brings a claim. It doesn't matter what the claim is, the defense -- after the usual legal mumbo jumbo -- will be something like this: 'She's nuts. And by the way, pssst, she may be a slut.' That is the mode of attack Democrats use against conservative women.
Sarah Palin is the prime example, as she routinely is called crazy and is sexualized by the left." Yeah, Nikki Haley in South Carolina, she's a slut. She's loose. Now stick with me on this because this is how the left always goes out and attacks conservative women and some elite conservatives in the blogosphere and the Republican Party do the same thing. Yet guess who's always silent? The feminazis. The feminazis are never upset.
Now, Bill Clinton and Carville called Paula Jones trailer trash. Carville said: (imitating Carville) "You never know what you're gonna get when you drag a dollar bill through a trailer park. ha-ha-ha-ha." It worked for Clinton. Used it on Lewinsky, too. "The nuts part of the attack is being used against Christine O'Donnell in Delaware by the local Republican establishment..." this is from the Le•gal In•sur•rec•tion blog, "...and also by two leading conservative magazines, The Weekly Standard and National Review.
If O'Donnell is so nuts," the blogger asks, "why did the Delaware Republican Party nominate her to run against Joe Biden just two years ago? If O'Donnell wins tomorrow, you can be sure that the Democrats will seize on the nuts attack from Republicans, and take it to the next step by sexualizing O'Donnell (it already has started). By signing on to the nuts defense directed at conservative women, the Republican establishment has adopted the most pernicious line of Democratic Party attack."
One of the ways they talk about Castle is, "I am not 'anti-Mike Castle,' but I do have a problem with someone who was willing to destroy the economy by signing on to Nancy Pelosi's cap-and-trade plan." There are people attacking Castle that way, but the point is they're doing it on his issues; they're doing it on his ideas. Nobody is out there calling him names. "The vigorous attacks on Castle have been focused almost exclusively on his record and policy prescriptions.
Almost none of the attacks on O'Donnell focus on her policies or political agenda," which, if you've been paying attention, is true. Not one attack on Christine O'Donnell because of what she believes.
No, she sued a think tank, got the IRS after her, other personal attacks they're going after her with. That's why I keep saying I guess Mike Castle is clean and pure as the wind-driven snow; he doesn't have any baggage. There's not a person in the country that could run for office that doesn't have any baggage. So something of note here and it's going to be interesting to see if O'Donnell does win tomorrow, to look at the Republican establishment and see how they react to it. If they're being true to form now, they will not support her. They simply won't.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Washington Post today. In Delaware, GOP comes out swinging against Tea Party. The Delaware Republican Party chairman in this article essentially says, if you want a conservative committee chair, step back and allow Castle to become the next senator. If you -- in other words, the Republican chairman saying, we don't have a chance with this O'Donnell woman. You want a conservative in the Senate, go Castle. But he's not. He's not a conservative. That's the fault line.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: I really find this fascinating. If you will indulge me here for just a mere moment, Washington Post: "In Del., GOP Comes Out Swinging Against Tea Party." And here's the Republican Party chairman of Delaware, Tom Ross: "Quite frankly, I don't know what the goal is here. If they really want to see conservatives as chairmen of committees in the United States Senate, they'd step back and allow Mike Castle to become the next United States senator." Now, what's amazing about this is I think it's a tremendous tribute to everyday people in this country that everybody running for office is trying to convince everybody else that they're the most conservative in the race. And yet the RINO moderates know full well what they have to do to win. They have to go out and sound conservative, talk about being conservative, when they aren't. We never see Republicans fight the Democrats the way they're fighting their own.
Have you ever seen the Republicans fight against the Democrats the way they're fighting against Palin, the way they fight against Christine O'Donnell or Sharron Angle? You don't.
They are all ones to watch tomorrow.
I know she's endorsed Sean Duffy in WI and Murphy in MD. I think she's endorsed Gomez in NY as well. Can't say on the others.
holy cow. have we all agreed that Todd Palin is one lucky guy? what a smile!
I am certain Thatcher whispered a few choice suggestions to Palin when she visited...and that eagerly accepted. Thatcher knew how to take them down and the funny thing is they generally didn’t realize she was doing so until it was too late! Her humor oftentimes thru them off balance and when coupled with her feminine side....they were done before they had a chance to figure out what happened. She knew well how to throw her enemies off balance.
That is the A team. (though I think Cuccinelli would make a great Attorney General).
That whole list I posted Sarah endorsed. It got the list from Josh’s site.
Ok thanks.
Last time I saw this level of hostility was when Rush went after Karen from Whitefish Montana. I wonder if he ever called her to apologize for being the southern end of a north bound horse. especially since she has been proven 100% correct about the GOP and he was 100% wrong.
It was the beginning of the end for him and me, and I had been listening since a month after he went national.
“Rush: Ever see Republicans fight Democrats the way they fight Palin, Christine O’Donnell or Angle?”
Which is exactly why those RINO buttmunches have to go.
I like Kraut but sometimes his elitism creeps out.
Don’t think so (bad picture) or you can bet the NY Times would have it on the front page and Time would have it on the cover.
I listen to Rush all the time, but I don’t remember the incident to which you refer with this Karen.
One of the things I like about Rush is that he is universally pleasant and polite to callers even rude, nutty ones.
Kraut ACTUALLY said that Castle would be a certain Senate pick up for Republicans. O’Donnell is a long shot at best to win in the general election. He said Delaware is not Alaska. If you lived in this area you would know what he means. He said that if Republican lose this seat possibly the 51st it will enable Obama to pass everything he wants. A huge political blunder.
I agree with him.
We need 51 seats and control of committees.
It was in my mind an infamous moment, perhaps the only time I’ve ever heard him be genuinely mean to a caller. He really gave it to her in the neck.
Was probably in the mid-90’s. Many around here remember it well, as do many of my friends who listen.
interestingly, FR archives no longer have the transcript of this call.
And it's not just the democrats, but some on our side as well. I don't dispute the blogger's assertion that the left and some on our side's obsession with Sarah is due to status anxiety. But the blogger doesn't get to the root of the problem: their sexism. That is, that such status anxiety is a manifestation of a sexist problem. So the core of the problem is rooted in their sexism, which leads them to their status anxiety. These individuals, mostly men, feel threatened of being displaced in the hierarchy of society by a woman, and some women have a problem accepting another woman as a political leader as well.
Notice how the attacks by these individuals aren't simply directed at i.e Sarah Palin's, Nikki Haley's, Christine O'Donnell, and Sharron Angle's policies, but rather are pointed at their sexual nature: sexualizing them and diminishing them by depicting them as sexual objects, sluts, and bimbos (as they call them). They hardly ever discuss them in term of their policies but rather made up stories, 1/2 truths, and lots of sexual innuendo about them in an effort to minimize them and their impact. Unfortunately, this animus has taken not just the crazy leftists but includes some of our own, self-described conservatives.
However, those who are secure in their manhood or womanhood don't have a problem with a politician that happens to be a woman and a leader, so any discussion and analysis is directed at their politics, policies, and issues instead of their sex.
Wow, Victoria, another thoughtful well written post. I am glad you included women because we see evidence of women hating Sarah right here on this ‘conservative’ forum, and in some cases, they’re as vicious as some of the most vicious men, or should I say males? I’ve often wondered what’s behind that hatred for Sarah and I think you, Rush and this writer have pretty much explained it.
I am disgusted with those who lustfully comment on Sarah’s looks, etc. Even if one doesn’t respect her for her politics, she is a married woman and should be treated accordingly.
And yes, those women can be as vicious (or even more vicious) than their male counterparts. It all comes down to a deep insecurity which translates into a hostility towards another female.
I think I'd like to replace Dr Laura for a bit, but for now I'm going to bed. LOL. Nighty night.
I agree with you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.