Sunday, November 02, 2008

Oh, Sarah Palin. Stay gold, you know? wacky l'il dumbass maverick, you. -bites lip- oh, bless.

You almost feel bad for disappointing her: she just seems so, so, so, well, -flattered-, doesn't she?

And yet, it probably won't cost her much: one gathers her fanbase does not perhaps have the most ummm uhh errm exacting powers of discernment, let's say.

“John McCain! Not Hussein!”

So goes the latest popular chant on the campaign trail with Gov. Sarah Palin, demonstrated at a morning rally in central Florida.

...After the rally in Florida ended, two of the people leading the chant explained why they did so.

“Because it rhymes,” said Shirley Mitten, 64, a volunteer at a pregnancy center and a resident of Brooksville, Fla.

...Mr. Mitten said he could not trust Mr. Obama because of his past association with William Ayers, the 1960’s radical, and because of his relationship with the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. He also pointed out that Mr. Obama’s father was a Muslim.

The middle name Hussein, he said, added to the suspicion. “I guess Obama was named after Saddam Hussein,” he said.

poor little kittens.

Btw, y'all have seen this, right?

ETA: right, right, sorry, my mistake, Palin's a Brainiac. No, rilly. I apologize for ever thinking that just because a woman running for VP can't accurately explain to a third grader what the Vice President's job actually is, can't answer really tough on-the-spot questions like "what magazines do you read," and consistently provides glittering generalities, mugging and winking as a substitute for actual content, -any- content, when asked -look, how exactly are you going to do your job, can you demonstrate that you take this remotely seriously-, that she might not be the brightest bagel in the box. It must just be internalized sexism: clearly, a Palin presidency would be in -my best interests.-

And anti-Real Americanism: I care -deeply- that she shoots moose, you know, christ knows I've talked about nothing but her huntin' shootin' fishin' credentials and how much that offends my elitist organic latte-sipping sensibilities. Of which latter, expecting someone who's apparently -still- under the impression that she's a viable candidate for the most powerful position on the planet even assuming Tuesday goes down the way the reality-based community expects it to, well, that's part of it too, isn't it.

I mean, damn, look at Dubya! we weren't too hard on -him- just because he gave a -terrific- impression of a deeply incurious, completely incapable of nuanced thinking, smugly, terrifyingly ignorant Yahoo who made terrible decisions with devastating consequences for lo these past eight years, and he's a MAN. Shouldn't we give a woman, yes, -this- woman, a fair chance to fuck up the country at least as thoroughly as he has? I mean, be fair.

And yes, by cracky, this commenter is RIGHT: a vote against Palin is -a vote against feminism-, because!

I'm in my fifties. Feminism, to me, has always meant having the freedom to reach one's full potential. Contrary to the popular notion, it does not require one to be liberal.

A litmus test of liberalism was never part of feminism. If anything, it's time to liberate feminism from the liberals.

Excellent: the only thing that makes it "feminism" is that it puts a female type person in a position of power, so that that individual, at least, if no one else, can reach her -full potential-, whatever that potential may be, and whatever effect it has on, well, everyone else. I agree completely.


Beverly LaHaye Judith Reisman Savitri Devi Countess Erzabet of Bathory Marie of Romania, FEMINIST.

and don't you forget it, bub.


Daisy said...

They are calling her "Bible Spice"--which I admit, cracks me right up.

belledame222 said...

I know. That and "Mooselini" are my favorites.

GallingGalla said...

The "Marie of Romania" link isn't working for me...server not found...

observer said...

I very much doubt Palin is as stupid as she appears. I don't know how anyone can get to where she is while being not altogether bright. But the problem is she "acts" dumb, because that seems to be somehow the way society feels comfortable with a successful woman. By winking and acting sweet, charming and not too bright she seems "harmless".

It doesn't mean all women have to agree with her policies. Insofar as she has any.

belledame222 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
belledame222 said...

I don't know how anyone can get to where she is while being not altogether bright.

...Oh, that's right: you're not from around these parts, are you...

well, no, that is the sort of cheap cynicism I have been trying to avoid and censure in others. nonetheless.

also google: Know-Nothing Party, Ronald Reagan, P.T. Barnum, "Being There"...

also, too, also, consider the wisdoms of Douglas Adams:

Billions of years ago, when the Vogons first crawled out of the primeval seas of Vogsphere, laid panting and heaving on the planet's virgin shores... when the first rays of the young Vogsol sun had shone across them... it seemed as if the forces of evolution had simply given up on them then and there, thurned aside in disgust and written them off as an ugly mistake. They would never evolve again. The fact that they did is a testiment to the thick-willed stubbornnesss of these creatures. Evolution? they said to themselves. Who needs it? What nature refused to do for them they simply did without...

The natural forces of Vogsphere worked overtime to make up for their blunder. They brought forth scintillating jeweled scuttling crabs, which the Vogons ate; aspiring trees which the Vogons cut down to use the firewood for cooking the crabs; and elegant gazellelike creatures which the Vogons would sit on (they were useless for transport because their backs snapped under the weight, but the Vogons sat on them anyway).

belledame222 said...

GG: fixed. It's just a link to the Dorothy Parker poem.

Poeschl said...

I'd like to respond briefly (or not briefly) to Observer's comment about Sarah Palin's intellectual inadequacy being an "act" designed to disarm voter hostility (especially male hostility).

If I'm not mistaken, Observer is posting from Australia. I don't know how Australian electoral politics works, but in the United States, under certain circumstances, it is actually not that hard for someone of Sarah Palin's limited capacity to actually win a governorship of a U.S. state and get high voter ratings -- again, UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES.

Note that, in the 2000 elections, George W. Bush's only previous formal experience in public service was as Governor of Texas (two terms?) During the 2000 electoral campaigns, that was probably the only fact about him that most Bush voters actually were aware of; and, at that time, even some left-wing journalists, in both the U.S. and Britain, assumed that Bush's apparent 'dumbness' on the campaign was nothing more than a deceitful performance meant to disarm voters.

I think such journalists assumed that, because G. W. Bush was a two-term Governor of Texas, he must be capable, right? Few journalists and fewer voters paid attention to the fact that the Governorship of Texas is a 'weak' governorship which has very, very limited powers of appointment (possibly even none), and the office of the Governor of Texas cannot even initiate legislation on its own, which is why G. W. Bush as governor had to forge bipartisan coalitions in the Texas legislature. Thus, many voters, as well as some journalists, assumed that Bush's superficial 'success' as Governor of Texas was proof of his real-life intellect and political competence.

But we now know that the success of Bush's governorship was due mostly to his ability to cut deals with the Texas legislature. Once Bush was in the White House, after the Republicans took control of both houses of Congress after 2002, Bush no longer needed to compromise. He simply 'bribed' the GOP Congress by not vetoing ANY spending bills, and the GOP Congress, in turn, refrained from exercising any serious oversight of Bush's War on Terror, including the Iraq war. Bush's 'bribes' of the GOP Congress reveal the total extent of his political competence. He knows how to win legislators over by refraining from vetoing spending bills; that's all. I suspect that's probably the total extent of Sarah Palin's political competence as well, in that she knows how to use her office to bully and 'bribe' people.

More than that, even Republicans now understand that G. W. Bush is not only a malignant narcissist in the most crippled sense, but he has a hopelessly stunted intellectual capacity. He is simply disabled from thinking anything through.

That's why even most Republicans are alarmed by Sarah Palin's public shallowness, or, to put it another way, her complete lack of self-awareness that she shows when not trying to charm "Real Americans."

It's that total lack of self-awareness, a trait she shares with G. W. Bush, that reveals her incapacity. In the 2000 campaign, Bush's lack of self-awareness was mistaken for the personality of someone who was "comfortable in his own skin," as some journalists put it, and as such, on campaign, Bush could be personally disarming.

But we now know that Bush was comfortable in his own skin because he had permanently shut down his self-awareness. Similarly, Bush's apparent iron confidence in his own convictions, his apparent lack of any doubt whatsoever, was also due to a complete lack of self-awareness, as we now know. It is Bush's lack of self-awareness that contributes to what we now know is his inability to sort out data and policy recommendations that are presented to him. His "gut decisions" are probably based on which advisor he trusts the most, which is why Bush places a premium on personal relationships and personal loyalty.

Sarah Palin is in the same boat, psychologically and intellectually. She won the governorship of Alaska by challenging an opponent who was proven to be corrupt, and by mostly concentrating on ad hominem attacks rather than on policy issues. Even her supporters in her campaign for the Alaska governorship admitted that Palin apparently had no coherent policy positions and mostly campaigned by presenting an assertive and at times attractive personality, at least to many Alaska voters at that time.

But considering that the Alaska state government gets by mostly on oil revenue, and Sarah Palin knew how to improve her approval ratings once in office by increasing the oil revenue allotments that are due each citizen of Alaska, it's not surprising that she initially had 80% approval ratings in Alaska and, until she actually began campaigning for the Vice Presidency, could fool observers in the lower 48 states into thinking that she must be politically competent.

But we now know that her 'competence' in Juneau was due mostly to her power as governor to bully opponents and buy off voters with increased oil dividends. Even in Juneau, once her opposition decided to seriously confront her, she's proven to be politically helpless. She simply doesn't know how to make an intellectual case for herself and for her behavior. In that sense as well, she and G. W. Bush are in the same boat. In other words, she's George W. Bush in a skirt, and people shouldn't be fooled by her experience in public service.

Sorry for this overlong post, but I wanted to make clear why, at this point, even most Republicans can now read the clues that reveal Sarah Palin's unfitness for the Vice Presidency. That's all.

FeministGal said...

i heard that prank on the radio this morning... it made me feel a bit sad for Palin - she sounded so disappointed...

Jill said...

Taxman In The Casino: The Truth About Taxes And Our Economy

Woozie said...

Bible Spice made me laugh like an idiot in the library's quiet area. So did PalinAsPresident. I should stop visiting you when I'm here.

observer said...

Ha ha, yeah, not hard to spot the foreigner around here.

Thanks for the insight Poeschl. My theory was that Bush had the benefit of the boys clubs, the ears of the powers that be to get where he is. He is a puppet, right? I mean, he can't even read from a teleprompter without sounding stupid. He just doesn't understand words.

I find it hard to imagine Palin having such access to the powers that be and winning their faith in her maleability, because of both entrenched sexism in the elite and because who has time or inclination to fricking network and sell oneself as an empty shell while raising three (four?) kids.

Victoria Marinelli said...

If you haven't seen it already, do also check out Palin PUMA Watch for some good analysis of the impact of the Palin candidacy on feminism. (And if you'd seen and/or blogged about that already, my apologies; as usual, I am on info overload and can't keep up nearly as much as I'd like to with any number of sources.)

If I'd found that site months ago, it would have done wonders for my blood pressure which seemed to spike dramatically whenever I'd end up reading formerly beloved blogs, overtaken in more recent months by the PUMA pox.

Yes, this means that of the, I dunno, 3 or 4? radical feminists with whom I'd still been on good terms, I'm down to something in the neighborhood of bupkis. (It's because I'm such a maverick, dontcha know!)

belledame222 said...

VM: yeah, I know what you mean.

woozie: did you try opening the door a few times?

poeschl and observer: you might be interested in this article.

belledame222 said...

also consider that Ross Perot had what seemed like a reasonable shot for a while there, and -his- only real qualifications were a shitload of money and an ability to draw pie charts.

I mean, we elected the fucking Terminator for governor for cryin' out loud...

there is yes an active belief in the U.S. that when it comes to positions of political leadership, actually knowing what the fuck you're doing, either through experience or working little grey cells or y'know -something- is really sort of not all that important compared to, you know, how much that person is "just folks."

Victoria Marinelli said...

Um, apparently my blood pressure wasn't done spiking. Last political post for quite some time, I fervently hope: One last word about that "Obamabot" slander.

Can't wait to bring my girls to the polls today. Thanks for consistently addressing these issues - seems much more effective than "keep it bottled up from April until November and then explode," but hey, I never claimed to be particularly functional. :)

belledame222 said...

well, I sort of resolutely was ignoring most of it (with a couple of explodey exceptions) right up till early October, and since then I've kind of been talking about nothing but. whatever that says about me.

Mandos said...

Don't forget to write-in Heart!!

Tom Nolan said...

Shit, I forgot about Heart's candidacy - is she still in contention? I've done loads of search-engine trawls, but I musn't be following the procedure correctly, because I just can't find any mention of it.

Go Heart! Heart for President!

Tom Nolan said...

Oh, and can anyone tell me why Reclusive Leftist is so called when it is, in fact, a pro-Republican blog these days? Can you really be an enthusiastic supporter of Sarah Palin (because she's a feminist you see, in the sense of being a woman and within sniffing-distance of power) and a leftist? You can't, can you?

Mandos said...

VS says she won't vote for McCain, but for McKinney, but to her the treatment of Palin is sufficient grounds not to vote for Obama.

Her vote for McKinney is what gives her the leftist title.

Tom Nolan said...

But apart from her saying she was going to vote "Green" which of her posts actually extols the Green position and encourages others to adopt it. I haven't seen one, but I've read maybe twenty against voting for Obama ("if you vote for Obama, this is what your voting for": followed by a picture of a crocodile eating a baby) but none against voting for McCain. The "Green" declaration was a single sentence, the pro-Republican (Sarah Palin is a true feminist we can all vote for with a good conscience) and anti-Democrat campaigning is her daily effort. Honestly, who does she think she's kidding.

belledame222 said...

well, it's the leftism that's gone into reclusion.

Tom Nolan said...

Yeah, reclusive for a reason if you ask me (grumble grumble).

Anyway Mandos, what about the other Miss Havisham - aren't you going to defend her too?

belledame222 said...

"I DEFY you, Miss Twisty! I'm gonna let the light shine in."

Mandos said...

The other Miss Havisham being Twisty? Hasn't she been silent for a while again?

But as for VS, the other rationale(ization?) is the slogan "30% solution", as in, having 30% women in government is apparently a magic number at which women's concerns and issues are taken seriously, regardless of the political mix of women as such.

Also, from her perspective, rewarding Obama for using the techniques he/his followers used is validating a tendency towards overt misogyny in society. That to her is worse than four years of McCain and Palin.

belledame222 said...

Yes; clearly giving the job to a guy who sneers at the idea that the scare quoted "health of the mother" might matter when it comes to abortion rights, has a 0% NARAL rating, and picked one of the most anti-choice and otherwise socially regressive candidates he could have for a running mate, oh and incompetent as well (but hey, she's -likable- gosh darn it, gee where have we heard that one before), AND couldn't even the Lily Ledbetter Act aka your -basic- meat and potatoes "help break the glass ceiling" legislation--this all sends a GREAT message for feminism. Yas.

Oh oh, and on a personal level, McCain's such the charming, not-at-all misogynist anti-sexist; why I frequently confuse him with Alan Alda. Particularly when he's cracking homophobic and misogynist (and just plain hateful) jokes about Chelsea Clinton, ditching his first wife for a younger and richer model when it looks like he might actually have to make good on the "in sickness" part of "in sickness and in health," etc. etc. etc.

None of that compares to, you know, someone -possibly- have -maybe- been deliberately digging at Palin with "lipstick on a pig" (which he later courteously clarified and apologized for anyway), and a few other such digs, which in turn are far worse than any of the subtly racist dogwhistling the Clinton campaign was throwing right back at him, -particularly- in light of the fact that the -actual Clintons- have kissed and made up with Obama because, you know, unlike some people, they're fucking grownups (more or less).

Oh well, none of it matters very shortly. Have fun under the bed for the next four years, PUMAs and other strange creatures. W00T

belledame222 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
belledame222 said...

oh lol

"I expect Obama to win tonight, which is frustrating but not surprising. What's most disturbing to me, though, is seeing women not only vote for this, but celebrate its triumph. It's deeply horrifying. It's perverse."

wow, I had -no idea- that Obama had designed pornographic Palin dolls! And all this time, to think all these people, me included, were voting for him on the basis of, y'know, economy, policies, doesn't seem like a drooling idiot or disturbingly angry reactionary or I don't know a representative of the party that's COMPLETELY FUCKED US ALL OVER FOR THE LAST EIGHT YEARS...

Mandos said...

And today,

When people are telling you that women ought to be happy for black men right now despite the tread marks on their own backs, think about that.

Is there any other oppressed group of people on earth who are expected to excuse any and all injuries to themselves as long as someone else benefits?

But, the point is, Violet is all about opposing the pop-cultural misogyny, especially after the Anonymous Horde. (Among other things, she seems to think it is the pernicious influence of hip-hop.) As is repeatedly asserted by various on her blog, McCain indeed has a history of misogynistic comments and conservative policies, but he nominated a woman, and actions speak louder than words.

As for the conservative policies, well, some feminists are conservative. Violet allows this because she believes that feminism is foremost about cultural and political power, not individual happiness, and while she's pro-choice, she herself asserts that that sort of thing is not first-ranked in her larger scheme of things. Culture and politics is far more urgent to her, so the Obama campaign is far worse to her.

Alon Levy said...

Violet allows this because she believes that feminism is foremost about cultural and political power, not individual happiness, and while she's pro-choice, she herself asserts that that sort of thing is not first-ranked in her larger scheme of things.

Really? Back when she started, in, say, 2006, she kept saying that choice was the most important issue around, and the Democrats were fools to ignore it and focus just on health and education, as they seemed to be doing at the time.

Tom Nolan said...

Violet never argued that reproductive rights were other than of paramount importance, or that a thoroughly reactionary mentality was compatible with feminism until Sarah Palin came on the scene.

The fact is she goes weak at the knees at the thought of a woman - political persuasion be damned! - in a position of political eminence and their isn't a principle she wouldn't sell down the river for a smile from a grandee in a dress. She's the feminist equivalent of Paul Johnson.

Mandos said...

Really? Back when she started, in, say, 2006, she kept saying that choice was the most important issue around, and the Democrats were fools to ignore it and focus just on health and education, as they seemed to be doing at the time.

More important...than health and education.

But prior to the campaign, or at least prior to the "climax" of the primaries, she had already made the shift to culture as her main focus rather than anything else. It happened around the time of the Anonymous Horde. In my mind, the present version of Violet really begins at the time of the Anonymous attacks.

Mandos said...

The fact is she goes weak at the knees at the thought of a woman - political persuasion be damned! - in a position of political eminence and their isn't a principle she wouldn't sell down the river for a smile from a grandee in a dress. She's the feminist equivalent of Paul Johnson.

Well there's also the whole PUMA business of punishing the Democratic Party for allegedly rejecting the female candidate as being less historic in some way than the black candidate. That's what I mean by the cultural vision here.

Tom Nolan said...

In my mind, the present version of Violet really begins at the time of the Anonymous attacks.

Do you think so? I think the rot set in about the time she attempted to become an "honest broker" between the pro- and anti-pornsitution wings of feminism and discovered that, so far as the antis were concerned, she was with'em or aggin'em and that if she was aggin'em she could expect no quarter. At that point she caved in, welcoming Ginmar, Sam and Heart to her blog as true sisters in arms. Tragic really: she started off as an entertaining writer with a really sharp bunch of commenters and is now, what?...a Republican fellow traveller surrounded by feeble minded sycophants and ninnies.

Mandos said...

Meh, it's a matter of opinion. I mark the time as being around when she started doing the "Dead" thing and when she banned me, and that was around the Anonymous Horde time.

I got the impression that she was always sympathetic to the doctrinaire anti side but was willing to indulge the opposing POV up to a point, but then finally decided to "Get Serious." It was much the same way when I got banned at Twisty's: Twisty basically implied that she wanted to move things in a different direction from what was effectively a radfem humour blog. But then she kind of dropped out.

But yeah, I see the Anonymous Horde as starting off the concern about What About Our Misogynistic Porn-Addled Young People thing, and that made her want to Get Serious, and Serious to her to was the transmission of culture. (Consider that she's some kind of anthropologist or cognitive scientist or at least is well-read in parts of those fields.) That's how I understand how she went down this road.

belledame222 said...

alternately, you know, maybe it all started when she took up huffing Republican bat guano. all the kids are doing it today, you know.

it's a theory.

Victoria Marinelli said...

[with apologies in advance to all of you for the length of this comment, which I could have taken to my own blog but didn't, having vowed not to do another overtly political post for some time.]


I feel alternately queasy and relieved reading this thread since the last time I checked in, because I'd been trying on my own for some time to wrap my head around the apparent transformation of Reclusive Leftist from a site of genuinely progressive, feminist analysis, exploration, debate, and dialogue to its present status as hub for giddy conservatives' virulent Obama-bashing.

And this bit that Violet was voting for Green party candidates? As observed above, it'd be one thing if she'd been promoting that party's agenda, running posts about why the Green Party candidates had the most desirable platform or whatever, but no - there was only a passing statement that she'd vote for "McKinney/Clemente, unless McCain comes close enough to win New York, in which case I will vote McCain/Palin at the top."

But anyway, here's the thing: Violet has taken an awful lot of undeserved shit over a long period of time in the blogosphere. I don't know whether it's all that useful to speculate about what role all of that may have played (sex industry debates, the Anonymous attacks, etc.), but I do know that at a time when I was much more engaged in overtly political blogging and online activism, I also took an awful lot of undeserved shit, and it made me nutty - which is one reason why I stopped.

On the one hand, this can be interpreted as "I was bullied and finally, for the most part, silenced"; on the other, I was given an external impetus to return to my core impulses: namely, in favoring art over politics (to the extent they can be separated, and with the recognition that anything 'artistic' I might attempt will have the 'political' embedded within it, whether or not that element is overt/explicit).

But before I went back to this core impulse (before I nuked 4 years of my blog, etc.), when I was still in the thick of it and dealing with some very stupid attacks, to whatever extent my orientation was already ideological in nature, I could easily have backslid into a certain, dangerous flavor of dogmatism. (I'd done so before, certainly.)

They don't call it "reactionary" for nothing, you know? One feels (and often is) cornered, and one reacts, rightly or wrongly.

So regardless that I have taken vehement exception to the tone and strategies which I saw beginning to metastasize at Reclusive Leftist during the Democratic Primaries - because they were just so wrong that I had to, regardless that I wanted nothing more than to write not another overtly political word in my life - I was not then, nor am I now, without sympathy for what Violet has gone through over a long period of time, and how that (possibly) might have influenced her direction over the last year.

At least if she comes to a point where she looks back, with regret, on the (absolutely reactionary, in every sense of the word) uses to which she has put her (considerable) energy and intellect, she can move from there into a different direction, without the burden of having done all of the above without the significant protections offered by anonymity. (Whereas there are a great number of things I have published, blogged, contributed to listservs, said in speeches, etc., in my full legal name, which I find quite problematic today.)

As much as I wish her well, I have to care more for the well-being of people who have been hurt by the warmongering, racist, sexist policies of Bush, McCain, et. al. They had to be defeated, and Obama was (in my estimation) the candidate best equipped to facilitate that (although, had Clinton won the nomination - as I've said all along, without exception or qualification - I would have supported her candidacy wholeheartedly).

So, what now? I move that we do everything possible to steer clear of attacking persons with whom many of us have had volatile political disagreements (even though they might attack us, and even when those attacks are vicious to the point of seeming unforgivable), and stick to (passionately!) advocating for our progressive causes by every means available.

Higher roads, you know? A politics of hard work and hope. It wasn't just a campaign buzzword - "hope" - it's something substantive to embrace, however imperfectly. When Obama spoke last night of those who had not voted for him, I chimed in with all my knee-jerk snark ("Yeah, the crazy racists who called you a terrorist") even while Obama was being far more conciliatory. I had to think about that. I mean, I voted for the guy, and he's being that conciliatory toward whole swaths of a (still deeply racist) population. So I can at least attempt a similar approach with regard to individuals who - even while I may vehemently disagree with them, and find their tactics to be entirely reprehensible - I'd once considered allies and even friends.

We've had 8 years of the Republican ethos of "with us or against us." It's made all our lives hell. I'd be thrilled if we could all discard it to whatever extent human nature allows.

I don't - indeed, I will never - excuse anything Violet has done over the last year with regard to this election. But I do forgive her (even if she would regard what I've said about her as an unforgivable attack both on her and, somehow, on feminism itself, and even if she would regard said forgiveness as deeply insulting and patronizing, which I don't intend it to be in the slightest).

And then I have to move on.

belledame222 said...


So...remind me. What "culture" is this, exactly?

It's: one where choice isn't paramount but pornographic anything is the height of outrage, where a (white) woman's honor needs to be respected and we just happen to be scaremongering about the black guy and also now too hip hop, is it? Where it's just mostly important that a 30% (thank fuck, not "final," I guess) solution is just...women...any a position of authority...even if they're appointed by a right-wing man at the head of the table.

And all the rest of us poor bamboozled women who actually think we can think for ourselves, actually, need them to show us the true light.

culture, okie dokie:

O hai there, Aunt Lydia.

belledame222 said...

yeah, I hear you, VM, thing is--I am large, I contain lunch. I believe in higher roads. I also believe in a healthy venting of snark. And I get that the rift with VS is painful for you, as a former (recent) friend--for me, I kind of lost any real emotional investment long since, so it's just mostly me sort of boggling at the boggleness of it all.

The other thing is, honestly? Without going into details, I actually -don't- think this is a 100% sea change personality for her. Just cranking certain elements up to eleven while losing any sense of perspective. But, the elements? Were there.

anyway, you say forgiveness, I say moving away from the investment of actual anger through increasingly detached snarkiness till I reach indifference. It's how I roll, I'm afraid, most of the time. It's not that I don't feel Obama's spiritual call; it's just, at the same time? Um yeah, I'm kind of an asshole, also, too, and I'm making my peace with that, first, I think, before moving on to forgiving/tonglening/whatever other peoples' unconscious shadow, most of the time, because it's more energy than I have.

or rather: that's more or less my nascent career/possible calling, yes; but here on the Internets, it's kind of my lunch hour.

belledame222 said...

the other thing about snark is--I mean I think Obama is genuine about the higher road; but I also think, y'know, there are a lot of good pragmatic reasons for taking such a stance in public, I mean I think this is a -good- thing, being a politician, it's what you do in order in politics.

I guess, I'm not feeling the need to be as diplomatic, you know.

Yeah, I'm not calling for anyone's head here. I just think she's being a dick, is all, and I'm not feeling particularly sympathetic wrt how rough a time she's had on the Internets as such, I gotta say, though I may admittedly be missing something since I stopped following her, I -guess-: still, it hasn't struck me that she's had a particularly rougher time than, well, a -lot- of other women (never even mind in what one calls "real life,") and--yeah, we've all got our reasons, you know? They're just kind of not my problem either way, honestly, with her.

Victoria Marinelli said...

belledame: "To everything there is a season," including assholery. For example, me yesterday. (Though there was a follow-up.) :)

Mandos said...

Anyway, the strange evolution of Violet Socks is going to remain an interesting case study for some time, simply because the difference between her attitudes and behaviour then and now (she protests that she's the same) is so stark.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
belledame222 said...

eh, I've seen a lot of the general idea. liberals losing their shit after 9/11 and going neocon, say. (the loathsome Gerard Van der Leun being one blogging case that sort of morbidly interested me for a bit: the constant throughline seeming to be his bein' a self-involved condescending dickhead, I eventually concluded). similar principle, except for instead of a huge terrorist attack killing thousands of people in this case the galvanizing effect seems to be, umm...the loss of a favored political candidate in the primary.
oh, and some online attacks by misogynist trolls. -nods-

belledame222 said...

VM: heh. Personally I think Zen is probably overrated. anyway I'm currently surrounded by crunchy earnest peace-n-granola quasi-Buddhist etc. types, at least one straight liberal SNAG classmate of which has just informed me that he voted FOR prop 8, so, you know, not always all that impressed. crap your mung beans and meditation tapes where the sun don't shine, love.

"Hey, Ken. Wanna see my Gandhi impression?"



"Well, you know, if he were really pissed off."

--Buffy the Vampire Slayer.

belledame222 said...

anyway, wtf is Nader still doing around? he's like one of those godawful cancelled TV shows that they just won't yank out of rerun for some reason, even though it's less compelling than the Home Shopping Network.

how is it that he got more votes than McKinney when he's partyless and -nominally- the Greens are you know a Real Party? Is it true that overall they actually raised less money than was spent on Palin's wardrobe? Just--nothing against McKinney or people who -had- to vote their conscience (esp in "safe" states), but ffs, Greens, I mean--I'd -like- to believe that a third party that I could get behind ever (never even mind this presidential election) could organize its way out of a grease-proof paper bag, but...

Victoria Marinelli said...

For the record, I have spent my fair share of years involuntarily dealing with the mung bean-crapping meditation tape-listening sorts, who, if they fart, think it's a profound statement about the universe which thus justifies or renders awesome whatever their particular racist, sexist, and/or homophobic dumbfuckery and it always makes me want to kick them in their nether regions.

And then I do the whole unintentionally ironic deep-breathing thing and try to just stay out of their way, or bank the material for future pieces in which I pillory them in the cruelest language possible, which is still technically nonviolent, right? RIGHT?!?!?

belledame222 said...

o absolutely. welllll technically we're supposed to be about "nonviolent communication" in this here school I'm in, but I figure "fuck you with a rusty chainsaw, you loathsome gobshite" is technically that, if you look at it in the proper Zen paradox mindset, really.

no, it's true: there -are- a lot of really great parables involving Zen Masters hitting dumbfucks with sticks, and it's like this profound lesson? I could get into that part, I guess. -nods-

belledame222 said...

Back to the subject title: are we all up on her latest campaign backstage mess? The diva-ness is not exactly a surprise, nor the dumbfuckitude, but really, not knowing the countries in NAFTA? or that Africa is a continent? she makes Dubya look like Winston Churchill, it's incredible.

belledame222 said...

...heh, I'd meant to write "cram," actually, but "crap" works as well, if a bit redundant. eh, I like it.

Mandos said...

Re: Palin. Well, she'll be back, no doubt about it. And the camp that is planning to move to someone like Romney is trying to drive a stake through future attempts ASAP. Palin is going to have to make it to the Senate at some point, possibly post-booting of Capt. Toobz.

Anonymous said...

When you check out the word the saying enjoy, with relation to its an amorous relationship using an additional, yet for a experiencing that may be engendered should you have miltchmonkey the best relationship with yourself far too -- or perhaps like a experience of higher oneness with the fam and also humanity - it then becomes a lot more magnificent that each anyone wants in daily life is like.