Can this marriage survive me?
Boy, this presidential election is splitting families and tearing friendships asunder. At a social event Saturday night, for instance, I witnessed a heated political argument between the host and his wife over Sarah Palin.
Weird thing is, the husband didn’t actually participate in the argument. He was in another part of the house, happily knocking back drinks and spreading bonhomie. Instead, I became his unwilling stand-in as his wife assailed him/me for not appreciating the depth of her unhappiness with Palin — who apparently is going to not only singlehandedly engineer a reversal of Roe v. Wade, but also then somehow arrange for the couple’s three daughters to become pregnant. (OK, I’d had some wine by that point, so it’s possible that I haven’t represented the details of her argument accurately, but I’m certain about the vehemence behind it.)
I’m guilty as charged in one regard: I hadn’t appreciated the depth of her unhappiness with Palin. But at the risk of repeating myself, remember that I’m not her husband. I was hearing it all for the first time.
As her monologue unfolded, I offered a series of bland, non-confrontational responses along the lines of “My, you’re quite passionate about this” and “Well, I can see why you feel that way.” But that effort at maintaining domestic tranquility didn’t do him/me much good. It didn’t even slow her down. She had her teeth into this topic like a lipstick-wearing pit bull. (Sorry, couldn’t resist.)
Then I made a huge mistake. I suggested that if the Supreme Court had a do-over, maybe it should decide that abortion is an issue best left for states to hash out as they see fit — as has become the case with the similarly incendiary issue of gay marriage. You can imagine how that went over.
I’m happy to say that I got out of there alive. But I’m pretty sure that my buddy the party host is still wondering what he said wrong — and how he ended up on the couch for the night.
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:04 am
Funny, I didn’t realize that you were at my house this weekend.
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:05 am
The level of rage that many liberal woman have with Sarah Palin is quite remarkable. Glen Reynolds of Instapundit.com had a great line this morning about a recent Naomi Wolf tirade against Palin in which she writes that (according to a dermatologist she talked to) McCain will die in his first term. She then says that Palin would take over, a dictatorship would ensue and there would be no more elections held - ever.
“Well, Palin’s driving Naomi Wolf crazy, anyhow. Of course, Wolf was already close enough to walk . . . .”
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:32 am
All credibility the feminist movement might have enjoyed was lost with the liberal women’s organizations’ loud support in favor of Bill Clinton. No need to rehash that old news, but it certainly revealed the hypocrisy therein.
So your friend’s visceral hate of a confident, strong conservative woman is no surprise at all. Any woman that doesn’t toe the liberal line is to be mocked and destroyed, as we are witnessing with Sarah Palin.
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:59 am
Even though I am vehemently pro-choice and also think that Palin’s daughter is a little fool for tying herself down so young with a child, I think that Sarah Palin is an extraordinary woman.
Such a natural.
Many women, I suspect, are perplexed by Palin’s ability to have had five children and a successful career as well…….and look good doing it!
By the way, over on the N&O’s Editors’ blog, Dan Barkin is busy with some outrage equivalency in an attempt to gloss over the Linda Williams fiasco.
That’s how it’s played.
She will lie low for a while as the others bring out examples of other cases where “somebody done somebody wrong”.
And it’s supposed to justify the Sista’s unprofessional bigotry.
As usual, I couldn’t resist a reply.
September 23rd, 2008 at 1:19 pm
“I suggested that if the Supreme Court had a do-over, maybe it should decide that abortion is an issue best left for states to hash out as they see fit — as has become the case with the similarly incendiary issue of gay marriage.”
It worked for the segregationists.
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:01 pm
For the elusive Bob Wilson, if he happens by this way today:
HAPPY BIRTHDAY !!!
September 23rd, 2008 at 5:44 pm
GF- Palin is being destoyed by her own extremist views, not by us crazy liberal bitches who believe all women must ‘tow our line.’ Jeez, where do you get this stuff? Palin is just woefully inadequate and unprepared to run this country, and the 12 point drop in her popularity in just this short time shows that others feel the same way, once they know her politics.
I don’t agree with anything about Elizabeth Dole or Kay Bailey Hutchinson’s politics, but they are both examples of strong, intelligent, capable females-much more qualified to be McCain’s running mate than Palin.
September 23rd, 2008 at 9:06 pm
Hi Sheila - I “get this stuff” from history. See the Clinton impeachment episode and the organized feminists’ organizations’ falling all over themselves to defend him. Whereas less egregious offenses committed by conservatives were chased with the proverbial pitchforks by these same organizations. I.e., the reaction all came down to the perpetrators’ political affiliation. Not their offenses. I don’t believe women as a whole engage in groupthink mentality. Liberal women (the NOW type), yes. And they most assuredly toe the line, hence the seemingly organized and predictable response by these women against Sarah Palin.
Tell me a view of Sarah Palin’s that is extremist. Perhaps you confuse “extremist” with “conservative?” And don’t embarrass yourself by proclaiming someone in this presidential race lacks experience. There’s a rather large hole in that argument, and his name is Barack Obama (speaking of extremists…).
For the record, I don’t believe Elizabeth Dole is necessarily worthy of your respect. She certainly is not presidential.
September 23rd, 2008 at 11:54 pm
I never said Elizabeth Dole was presidential, I said she would have been a better choice as McCain’s running mate than Sarah Palin. That’s not exactly a compliment. Kay Hagan will take Dole’s Senate seat, and I will applaud it.
And Obama may lack experience, but he’s not shielding himself from the media because he knows he can’t answer anything they ask.
A Creationist to me is extreme, not conservative. Someone who doesn’t believe man has anything to do with climate change, believes that abortion should be illegal even in cases of rape and incest, and making women in Alaska pay for their own rape kits to me is extreme. Maybe it’s just conservative. Either way, it’s not something this liberal can stomach. As I said before, I have nothing against a strong woman, but I can’t even imagine for one second this particular woman helping to run this country. She’s under investigation. Her 17 yo daughter is pregnant and the father is surely being forced to marry her. Good thing {alin believes in abstinence only education because that did a lot of good.
September 24th, 2008 at 5:22 am
Shiela, other than you, do you think there are more people in America today that are shaking their heads in puzzlement at how John McCain MISSED the opportunity to energize conservatives and independents, shake up a moribund campaign, draw huge crowds, knock the Obama campaign off stride, accelerate fund raising and create a phenomonal national buzz by overlooking Libby Dole and going with Sarah Palin instead?
September 24th, 2008 at 9:51 am
Initially, most women seemed to be fascinated by Sarah Palin.
Moreover, a fair number of women have now turned to McCain after having suffered the loss of their constant candidate Hillary.
The most rabidly anti-Palin appear to be those same “enlightened, independent, and ball-crushing” women who propped up Billy Jeff after the news long ago that he’d been keeping a chubby intern under his Oval Office desk.
And that same Billy Jeff (Clinton)–who has always had the support of the Palin-hating women–has only high praise for Sarah Palin. He’s “fascinated” by her.
Curious, that.
September 24th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
Hmmm. Notwithstanding the well known examples of his extremely unfortunate problem with judgment in his personal life, Clinton is a fairly smart guy. He has nothing to gain by denigrating Palin, so why would he invite the inevitable bashing that would accompany his doing so? No, I don’t think it’s all that curious that he’d be complimentary.
Nor is it suprising that we “liberal” women supported him, albeit with some difficulty, during the Lewinsky fiasco. For a lot of us the real bottom line at that level of office was and is the political agenda. Regardless of what his relationship with his wife was like (I think the adultery was their issue to work out rather than ours), he represented the closest thing anyone had seen to a progressive in the White House for a long, long time. Yes, a lot of liberal women perceive that the party most likely to advance our interests is the Democratic Party, and I think we are correct in this perception.
I guess we disagree on the use of terms, but I’d call Palin an extremist because of her stance on abortion, and agree with the comment above that compared this issue to that of segregation. I don’t think states should have the ability to determine that women can be denied the right to choose abortion. This, to me, should be treated as an inherent right that no passel of legislators should be allowed to abrogate.
I will support the man or woman most likely to nominate someone to the Supreme Court who will protect that right, so as mad as I was at Bill Clinton, I would have voted for him a third time if a third run were permitted under law.
September 24th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
Palin is an extremist on abortion because she is pro-life? Repecting the sanctity of innocent life is an extreme position?
Holy moly.
Yesterday Debrah remarked that Palin’s daughter is foolish to “tie herself down” with a baby right now. Implicit in that comment is the notion that avoiding the inconvenience of an uplanned pregnancy is worthy of the act of abortion if that’s the woman’s “choice”.
Heck, suppose Miss Bristol Palin had early admittance to Vassar. Suppose she’d planned to summer in Spain after her freshman year. Suppose she’d planned on carrying on a torrid affair with a bull fighter and romp naked and unashamed on a Medeterrenean beach? What happens to all those wonderful plans if she keeps the infant she helped create? Why let something like that tie her down indeed.
You folks (Debrah, Brunette) talk in such dispassionate terms about “choice” as it relates to abortion. Maybe that’s how you sleep at night. No, I guess you’re quite passionate about not letting a passel of legislators tell you what to do. At least you’ve got your priorities in order - reverse order.
And Bill Clinton deserves the eternal animus of all Americans for allowing the country to twist in the wind because he wasn’t leader enough to admit he was getting hummers from Monica. What a complete piece of bovine dung that man is.
And have a nice day.
September 24th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
Yes, I think Palin is an extremist because she opposes abortion. I don’t think hers is a sanctity of life principle, though, unless I am mistaken in believing she supports the death penalty.
Are you sure Clinton deserves the eternal animus of all Americans? I think that’s a tad harsh. I forgave the man. In fact, I like him all over again.
And speaking of passion, I didn’t *mean* to sound dispassionate, because I do have very strong feelings about this issue. Maybe you would have been more comfortable with my interjecting sarcasm or insults along with my opinion, but I thought I’d take it easy on you guys with my first post.
I don’t have any problem with Palin’s daughter keeping her baby. I do think it’s a bad idea to get married, though, when she need not do so. I believe her family is very supportive and that she would not have been left on the frozen tundra. Marriage at seventeen — now THAT is extreme.
September 24th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
John, Bill Clinton lied about the hummers for his wife and for all the married men in America. He did it for you, you ungrateful piece of bovine dung.
September 25th, 2008 at 7:33 am
Lipzee,
I guess I’m in good company then (bovine dung-ly speaking).
And your response sure sounds familiar. I think I know you. Did we serve in ‘Nam together - 1967 - Bang Fuk province? You got discharged on a Section 8, right? No. You were convicted of attempted murder! You tried to frag our lieutenant - but you forgot to pull the pin on the grenade before you tossed it in the crapper. Hit the LT right upside the head with that pineapple. Didn’t kill him, but he had one hell of a headache for awhile. Yeah, it’s you all right.
I’m tempted to “out” you right here and now.
Point of order blogmaster: is it permissable to divulge the true identity of a fellow reader/poster without their expressed written consent - not to mention actual proof of their identity?
Never mind. If you are who I think you are, then aren’t you thinking that you think I think I know who you are? It all makes sense to me now.
And I’m not ungrateful.
Gearino, if anybody gives a flip, this may be one of those posts you’ll have to explain (or purge).
September 25th, 2008 at 10:32 am
John,
You need to cool it.
Your emotional rants remind me of some of those radical left “pink” women who walk into gathered proceedings to show themselves.
Trouble is, most of them look like Cindy Sheehan.
Regarding your comments about my being pro-choice: Get back to me when it’s your feet in cold steel stirrups and when it’s your rear turned up toward the probing lights.
This is one time when you might want to shut up.
September 25th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
Debrah,
I believe I’ll pass on the stirrups and rear-turned-up-toward-the probing-lights thing. The position you describe doesn’t appeal to me (I don’t think - at least not when I’m sober).
Closest I’ve come is a prostate exam. Ever had one of those? No? That’s OK. You have my permission to opine about it if you so choose.
Not sure how my gender classification restricts me from talking about a woman’s right to choose, but I’ll take your directive to “cool it” under advisement. But I think I’ll ignore your other command to “shut up”. Not your fault. I got a problem with authority. It’s plagued me my whole life.
Seems your declarative about being vehemently pro-choice kind of invites a verbal engagement. “Bring it on”, sort of. You know what I mean?
And regarding your right to choose, I don’t take it lightly. Heck, even a mouth-breathing, flatulent, ESPN-watching, navel- scratching neanderthal such as myself was pro-abortion back in the day. That’s what the position was called back when I supported it - “pro-abortion”. The term has long since been PC-sanitized to the more accurate “pro-choice”.
It was after the birth of our kids - not yours and mine; my wife and I - that I gradually changed my opinion on the subject. Once I distilled the issue down to its essence (the life of an unborn child) then it was clear what position was best for me.
It’s a tough call. And given America’s history of oppression toward women, it’s understandalbe that the freedom to choose about such a personal matter is not one to be surrendered without a fight.
But bottom line is you women are blessed (or cursed) with the responsibility of child bearing. We men get to participate in the fun part and then Nature pretty much gives us a free pass - we’re then slaves only to our consciences - and our need for more sports, beer and sex.
We rutting humas have a choice about whether or not to perform the old procreative act - knowing full well what the result might be. The life that grows within the woman doesn’t have that luxury.
Maybe if you didn’t use terms like being tied down when you talked about having a baby, you wouldn’t have come accross to me as callous and dismissive about the unborn child. Who knows? And it’s doubtful you give a tinker’s damn about anything I think, I wager.
I’m not your enemy, but I’m not impressed with your come-talk-to-me-when-you-have-a-vagina argument either.
I’ll shut up now. But not because you told me to.
September 25th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
John, I better be who you think I am. And pro-choice ain’t no PC thing. It just means you can be personally against abortion but think it’s none of your business if somebody else wants an abortion. I’m not impressed with that come-talk-to-me-when-you-have-a-vagina argument either. I am impressed with vaginas, especially after my prostate exams (my doctor played defensive tackle in college).
September 25th, 2008 at 4:03 pm
I was not impressed either with Debrah’s “no vagina - no right to an opinion on abortion” claim either. It would be like me telling woman that until they can represent a larger level of frontline combat deaths than please, keep your opinion on war to yourself.
Those of us who are pro-life feel very strongly about it as well.
As far as my prostate exam my doctor is a small Asian woman. Ippzee needs to do a better job of picking his medical professionals.
September 25th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
“And Obama may lack experience, but he’s not shielding himself from the media because he knows he can’t answer anything they ask.”
Like all those questions he’s answered about William Ayers, ACORN, Jeremiah Wright and Tony Rezko? Your post would be more accurate if you wrote “because he knows they won’t ask him about his very troubling and radical associations.” Wonder why that is.
September 25th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
Debrah and Brunette,
I apologize for the tone of my original email on this thread’s sub-topic of choice.
Both of you pointed out that I was sarcastic and insulting and that I need to cool it.
You’re both correct and I will.
September 25th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
Sheila,
In your listing of the supposed “extreme positions” of Sarah Palin you charged her with “making women in Alaska pay for their own rape kits”.
We should all have learned by now that treating every charge hurled against Sarah Palin as real is not conducive to ones credibility. A few facts for you to ponder…
1) Alaska had laws that hospitals and emergency rooms could choose to bill assault victims or their insurance companies for rape kits. Those law were changed in 2000, six years before Sarah Palin became Governor. And no, she hasn’t tried to change that law since.
2) Palin was Mayor of Walissa during the late 1990’s when the old laws were still in effect. However, city and police records show that no victim was ever billed for a rape kit while Palin was Mayor.
3) While police departments or medical services could technically have charged the victim prior to 2000, the State of Alaska Violent Crimes Compensation Board formed in 1971 for the express purpose of paying for rape kits and other medical expenses associated with assault cases, guaranteed 100% reimbursement for any such services.
4) During the Alaskan legislature’s debate in 2000 over changing the law, neither State law enforcement officials or sexual assault victim advocates were aware of anyone in the State who had ever actually been billed but felt the law was needed to eliminate the possibility of a victim even seeing it on an insurance statement. As committee minute’s show, the victim advocates were worried about hospitals billing; not police departments and CERTAINLY NOT Sarah Palin.
Sheila, I don’t know if your a North Carolinian but the link below takes you to a story from the August 14, 2008 News & Observer about the NC legislature approving a program to revamp its process so “hospitals will settle directly with the state, sparing victims of sexual assault the aggravation and trauma of receiving a bill”. Only eight years behind those hick extremists in Alaska, I guess.
http://www.newsobserver.com/politics/story/1177105.html
By the way, Barack Obama’s home state of Illinois has a law on the books ((410 ILCS 70/7) that allows hospitals or ambulance services to charge victims not covered by insurance or Public Aid for a variety of services including “sexual assault survivor” kits. Obama, in his role as a State Legislator, may have even been a co-sponsor of the particular law that provides for this billing option.
Sheila, I think you may be a bit extreme and very uniformed with your charges.
September 25th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
Ha!
John,
You don’t have to go THAT far.
I enjoy arguing too much to require apologies.
You’ve got a keen sense of humor….so at least you’re not worthless.
ROTFLM-tits-O !!!
September 26th, 2008 at 12:06 am
T’anks, John.
September 26th, 2008 at 3:06 am
Doug, it appears I’ve done a better job than you have in picking medical professionals since you’ve obviously got a bug up your ass.
John, I admire the way you got them women eating out of your hand.
September 26th, 2008 at 10:31 am
Lippzee, while a small Asian women is sufficient for dealing with my ass, other asses like yours, require a former college defensive tackle.
September 26th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
Doug, I’m starting to suspect that your “medical professional” charges by the hour.
September 26th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Lippzee,
There’s nothing wrong with developing those “women eating out of your hand” skills. Nothing wrong with a few gentle nibbles here and there, ya know?
September 26th, 2008 at 8:50 pm
Debrah ..He’s “fascinated” by her because she’s attractive
and he can’t have her.
September 27th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
Brunette,
Absolutely. My admiration of John is sincere.