What, exactly, disqualifies Sarah Palin from being considered a feminist? She’s a self-made women with an impressive career. For those unfamiliar with Palin’s career pre-politics, she first worked as a sports reporter; after marrying her husband, Todd Palin, she worked with him in the commercial fishing industry in Alaska. She got into politics pretty much at the lowest possible level: at the PTA. She then ran for a seat on the Wasilla city council, eventually moving on to become the mayor, and then governor of Alaska. The rest is history. She was forced to step down as governor, but her career has been far from over. She’s now a bestselling author with an upcoming second book to be released later this year, a Fox News contributor, and a public speaker. She’s the clear breadwinner of her family, but by all accounts seems to have a happy, healthy marriage with her hunk of a husband, Todd. They have five beautiful children together. One would think this would be the perfect definition of a feminist is. But, of course, there’s a litmus test that you have to pass in order to join the Fascist Feminist Club, and Sarah Palin failed.

I responded to the post by writing a comment a tad long for that form. So I’ve reposted it here. (with a few extra cherries at the end)

•••••••••

Sarah Palin IS the very definition of an empowered woman. She thinks her own thoughts, pursues her own goals, AND does this WITHOUT pretending to be a man.

In other words, she embraces her own femininity.

Too many womyn believe that a feminist must sacrifice the very thing that makes her so- her womanly nature. To these people, a “feminist” must dress like a man (bonus points if she looks like one.), work in a male dominated industry, and sleep around ‘like a man’ (I say this facetiously).

By default definition, a feminist is also someone who can not be too feminine or too attractive. She must not work in a traditionally “female” role. (seamstresses, flight attendants and mothers: take note) And she absolutely must be completely open to sleeping with as many people as she so desires. To enable this last qualification, she must be willing to have an abortion or support the right of other womyn who also choose to have one. After all, if a man sleeps around, he does not get pregnant. Neither should womyn.

This is ridiculous and a far cry from what the original Feminists (big F) fought so hard for. To them, being a Feminist meant being able to work at the same job as a man, performing at an equal quality of productivity, and get paid just as much. (that middle part is jumping up and down and waving it’s little arms at you) It meant that their intelligence was not dismissed, especially when it was equal to that of their husband’s. And that their vote should be equal to that of their brother’s.

NOTE: this did NOT mean that a woman would head over to a firehouse and still be hired, despite the fact that she couldn’t carry the equipment while wearing the gear through a burning building as she carried an unconscious victim over her shoulder.

Women, despite what “feminists” would like to imagine, are not exactly the same as men. There are some things we (generally speaking) are better at, and some that they excel at. It is the way of reality.

The problem with womyn feminists is that would very much like to deny that reality.

As far as abortion goes, feminists insist that because some men have poor judgement and little self control, that all womyn should also have poor judgement and little self control- or at the least, support womyn who choose to live so foolishly.

In their mentally stunted rationale, if that nasty kid on the playground is always throwing sand in everyone’s eyes, yet you are prevented from doing the same, well then equality can not truly be gained until you are also allowed to throw sand.

They haven’t quite worked it out yet that a playground full of brats throwing sand in each other’s eyes isn’t exactly a fun environment to play in.

Not to get slightly Spider-Manish on y’all, but with rights come responsibilities. Though we have the right to vote, we also now have the responsibility to make sure that our votes go to the most worthy candidate.

And yes, womyn of the feminist movement, while we have the right to sleep with whoever we wish, we must also take responsibility for those actions and not sacrifice the lives of innocents for convenience sake.

It’s funny how Sarah Palin (that silly bimbo with the campy accent) gets that… and yet womyn don’t.

Fantastic! More, please!

Also fascinating is Dr. Tawfik Hamid’s (the former Jihadist being questioned) assertion that terrorist groups’ first enemy was women’s rights. The West, Israel and America are the Great Satans because they are the defenders of women.

Utterly perplexing the way old-style feminists defend this culture.

Democrats: …

Conservatives: This is a day to celebrate a new breed of feminist victory. One that supports strong women who think for themselves and are brave enough to stand against the old-feminist dogma. And many thanks to Palin for supporting these candidates. She is an intelligent, common sense kind of person, a real breath of fresh air.

Democrats: …. Sarah Palin… /head tilt/…

Conservatives: Yes, it’s quite possible that her endorsements really made a difference-

Democrats: -do you think… ?

Conservatives: yes?

Democrats: You think her boobs are real?

Conservatives: What?

Democrats: No, look at these pictures! Don’t they look… BIGGER, somehow?

Conservatives: …

“Even if I prove these things to you, you would prefer to believe a political line given out from an organization rather than the scientific facts?”

Her answer… well she’s got faith, you see.

I have discovered the abortion movement! And they comment at Cute Overload! [/sarcasm. Probably.]

15 asdf 11.11.09 at 3:49 pm

babies are gross and creepy. moar kitties and puppies plz.

29 Bleh 11.11.09 at 4:04 pm

I can’t stand babies. I go to this site every day to see cute animals, not some slobber faced brat.

22 Tiffers 11.11.09 at 3:57 pm

I wish you wouldn’t have done this. I might have to go elsewhere if baby pics continue. I get enough of that crap from my coworkers, no more human babies pls! kthxbye.

89 Rowan 11.11.09 at 5:35 pm

Babies are not cute – please don’t post human babies, I get enough of the little twerps once a year at Christmas, thanks

107 Jari 11.11.09 at 5:53 pm

Ewww. puked

139 Paws and Claws 11.11.09 at 7:06 pm

I’d take the “ugliest” (I think even the ugly ones are cute in their own comical way) animal or insect over the cutest baby any day. Yeah, the babies cute, but human babies all do the same stuff. Animals are more unique and interesting, but that’s just me. I’m not hatin’ on the baby, but would rather have seen a praying mantis or rat or something. I have to see baby’s all day long and get dirty looks when I don’t melt and coo over them. Plus what’s ironic is that in a few years that kids parents will probably feed in lamb…. how wrong is that?

The post was 450 comments long, and fortunately most of comments were from people mocking the baby haters. It was surprising to see how much a photo of a baby human could elicit such a rabid response. Made me curious, too. I know that biologically speaking, we’re designed to have an emotional, positive response when we see children. That’s right, cute serves a purpose. It helps parents (especially mothers) to instinctively want to protect their young.

It isn’t as if these people don’t exhibit this reaction at all, they are on a site dedicated to photos of baby animals. It is just human babies that get them jazzed up.

“Obama’s handshake/forward lurch was so jarring and inappropriate it recalls Bush’s back-rub of Merkel.

“Kyodo News is running his appropriate and reciprocated nod and shake with the Empress, certainly to show the president as dignified, and not in the form of a first year English teacher trying to impress with Karate Kid-level knowledge of Japanese customs.

Jake Tapper, ABC

The Minnesota Free Market Institute hosted an event at Bethel University in St. Paul on Wednesday evening. Keynote speaker Lord Christopher Monckton, former science adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, gave a scathing and lengthy presentation, complete with detailed charts, graphs, facts, and figures which culminated in the utter decimation of both the pop culture concept of global warming and the credible threat of any significant anthropomorphic climate change.

Walter has much of his speach transcribed, as well as a portion of Lord Monckton’s question/ answer session. No matter which global warming theory you subscribe to, it is well worth the read, though I do wish we could see his entire presentation. Keep checking his site for more updates should the rest of the presentation become available.

As is so often the case, the most important issues are usually the ones that receive the smallest amount of attention.

Remember this? Remember the assurances that the promise would be kept? Yup. Still no CSPAN coverage.

Maybe he’s not that interested in hearing what the American People think after all.

Crowder goes undercover. As a Democrat.

In a word: LOL

Just watch it.

More videos and lots of information at their site.

HT: La Shawn Barber

Call me crazy, but I don’t remember anyone ever putting out a George W Bush bible cover.

Buy one today, here!