This Isn’t 1988, After All
You know what phrase I hate real bad? ‘Talking points’. ugh. Either it’s political bullshit related, or it’s corporatespeak for ‘problems we have with X’, neither of which I am particularly keen on, ever. Thank you, Campbell Brown, for acknowledging the BS.
That said, here are some talking points as regard Sarah Palin that have nothing to do with gender, babies–I don’t like or care about babies–or anyone’s drug/alcohol indiscretions. These are issues that no one has been able to adequately explain to me, and anyone who might help, well, I’m mighty obliged.
– What’s with this banning books from the town library thing? Don’t give me the ‘it was rhetorical’ crap. It means she did say it, even so.
– I realize that just speaking to a group doesn’t imply membership, but it does imply tacit acceptance if you’re not there to debate. The AIP worries me.
– When does nepotism become really an issue, even if the ex in question is a complete and utter wankbasket? When can one accept responsibility for control of one’s staffers?
– I’d like to know what this really means, because I can’t parse out what the McCain/Palin PR staff want it to mean.
– And where’s the line between being a maverick and talking the national party line?
No gender, no media crap about ‘mommy wars’, no children. Just a lot of questions that I still want answered, particularly about Palin’s attempts to disappear people she disagrees with. These are feminist issues too.
Other people can discuss the implications of the media circus elsewhere. I’m too tired right now.
Filed under: Uncategorized | 1 Comment
Tags: oh no you didn't, politics, really not cleese