Elizabeth Wurtzel of Prozac Nation is partly poignant and mostly dumb on the subject of Sarah Palin. However, she had an amusing theme with one howler, so here we go:
To paraphrase Lillian Hellman, I don't agree with a word that Sarah Palin says, including "and" and "the." And as a liberal feminist, it drives me absolutely bonkers that Palin is the most visible working mother and female politician in America, that she is the best exemplar of a woman with an equal marriage, that she has put up with less crap from fewer men than those of us who have read The Second Sex and marched in pro-abortion rallies and pretty much been on the right side of all the issues that Palin is wrong about.
So I suppose I should confess: I like Sarah Palin. I like her because she is such a problem for all these political men, Republicans and Democrats alike, with their polls, and their Walter Dean Burnham theories of transformative elections, and their economy this and their values that--and here comes Palin, and logic just doesn't apply.
Ms. Wurtzel goes on to note that even though the left has Rachel Maddow it's not quite the same, and if I got a nickel for every time Ms. Maddow sneered I would probably pocket five bucks for watching a half hour show which is barely minimum wage and totally insufficient compensation for my pain and suffering but still, that is a lot of sneering. I digress:
But it doesn't matter. It will never matter and I bet it never has mattered, because Sarah Palin is hot. She has sex appeal. That's why people like her. That's the whole story. Everyone has to stop trying to deconstruct and decode it, because there is no accounting for chemistry, and Sarah Palin has lots of it going on with her public.
Well, OK. But on to the howler:
The Democrats are total morons for not finding their own hot mama before the Republicans did so first, or maybe I should have left off the qualifiers and called it straight: the Democrats are just plain morons, at least where women are concerned...
I know, I know: all of you are saying that it's a good thing it's like that, it's a sign that liberals have integrity and blah blah blah. But I think you are kidding yourselves. It's a sign of another thing: that liberal men are wimps who can't handle the hot potato that is a combination of feminine sexuality and female political brilliance.
Why blame liberal men? Where is the evidence that the Girl Power on the left has any interest at all in promoting a hot policy babe? I have this vague memory that back in the 70's the truly earnest and committed protest babes were showing their solidarity with the Viet Cong and their disdain for the corporate patriarchy by not showering for two weeks. Well, that was a long time ago. And I guess Jane Fonda was pretty smokin'.
Besides, the left has Madames Pelosi and Clinton, so quit whining.
The only sex more confused than the girls are the boys.
=============
Posted by: Cherchez la femme. | November 24, 2010 at 12:05 AM
The dumbest thing about her article was her attributing to Lillian Hellman a statement that Mary McCarthy made about Lillian Hellman.
Posted by: George | November 24, 2010 at 12:09 AM
is hot. She has sex appeal. That's why people like her. That's the whole story.
That's an interesting enough observation from the woman who chose to market her own book thusly:
-but combine it with this:
liberal men are wimps who can't handle the hot potato that is a combination of feminine sexuality and female political brilliance.
Oh, my.
Posted by: bgates | November 24, 2010 at 12:16 AM
Liberal women are like the blacks when it comes to democrats. They could be raped by dems and still vote that way. Similarly, the blacks can be lynched by dems (historically they were) and still vote dem.
Stupid, I know, but, that's what it says about black and liberal intellect.
Posted by: Jim | November 24, 2010 at 12:58 AM
liz isn't a sexist is she?
Posted by: tommy mc donnell | November 24, 2010 at 01:29 AM
bgates, I'd think that cover is entirely consistent with what she says about Palin.
Now, I disagree with Elizabeth about Palin's success being primarily because she's hot, but then she pretty well walks that back herself when she says "combination of feminine sexuality and female political brilliance."
George, having both made mistakes in quotation, and missed those mistakes in fact-checking and editing someone else's article, I've got to say, you should cut her some slack.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | November 24, 2010 at 02:05 AM
Well it looks like Liz left out the burning their bras and the not shaving parts of female protest in the 60's.
I don't think those hippie chicks aged well.
Posted by: Comanche Voter | November 24, 2010 at 02:05 AM
Well, Elizabeth isn't a hippie chick, born in 67 -- and she ain't half bad.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | November 24, 2010 at 02:24 AM
I liked Palin long before I ever saw her, and I think there's a reason there's no hotty lefty women of prominence. Left women are catty and pretend to celebrate beauties like Hillary and Michelle, because they distinctly are not hot, and are unthreatening.
But throw a relatively happy, decently attractive woman at them, and then let her leave the feminist reservation, and you've got a true catfight. Stupid, trashy, stupid, uninformed, stupid, bad mother, whatever they can throw they'll throw.
Palin could look like Madeline Albright or Janet Reno, but I'll tell you what-- if she wants to actually cut the size of government and reduce what they take from me, she's as beautiful as any double rainbow.
Nobody-- and I mean NOBODY-- cares more about race and looks and sex than the left does.
Posted by: Morgan | November 24, 2010 at 02:37 AM
Speaking of Elizabeth, this article might interest some of you.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | November 24, 2010 at 02:42 AM
Well, that was fun! Nice to read a liberal fem with a sense of the ridiculous for a change. It's liberal women, of course, not men, who twist themselves into histrionic intellectual pretzels over Palin.
I confess, I like Elizabeth Wurtzel. Can you think of anyone else who would ask why Democratic men can't treat their bimbos with respect like the Republicans do?
Posted by: JM Hanes | November 24, 2010 at 03:31 AM
Thanks all of you, for your thoughts and prayers, as for Wurtzel, she almost gets it,
then the Harrison Bergeron gizmo gets in the way, the woman who named her son after Van Halen, who fought to keep the bars open, who
took on the ole boys at the city, and state
levels. They do have nothing like this, Ferraro, the quinticential Staten Island pol, pshaw, the real mom in tennis shoes, or stilettos as circumstances warrant
Posted by: narciso | November 24, 2010 at 06:09 AM
When did we wake up in a world where being a 'women' and a 'feminist' means you have to support killing off your children and loving lesbians on TV??
Posted by: Pops | November 24, 2010 at 06:21 AM
Why hasn't a reporter asked the most apparent question regarding TSA. Since last year, a terrorist exploded a bomb from his body cavity in Saudi Arabia - why haven't they instituted body cavity searches at airports?
You would think the TSA might actually think about the target THEY HAVE created.
Why blow up a plane when a terrorist can take out 300 people and the TSA simply by walking about to a checkpoint with 300 people queing up for pat downs with a carryon full of explosives??
Sort of like the CIA creating a que of people in cars trying to get to CIA HQ when Mir Aimal Kasi just walked down the line shooting everyone.
Posted by: Pops | November 24, 2010 at 06:27 AM
I don't want to give Mz Wurtzel a pass on this line about Sarah:
"she raises wretched children".
How the heck would Liz Wurtzel know?
Granted Bristol got pregnant but it seems a lot of folks admire her for trying to make something of herself on this 'wretched' TV show. You wouldn't catch me with the balls to get out there in front of 50 million people every week and ballroom dance. If its so damn easy, let Liz do it.
Or Track, Sarah's eldest son. Maybe he was 'wretched' in combat in Afghanistan and Iraq, but does Liz know? Hell no, and I don't either.
How bout Willow? 'My oldest is only 14, but 'Wretched' isn't a word I'd generally use to describe her or Willow. Perhaps she is, but then again, how would Liz know? Willow seemed to handle Letterman joking about A-Rod raping her in broad daylight in Yankee Stadium okay. S'pose we'll have to wait for Willow to get nude and write a book about being a Bitch" tho' to find out if there was any lasting damage from that crack.
Or how 'bout Piper? She's the cute little girl who groomed her baby brother's hair during the campaign in that wonderful photo. Perhaps "Wretched" is Miz Wurtzel's new speak for "retarded". Well, I suppose if you're still doing Prozac it rolls off the tongue easier than Down's syndrome or Mongolian Idiot.
Makes you wonder that if Liz thinks Little Piper and Trig are 'Wretched", what adjectives she might consider appropriate for Megan McCain or Al Gore's drug addled reckless driver of a son. "Wretched" comes to mind, but that's already been used for ">http://www.televisioninternet.com/news/pictures/piper-palin-trig-palin-hair-lick.jpg"> these 2.
Posted by: daddy | November 24, 2010 at 06:44 AM
Another Sarah Palin bashing article. LUN
God bless Sarah Palin and her family.
Posted by: Pagar | November 24, 2010 at 06:56 AM
Did Palin just make a major mistake?
Posted by: Extraneus | November 24, 2010 at 07:10 AM
Good morning all.
God bless Sarah Palin and her family. Amen.
....& prayers today for your Uncle, narciso.
Posted by: Janet | November 24, 2010 at 07:30 AM
If I were editing Wurtzel's article,I would rearrange a few sentences and add a few words for clarity:
Posted by: hit and run | November 24, 2010 at 07:38 AM
Wurtzel:
The Democrats are total morons for not finding their own hot mama
http://draftstormy.wordpress.com/>Draft Stormy Daniels!
Posted by: hit and run | November 24, 2010 at 07:39 AM
Powerline has a nice take down of Richard Cohen & his Palin bashing op-ed.
This petty over-the-top hatred of Palin has done more to open my husband's eyes to the insanity of the left than anything else.
Posted by: Janet | November 24, 2010 at 07:52 AM
Janet:
This petty over-the-top hatred of Palin has done more to open my husband's eyes to the insanity of the left than anything else.
But that's just because Palin's hot. That's the whole story.
Posted by: hit and run | November 24, 2010 at 07:57 AM
Someone should just tell it like it is. Republican women are very attractive and democrat women are troglodytes for the most part. I'm trying to think of an exception and can't.
Posted by: Jane (sit on the couch or save your country) | November 24, 2010 at 08:08 AM
Hah, She might be hot, but I don't think he'd vote for her (he's not that conservative YET!). But I know he cringes whenever a "we hate stupid Palin" slobberfest starts up. He thinks less of each lib. commenter that bashes Palin. They are diminished...not her.
Posted by: Janet | November 24, 2010 at 08:13 AM
Rasmussen said it would not be Romney,Huck,Newt,or Sarah, but someone who Sarah chooses.
Posted by: caro | November 24, 2010 at 08:58 AM
Wurtzel gets no credit for anything in this piece, even the halfway sensible stuff. All she is saying is that she wishes Dems had their own Sarah Palin. That's the whole story.
Posted by: Porchlight | November 24, 2010 at 08:59 AM
To my mind, the Left seems to have an "attractiveness" or "hot" deficit both in females and the males.
Where is their Sarah Palin? Well, where is their Marco Rubio or Col. West? And, why stop there? I could create quite a list of Conservative females (look at ALL of the recent winners) and males. We have quite a bounty of attractive and principled leaders arriving in DC.
Sadly, the Left doesn't even have any waiting in the wings that I know of.
Posted by: centralcal | November 24, 2010 at 09:05 AM
Sarah Palin is hot. She has sex appeal. That's why people like her. That's the whole story.
Especially regarding women. I've always thought that's why women find her attractive, haven't you?
Posted by: PD | November 24, 2010 at 09:12 AM
What I love about this story is that Wurtzel would probably be furious if anyone attempted to belittlle her own accomplishments as a women, but has no problem using belittlement as a woman for her entire attack on Palin.
Posted by: PD | November 24, 2010 at 09:14 AM
And the primary belittlement is that Palin hasn't *really* had to put up with much crap.
I'm trying to think of another woman on the contemporary world stage who's put up with more than Sarah Palin. I'm not coming up with another candidate. Anyone?
Posted by: PD | November 24, 2010 at 09:18 AM
And if the WHOLE STORY about why people like Palin is that she's hot, why does Wurtzel despise her? Sheesh. Her gasbaggery is a FAIL on so many levels.
Posted by: PD | November 24, 2010 at 09:25 AM
Porchlight: "All she is saying is that she wishes Dems had their own Sarah Palin."
And wishes that the Dem Palin would be named Liz Wurtzel.
Posted by: Fred Beloit | November 24, 2010 at 09:31 AM
You have this
Did Palin just make a major mistake?
But if within the machine itself, the GOP machine feels threatened – some of those in the hierarchy – if they start attacking my potential candidacy and trying to erode a base of support and discredit and invalidate me and my record and my policies, then I will know that I would probably do more harm that good to the cause…and if I get in the way of that cause, I don’t need a title, I don’t need a position, I don’t need to run for office in order to affect positive change in order to reach the goals we have here in the cause.
Then this
Rasmussen said it would not be Romney,Huck,Newt,or Sarah, but someone who Sarah chooses.
Palin is setting herself up to be the new party powerbroker. Could actually be more powerful than POTUS.
Posted by: Pofarmer | November 24, 2010 at 09:34 AM
I'm trying to think of another woman on the contemporary world stage who's put up with more than Sarah Palin. I'm not coming up with another candidate. Anyone?
I think the standard lefty would answer with either "Hillary" or "Michelle".
Posted by: Rob Crawford | November 24, 2010 at 09:45 AM
I think the standard lefty would answer with either "Hillary" or "Michelle".
Yeah, maybe. But if you want to attack a woman, attack her children. Which of the three has put up with the most on that score?
Posted by: PD | November 24, 2010 at 09:51 AM
Which of the three has put up with the most on that score?
Again, the standard lefty answer would be "Hillary" or "Michelle".
Things said about the Palins are not "attacks" to a lefty. Remember; they don't consider conservatives to be fully human.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | November 24, 2010 at 09:56 AM
Caro's 8:58 works for me.
Posted by: Old Lurker | November 24, 2010 at 10:07 AM
When did we wake up in a world where being a 'women' and a 'feminist' means you have to support killing off your children and loving lesbians on TV??
The most troubling speaker for me last week was Phyliss Schafly. I'm still trying to work out what she said. I've always considered myself a feminist - defined as equal without the moaning and whining- and Schafly really hates feminism. She also thinks the role of women is to be married and have children - along with whatever else.
I'm hoping that by the time she comes up on You Too I will have worked more out about it - but I did find it interesting that more men agreed with her than women.
Posted by: Jane | November 24, 2010 at 10:13 AM
That's not a Lillian Hellman quote. It's what Mary McCarthy said ABOUT Hellman.
Posted by: Uncle BigBad | November 24, 2010 at 10:18 AM
More importantly Mary McCarthy was pointing out that even "and" and "the" were transformed into lies by that repellent old Marxist crone, not opinions she disagreed with.
Posted by: Ignatz | November 24, 2010 at 10:36 AM
"feminist - defined as equal without the moaning and whining ..."
Traditional roles derive from times when modern equality was not feasible. A modern perspective might claim it should have been a higher priority back then but that seems unrealistic to me.
Pro-tradition arguments aren't necessarily anti-equality but are often seen that way.
Posted by: boris | November 24, 2010 at 11:11 AM
Sex appeal. Hot "bimbo"? See JM Hanes at 3:31.
I'll tell you who's "sexy". Maggie Thatcher. Even Geraldine Ferraro. Women unafraid to speak blunt home truths as they see them. Women not so wrapped up in current PC cant that they are unable to see the world before their eyes. Maureen Dowd is not "sexy"--she's just a blithering idiot. Sarah Palin is nice looking, but it's the content of her character that counts.
You want a real "bimbo", look at Robert aka "Baghdad Bob" Gibbs.
Posted by: Comanche Voter | November 24, 2010 at 11:31 AM
I take it there's not a shot of Phyliss Schafly holding a "Jane Wins Again" sign.
Posted by: daddy | November 24, 2010 at 11:38 AM
If wretched means a girl pregnant as a teenager, that might be racist.
Posted by: MarkO | November 24, 2010 at 11:42 AM
Mary McCarthy said of Hellman, "Every word she writes is a lie—including 'and' and 'the.' "
Posted by: Danube of Thought | November 24, 2010 at 11:46 AM
Phyllis Schlafly always seems a bit strident in her views to me also Jane.
In her younger years she was a quite attractive woman who campaigned against the ERA amendment and almost single handedly torpedoed having it added to the Constitution.
There is a wonderful series on Fox News going on right hosted by Brit Hume called The Right All Along where Schlafly is featured explaining her role in the ERA movement.
I think she feels/felt that feminism would absolve men from taking responsibility for supporting women with children.
Her attitude is much more involved than that simplistic summary however.
Posted by: glasater | November 24, 2010 at 11:53 AM
Too bad Hellman's slander lawsuit against McCarthy didn't really get underway before both Hellman and McCarthy died. It would have been worth watching.
Comanche Voter
Yes, the young Thatcher was "hot," and she was not above flirting to get what she wanted.
Posted by: Uncle BigBad | November 24, 2010 at 11:53 AM
Jane,
I struggle with this quite a bit, but it's important to remember the anti-egalitarian argument begins not with women can't do those things or really even they shouldn't do those things that men do, but rather women have an ability and a nature to do certain things that men cannot do. Most importantly bear children and sustain families in an emotional sense and in many ways civilize society and culture. They should be seen as equals in worth just not necessarily doing the same thing.
As someone who ended up in an extremely traditional family setting, but still doesn't fit most other feminine stereotypes I often find myself saying how did I get here? Because we value work and "doing something worthwhile" (raising a family doesn't really count) as markers of success the very idea of women as mothers and wives doesn't cut it as much of a contribution. My problem with the traditionalist view is what happens when you don't fit the mold. I don't believe our predisposition to choose particular activities, interests and careers are all the result of cultural and societal influences.
Posted by: laura | November 24, 2010 at 11:55 AM
Stabenow, Reno, Mikulski, Boxer, Napolitano, Hill.
I think the gal may have picked up on a trend of sorts. Three Baggers are Us for a new Democrat bumper sticker?
Posted by: Gmax | November 24, 2010 at 12:01 PM
I'm happy to talk about peoples' looks. Even politicians' looks.
But I don't like looks-as-politics discussions.
No party has a lock on attractive people.
I think "You like her because she's hot!" vs. "They hate her because she's hot" is a really worthless argument.
Posted by: MayBee | November 24, 2010 at 12:14 PM
And I don't want to hear about the way I've written "peoples'".
Posted by: MayBee | November 24, 2010 at 12:45 PM
Did Palin just make a major mistake?
Given her history, I sure as hell wouldn't want to bet on it.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | November 24, 2010 at 12:54 PM
And if the WHOLE STORY about why people like Palin is that she's hot, why does Wurtzel despise her? Sheesh. Her gasbaggery is a FAIL on so many levels.
If the story is about why Elizabeth despises her, why does it have the line "I like Sarah Palin" in it?
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | November 24, 2010 at 12:55 PM
And wishes that the Dem Palin would be named Liz Wurtzel.
I don't think so -- Liz has more baggage that Louis Vitton.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | November 24, 2010 at 12:59 PM
If the story is about why Elizabeth despises her, why does it have the line "I like Sarah Palin" in it?
Because she's a liar when she says that. "Like" doesn't really go with "I don't agree with a word that Sarah Palin says."
She doesn't really like Palin. She likes that Palin for the problem that she poses to "political men."
Posted by: PD | November 24, 2010 at 01:19 PM
Jane, I think you could look at P Shlafly as a museum piece. She is amazing at 86.And she went to law school to irritate the women in the lib movement.Remember that in her youth women really did not have the opportunities to support ourselves we have now and she spoke out to offer another point of view. I don't remember liking her at the time and would not think of her as a hero but she was a woman who spoke out for her beliefs and organized support for them. Is that not what we are trying to do today?
I wish you would have talked to her one-on-one.I bet she would support your POV.
Posted by: caro | November 24, 2010 at 01:47 PM
Because we value work and "doing something worthwhile" (raising a family doesn't really count) as markers of success the very idea of women as mothers and wives doesn't cut it as much of a contribution.
My sweetie is a homemaker: Didn't even occur to her until we got married that she didn't *have* to go out and get a job. Stayed home, raised the kids, did lots of volunteer stuff. I've always tried to make sure she knows that I considered this harder than my own job and that I highly value what she does. I thought it was important to stress this because "the world" doesn't much affirm this kind of "working mother." (Aren't all mothers working mothers?)
Posted by: PD | November 24, 2010 at 02:47 PM
Comanche you beat me to it. Not to take anything away from Palin in the looks department, I find her "hot" for the same reason I found Thatcher "hot." (And no, Uncle B, I don't really know how attractive she was in her younger days). She gets it, and she expresses basic political ideas with which I heartily agree clearly and without apology.
There are lots of very sexy woman who ascribe to lefty or Dem political ideals. I aint voting for any of them, pleasant though they may be to look at. (Don't ask me who, because I'm blocking at the moment).
Posted by: Boatbuilder | November 24, 2010 at 03:27 PM
(raising a family doesn't really count)
Nothing counts more. As one of the few stay at home Moms in my neighborhood, I was almost everyone's emergency contact. My husband said, "I takes a family to raise the village.". I do a lot of volunteer stuff too PD. On the endless forms we fill out in life I always answer "Mom" for occupation.
Posted by: Janet the tea-vangelist! | November 24, 2010 at 03:30 PM
Go, Janet!
Posted by: PD | November 24, 2010 at 03:48 PM
I don't think it's surprising that men would agree that women should get married and have children. It's not men who stigmatized these things.
Posted by: Extraneus | November 24, 2010 at 04:01 PM
In the Fifties, my mother instructed us to put 'homemaker' for mother's occupation instead of 'housewife' on schoolhouse forms.
=================
Posted by: Seemed right to us. | November 24, 2010 at 07:33 PM
This was the really the first time, I heard of her, in the LUN
Posted by: narciso | November 24, 2010 at 07:39 PM
Dems believe that women have to be slime balls like Nancy Pelosi to get ahead in politics.
Posted by: jorod | November 24, 2010 at 09:04 PM
Beldar's rolling thunder, heard across the gulf.
=================
Posted by: Thank you, narciso, and Tio, too. | November 25, 2010 at 07:51 AM
Rising up like thunder
Out of Beldar crost the bay.
==============
Posted by: Thank you, Soylent. And Daze, Dio. | November 25, 2010 at 07:53 AM