MW: Thanks for the Modifier, Sister Sledgehammer
Posted by: madamab on: May 17, 2010
- In: Feminism | Hillary Clinton | Human Rights | Morning Widdershins | Open Thread | Patriarchy | Politics | Propaganda
- Comment!
At last, at last! Sarah Palin has admitted she is not a feminist. She’s a “conservative feminist.” As you’ll see, this is an important distinction indeed.
Palin is being called “Sister Sledgehammer” because out of seventeen of the Democrats whom she is trying to replace with Republican conservatives in 2010, five are women. Apparently, this is news to someone at Politico. Why? I don’t know. Is it really surprising that Sarah is willing to step all over other women to get what she wants – especially women from the Party of “Death Panels?” She does it all the time, even to women in her own Party. Remember poor Dede Scozzafava, who got shoved under Palin’s Tea Party Express because Dede (a Republican who had the full endorsement of the RNC) supported reproductive rights and gay marriage? Ah yes. When people show you who they are, it’s best to pay attention.
No, Palin’s lack of support for any woman who doesn’t support her fundiegelical views cannot be news to anyone at this point. But her embrace of “conservative feminism” was a shock to me – a happy, happy shock. Golly gee willikers, what will the “new feminists” say about this?
“No one before her was a conservative woman on the national scene who has made such a splash,” says Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List, a group dedicated to electing women who oppose abortion rights. [MB: Not true. Phyllis Schafly, anyone - the woman who single-handedly stopped the ERA? But hey. We've all gotta be historically historic these days. It's the Barack Obama template, baby!]
Palin eagerly claims the feminist mantle—an unusual assertion for a candidate from her wing of the GOP—and spoke Friday of “a new conservative feminist movement” with an “emerging conservative feminist identity,” before a Washington audience.
“I kinda feel a connection to that tough, gun totin’ pioneer feminism,” she told the enthusiastic crowd of anti-abortion activists gathered to support the SBA List.
“For far too long, when people heard the word feminist, they thought of the faculty lounge ant [sic] some East Coast woman’s college,” she said. “And no offense to them, they have their opinions and their voice and God bless ‘em, that’s great, but that’s not the only voice of women in America.”
Get it, New “Every Woman is a Feminist” Feminists? Sarah Palin doesn’t want to work with you. Sarah Palin thinks you’re all a bunch of armpit-hair-braiding, birkenstock-wearing elitists who want to murder innocent babies. ZOMG!!!111!!!
But, MadamaB, what about the 30% Solution, you may ask? Guess what – Palin doesn’t believe in that, either. D’oh!
One of Palin’s 2010 targets, Rep. Betsy Markey (D-Colo.), says aiming at women like her undermines the rapport that women from both parties enjoy in Congress—where they make up only 17 percent of members.
“It certainly doesn’t help the cause of trying to get more women in Congress now, because I think as a whole I think we do a good job of working together, the women members,” Markey told POLITICO. “What Sarah Palin is doing simply doesn’t promote that idea of as women we all work together, whether you’re a Democrat or a Republican.”
You know who’s the real opposite of Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann, her “conservative feminist” partner in many of her campaign rallies? Yeah. You know who.
“One of the things that people were praising Hillary [Clinton] for was her ability to accept a position, listen, talk to both sides – and that is a real anathema to Palin and to Michele [Bachmann],” says Schroeder, who served 12 terms in her Denver-based seat. “With Sarah and Michele, they’re not listeners—they want to tell you what to believe, so it’s a very different style than most women in politics have had,” she said.
Darn. Yet another Palin myth is debunked. She and Hillary are nothing alike. Nothing. At. All.
So what is “conservative feminism” all about? Well, according to Sarah’s words and actions, it’s about destroying women who don’t believe as you do. It’s about endangering the lives of millions of women and children by denying them access to reproductive health care, quality sex education and birth control. It’s about unequal representation, putting ideology over gender equality. Oh, and it’s about looking pretty and making sure we are all happy with men!
Palin’s political style—and her cold-blooded approach to targeting races—also places her at a distance from some of her party’s top female officeholders, most notably those in the Senate.
While GOP Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) walk the halls of the Capitol in well-coordinated suits, at a recent election rally for one of their Senate colleagues, John McCain, Palin showed up dressed in a leather motorcycle jacket that accentuated her image and made her octogenarian former running mate pale by comparison. [MB: This is a small thing, but for Jeebus' sake, Politico, McCain is not an octogenarian. He's 72! Didn't anyone edit this piece?]
That willingness to break with political convention, both in dress and in her targeted candidates, will make Palin a singular force on the campaign trail, says Dannenfelser.
“The deep roots of the liberal feminist movement are in the Democratic Party. To the extent that this idea that we can’t be happy with men is still around; it’s probably living out its life there more than in the Republican Party,” says Dannenfelser. “The fact that women feel a little bit more likely now to be able to look feminine … is a great thing, because it means that at least we’re not trying to be the same people anymore. We know that we’re different, we know that we’re equal.”
And best of all, we bikini wax! Hooray for “conservative feminism!”
All I can say is: Thanks for the modifier, Sister Sledgehammer – you’ve made it very clear to us where you stand. “Conservative feminism” is a zero on the feminism meter. ”Conservative feminism” is simply patriarchal conservatism for women, clad in a sexy leather jacket and riding the waves of poorly-disguised historical revisionism. In short, it’s anti-feminism. And Sarah Palin is an anti-feminist. Try, just try to refute that. I dare ya!
By the way, NOW (an ACTUAL feminist organization) is trying to stop Sarah Palin and her fundiegelical patriarchal friends from turning this country into a Christian Saudi Arabia. From my Inbox, Terry O’Neill says:
Right-wing activists in state after state, emboldened by the abortion fights during the health care debate, are at it again. New state abortion restrictions and requirements are in the works, or worse, have already passed. And each one is aimed at undoing the rights guaranteed by Roe v. Wade.
- Most worrisome: Nebraska has criminalized abortions after 20 weeks — that’s before viability! This law, which is in direct violation of Roe, will be challenged in the courts — but it could also be the basis for the Roberts Supreme Court to overturn Roe.
- In Oklahoma, women seeking abortions will now be forced to undergo an intrusive vaginal-probe ultrasound while viewing the fetus and hearing it described in detail.
- Arizona now prohibits all private and public health insurance plans from covering abortion care — depriving thousands and thousands of women of the insurance coverage they currently have.
More and more of these laws, intended to shame and demean women and turn health care professionals into criminals, are coming.
Where will such restrictions pop up next? Is your state next?
Maybe, if you’re able, you might wanna throw them a few bucks. I think they deserve it a hell of a lot more than Sarah Palin does.
This is an open thread.
65 Responses to "MW: Thanks for the Modifier, Sister Sledgehammer"
May 17, 2010 at 8:09 AM
In the meantime, TNA has turned into I don’t even know what to call it and Amy Siskind has lost her mind.
May 17, 2010 at 8:14 AM
Oh. My. Dog. You should see Amy’s latest: Sarah Palin and the Feminist Revival.
No. Really. Nagonna link. I am so done with them.
May 17, 2010 at 8:58 AM
BL – that organization is EXACTLY why I wrote this. They are wasting their time and a whole lot of money on trying to make fundiegelicals like Palin into feminists.
Sorry, ladies, that dog won’t hunt. Give it the fuck up already.
May 17, 2010 at 9:08 AM
@5 – Revival indeed!
The problem with TNA is that most of its members are Republicans. Amy told me this when I was writing for them. Obviously they’ve done what they always do, and drowned out any voices of sanity that might be fighting against their fundiegelical bullshit.
May 17, 2010 at 10:13 AM
Okay, I had to do it. Read it and weep, people.
First, Amy incorrectly claims that Palin is embracing her gender. No, she is embracing CONSERVATIVE women, not all women. This is bullshit of a particularly disgusting variety – and Amy even congratulates Palin for “standing with” Jan Brewer, the signer of the Arizona immigration law, allegedly because Brewer is a woman. No, it’s because she ideologically AGREES WITH HER!
Then, Amy’s most jaw-dropping assertion of all – apparently, Palin’s problem is not that she wants to ban abortion, but that she’s using the word feminism AT ALL.
But there is a worrying aspects in Palin’s new approach: she has fallen into the trap of making abortion a centerpiece and it trying to rebrand “feminism” into a conservative mantra. Blech and more blech! If you want proof positive that this is a losing strategy, look left to the largest national women’s organization which has seen its membership dwindle (to 10% of its peak). And look at polling data that suggests that only 20% of women are willing to use the word “feminist” about themselves (and 17% said they would welcome their daughters using that label). And, a New York Times article yesterday on Kagan revealed a similar finding: One of the questions posed by the older lawyers was whether younger lawyers saw themselves as feminists. Many said they did not. “The older women were aghast…” This mantra is simply not appealing to the vast majority of today’s women.
What will appeal to today’s women is this: supporting women and speaking out on women’s issues that impact us all. Issues like the UVA murder and ticking bomb crisis of teen dating violence; “clitoral relativism”: nicks condoned on our soil by the American Academy of Pediatrics; Iraq’s admission to the UN Commission on the Status of Women (and President Obama’s silence) and so on.
Gosh, I guess the right to control our own bodies is not an “issue that will impact us all.” That’s because Amy and her privileged friends won’t ever have to worry about being able to afford birth control, quality sex education and the full range of reproductive services. That’s because in the “New Feminism,” only issues that won’t scare away anti-feminists are allowed to be discussed.
FOR SHAME, LADIES. FOR SHAME.
May 17, 2010 at 11:43 AM
What is the Arizona abortion law? Did I miss that? I know Brewer signed the odious “show us your papers” law.
May 17, 2010 at 11:43 AM
I am so going to have to write about Amy’s piece. It’s been sticking in my craw all morning. But, I’m at work, so this make take some time.
May 17, 2010 at 11:47 AM
madamab – regarding drowning out voices of sanity…that’s exactly what they did to me about a month or so ago when I commented on another Rah Rah Sarah! piece they had. This “conservative” feminism is nothing new from SP and I noted that she was only welcoming conservative women. Holey crap. I also mentioned it on my blog: http://bluelyon.wordpress.com/2010/04/10/i-dont-think-so/
May 17, 2010 at 12:11 PM
BL – I apologize, I was multi-tasking and was extremely upset. Immigration law, of course. I updated the comment.
You know I used to write for TNA, right? I quit last year when they started trying to water down my pieces.
I commented on Amy’s piece at TNA. I’m quite sure my comment will not be well-received.
May 17, 2010 at 12:36 PM
MB @ 12 – They’ll probably delete it. Yeah, I know you used to write there.
May 17, 2010 at 12:39 PM
I read your comment over there, and reaction was about what I’ve figured. Marla will probably get pounced on next. Love the guy telling us we need to make abortion a “non-issue.” F$%K that.
May 17, 2010 at 12:44 PM
Chatblu – The New Agenda.
BL – OMG, someone agreed with me?! Wow. And of course a man thinks we’re supposed to give control of our bodies to him! That’s why we needed feminism in the first place.
May 17, 2010 at 12:49 PM
I totally agree with Marla over at TNA. Palin should be taken as seriously as Paris Hilton.
May 17, 2010 at 12:54 PM
@18 – Me too, Beata. But hey, she’s going to learn from Hillary’s “mistakes” and become President!
May 17, 2010 at 12:59 PM
When I read that “learning from Hillary’s mistakes” line I lost it.
May 17, 2010 at 1:04 PM
OMG, me too, BL. Hillary’s big mistake was not being the person the Democratic Party had anointed to beat her! 
May 17, 2010 at 1:47 PM
So from what I read Madamab is “conservative feminism” is Mysoginism with “scary lady parts” am I correct?
That Sarah Palin is the personification of the status quo and evil is now on the record maybe “The Majority United” Folks can wake up an smell fires smoldering looks like we are gonna be burning people at the stakes again?
May 17, 2010 at 1:58 PM
Don’t worry, Fuzzy. According to Amy’s piece no one really thinks of themselves as feminists any more anyway. We’re all irrelevant next to the Glory that Is Sarah.
May 17, 2010 at 2:03 PM
wait? no one considers themselves feminist anymore? crap why am I the last to know?
May 17, 2010 at 2:32 PM
Yeah, I dunno fuzzy…the term is no longer “popular” according to polls.
Newsflash: you don’t make public policy according to polling data, nor do you make principles accordingly.
May 17, 2010 at 4:06 PM
Tristero over at Digby’s – a really excellent read. Apparently the idea that there is “liberal” (bad) feminism and “conservative” (good) feminism is not just coming from Sarah Palin.
(I haven’t been to Digby’s in quite some time, so trust me when I say this is worth it.)
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2010/05/more-on-liberal-values-and-ruth.html
May 17, 2010 at 5:23 PM
The thing I hate about the “conservatives” is come election time wherever they all try to outdo each other.
AL is having elections in June for guv, s.o.s., treasurer and I guess all the main state jobs. And the commercials are enough to make you want to puke.
I don’t watch Bill Maher anymore but this was linked on another blog and I found it to be sooo true about these current AL elections.
May 17, 2010 at 5:23 PM
the term is no longer “popular” according to polls.
So then, why the hell are they trying to claim it as their own?
May 17, 2010 at 5:55 PM
@30 – Yes, that IS a very good question. Amy Siskind thinks it’s a “losing strategy.” I guess people who are actual political operatives don’t agree with her.
Yes, that idea that white people will be out-birthed by brown people is a not-so-secret tenet of today’s conservatism. Charming, no? Bill O’Reilly blurted something about that a year or so ago, I think – I remember it made all the big blogs. Something about how white people needed to have more babies.
These people are beyond morally repugnant. I don’t even know how to describe how awful they are.
May 17, 2010 at 5:58 PM
Sarah Palin? and GAG in the same sentence takes my mind to dark scary places that I really dont want to go!
For slow starters Feminism = Liberal = Good
Sarah Palin + Stupidity + Faux Feminism – Independent Thinking Brain Cells = Bad (or Anti-Feminism)
May 17, 2010 at 6:00 PM
Something about how white people needed to have more babies.
And who supports/feeds/clothes these add’l children? Don’t they think folks have enough sense to know how many children they can afford to have?
May 17, 2010 at 6:13 PM
Oh and how as The Majority United taken Ms Palins decision to redefine “Feminism” I am sure Gloria and MS are wishing they never put Pampers on the cover!
May 17, 2010 at 6:25 PM
I am sorry I didnt say theis before but isnt “Conservative Feminism” an Oxymoron?
At the very least since it came form Palins mouth its Moronic!
May 17, 2010 at 6:42 PM
Fredster – By white people, Bill O’ meant white women. No, women do not have any sense according to fundies. That’s why fundies have to rule over every aspect of our lives! Feminist, huh?
Fuzzy – thanks for the primer. Although I don’t buy the idea that Palin is stupid. I think she is a brilliant politician.
Now that she’s showing her true fundie colors every freaking day, I think she’s evil too. A very bad combination indeed!
May 17, 2010 at 7:11 PM
I am not saying that Palin is stupid sory what I meant is her position and beliefs are moronic.
She is the personification of modern evil….
May 17, 2010 at 7:26 PM
The comments for sellout siskand’s article at huffington post were great. They told her what they thought of that BS article.
May 17, 2010 at 7:36 PM
MB@38-yes I understood that, but the question still holds.
And as I recall (I think correctly) women had to join in the work force in larger numbers back in either the Ford or Carter years when inflation was so rampant that one paycheck simply could not run a household. It was economic necessity that led a lot of women to work out of the home, not exactly by choice.
Jill@40: Do you have a link for the HuffPo article?
May 17, 2010 at 7:36 PM
Great post, madamab. Amazing how the Conservatives hijack and distort the meanings of words: feminism, patriotism, etc. I won’t hold my breath waiting for Palin or any other “conservative feminist” to articulate a platform. She said she identifies with “tough, gun-totin’ pioneer feminism.” The NRA reference is clear, but what does she mean by “pioneer feminism”? It sounds a lot like a reference to an outmoded, “Little House on the Prairie” concept of women’s roles.
May 17, 2010 at 7:41 PM
@40 – Really, jillforhill? That is encouraging. But I hope they did it without resorting to disgusting sexism. Certainly the article and the arguments are easily refuted without descending into that swamp.
May 17, 2010 at 8:53 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/amy-siskind/palin-has-begun-to-learn_b_578858.html
Comments:
“serena1313 18 minutes ago (8:24 PM) 80 Fans
First of all Sarah Palin may be endorsing women candidates, but that does not mean in any way she is “standing up” for women muchless women’s causes.
I would like to see more women in office, but women like Carly Fiorina, who got canned from HP for running the company into the ground, or Michele Bachmann, who believes in creationism, is anti-choice, votes against progressive education programs to prepare students for work not to mention her bizarre remarks, or Jan Brewster, who just signed the most draconian (probably illegal) immigration legislation into law are not quality candidates. Neither is Sarah Palin by any stretch of the imagination.
What matters is quality not quantity”
“HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Skepticat 20 minutes ago (8:22 PM) 133 Fans
Ms Palin no more represents womens interests than the “boobquake mullah or the current pope or any number of old white guys hoping that 1956 will somehow return. With slightly over half the adult population female it shouldn’t be an impossible task to find legions of women who are infinity better qualified. ”
There are more comments like that at huffington post.
May 17, 2010 at 9:07 PM
@44 – Fantastic, Jillforhill. Thanks for sharing that! Gives me hope.
May 17, 2010 at 9:35 PM
Another comment:
“everyoneshistorian 1 hour ago (7:52 PM) 10 Fans
I am utterly APPALLED by this article and even the mere suggestion that Palin is a “feminist.” Being a feminist or feminist-minded is a quality that is difficult to define but one that always revolves around a sense of justice–especially for ALL who face discrimination (ie., on the basis of sex/gender, race, sexuality, etc.) It also often involves a distinct sense of community which Palin likens to “Communism,” “Socialism” or any other fear-provoking term that was fed to her by her “handlers” during the ’08 campaign. The fact that she, while Governor (before quitting to leech off of those unable to see her for what she is), cut spending for kids with special needs in spite having a child with special needs herself contradicts EVERYTHING that feminism represents. Moreover, she admitted that she herself contemplated abortion before **CHOOSING** to give birth to him. Apparently, Palin’s “feminism” is quite narrowly bounded… much like her mind and the minds of her followers.
Does anyone know anything about this, there was a link on the comments that NOW got payments from sarahpac.
May 17, 2010 at 9:42 PM
Jillforhill – does the link seem credible?
And if so, why would anyone care if SarahPac donated to NOW? That doesn’t make Sarah Palin a feminist.
May 17, 2010 at 9:46 PM
I don’t know the link had some screen shots,but my computer wouln’t load so I am not sure. From what I got from that blog is that the keep track of the stupid things palin does and says.
May 17, 2010 at 10:28 PM
Jill I went to the link and it’s an obot site primarily and they were trying to imply that O’Neil was on the sarahpac payroll or some such drivel.
Those comments were fantastic! After that, Siskind should probably confine herself (if she can’t take the heat) to the Daily Beast and her Faux Agenda website (I knew there was a reason I didn’t care for the Beast site). And I particularly loved this:
But there is a worrying aspect in Palin’s new approach: she has fallen into the trap of making abortion a centerpiece and is trying to rebrand “feminism” into a conservative mantra. Blech and more blech!
Amy, dawlin, you cannot have it both ways. Abortion will always be the centerpiece of these people. You just don’t get it.
May 17, 2010 at 10:42 PM
Thanks, freezer. My computer would not load correctly so I was not sure. I got kind of freaked out about what was implied. I will stay away from that boot site.
Yeah,those comments were awesome. The media and amy are trying to force pain to be something she is not and for amy to even try to compare pain to hillary is ridiculous. Amy needs to turn in her hillary card.
May 17, 2010 at 10:53 PM
Jill love your spell check it turned Palin to “pain” what a smart program!
May 17, 2010 at 11:24 PM
MadamB said:
“I commented on Amy’s piece at TNA. I’m quite sure my comment will not be well-received.”
http://thenewagenda.net/2010/05/17/sarah-palin-and-the-feminist-revival/
# 17 May 2010 at 2:14 pm
“jenniferintexas said:
MadamB is most wrong about Sarah Palin. She is proudly pro-life for herself, but she supports the right to choose for all women. And the fact that this position is so seemingly confusing to those trapped on the left amazes me because Sarah is the ultimate feminist in my opinion. She does not agree with abortion so she herself would not get one and she might even counsel others not to get one, but she does NOT think that the issue of abortion is a political one and rather it is a private issue between doctor and woman. It is only the LEFT that is spinning this into Sarah Palin wanting women to lose the constitutional right to terminate an unwanted pregnancy. Sarah has said emphatically that she would NOT change that right and that it should have never been politicized.
I myself and pro life and pro choice. I do not think abortion is something I could handle personally, but it is every woman’s right. Honestly, what is so hard about understanding this and why does the left want to paint me as a social conservative when, in fact, I am not.
Furthermore, any woman waiting on the demon party to protect and/or support their rights will be waiting a very very long time. In fact, I pity any woman still clinging to that hope thing. It is time to face facts–women have not only been asked to sit on the back of the bus by the democraps they have been thrown off the bus. Wake up girls. please wake up.”
May 17, 2010 at 11:36 PM
It is time to face facts–women have not only been asked to sit on the back of the bus by the democraps they have been thrown off the bus. Wake up girls. please wake up.”
And so the Republicans would be better in this regard? No freakin’ way!!!
May 17, 2010 at 11:37 PM
Jenniferintexas is delusional and probably sees pink elephants like palin said she did this weekend.
May 17, 2010 at 11:42 PM
Here ya go doodoo666 and jenniferintx: Palin on 5/14/2010
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/video/palin-abortion-rights-forget-10647334
May 17, 2010 at 11:45 PM
Same thing from CNN:
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/05/14/palin.abortion.speech/
May 18, 2010 at 12:04 AM
What about “She spoke at an anti-abortion rally for the Susan B. Anthony List, a group dedicated to electing anti-abortion politicians” do these morons not understand? It’s right there in Amy’s article. Golly gee, why would she do that if she wasn’t anti-choice herself?
Furthermore, why would Palin say she wants Roe v. Wade to be overturned if she didn’t? Why would she sabotage a fellow Republican woman who was pro-choice if she didn’t want to elect anti-choice politicians? Why is it her mission to elect social conservatives if she is neutral on abortion?
Honestly, the depth of willful stupidity is appalling at TNA. It’s like Obamamania for anti-Obama women. Worship Sarah or you shall be cast out!
Look, if you want to vote for Palin because you like her for whatever reason, far be it from me to say you’re wrong. But do not DARE call her a feminist. From her own mouth, she isn’t one. She’s a “conservative” feminist. You know, like jumbo shrimp or military intelligence.
May 18, 2010 at 12:16 AM
And let’s not forget what it’s all about with Sarah. It’s the m-o-n-e-y.
May 18, 2010 at 1:06 AM
madamab,
Thanks for the post, and I found out that she is also pro-profiling ala Arizona Law. 
May 18, 2010 at 11:10 AM
@61 – That’s what Amy is lauding her for doing – for supporting the Governor who signed that law, Jan Brewer. She’s a woman, you know! Hooray!
May 21, 2010 at 4:47 AM
That description of Sarah in a motorcycle jacket reminded me of her saying(before she hit “the big time”) that the political figure she most looked up to was Condoleezza Rice. And her leather dominatrix outfits? LOL.
My sister told me that last summer — that Palin HATES other women. She gathered as much from being alone with her in an elevator once, after receiving that competitive look up and down. She also worked at the library when Sarah was trying to get books banned. Something that she later denied.
Sen. Murkowski is also an embarrassment to women. Right now she’s trying to undermine the Clean Air Act. We actually have had some decent hard-working female politicians, like Fran Ulmer (you may like this Madamab — she was a mezzo-soprano!) but they’re not opportunistic beauty queens or have a father who was governor, so — nope, they don’t advance.
It was distressing to see all the love for Sarah on the PUMA blogs before (and after) the election. And on feminist ones, no less! Here I had escaped the lunacy of the Obots only to find more. I thought Hillary supporters were so much smarter than that. That they should be able to see Sarah was the OPPOSITE of Hillary. Really, the Obots *should* have loved Palin, considering how much they despised Clinton. Here was someone superficial, “young,” anti-feminist, unknowledgeable… Yes, they should have loved her for how totally UNLIKE Hillary she was!
Comments are closed.
L 2012 – Support Your Local Lefties!
Top Stories – Google News
- Clinton blasts China, Russia over Syria - CBS News February 25, 2012
- Iran has expanded sensitive nuclear work: UN agency - Reuters February 25, 2012
- For Romney, a Message Lost in the Empty Seats - New York Times February 25, 2012
Recent Comments
 | madamab on New Year’s Eve Widdershi… |
 | Eddie on New Year’s Eve Widdershi… |
 | HT on New Year’s Eve Widdershi… |
| madamab on New Year’s Eve Widdershi… |
| madamab on Happy New Year – We… |
May 17, 2010 at 8:09 AM
Very well said, MB. Let’s hope this puts an end to the, “Sarah Palin is one of us” meme.