The headline you will never see, even in response to a post such as Palin: All Tail, No Head. The post title that has nothing to do with the post (which was about fundraising). But using sexual innuendo when writing about Sarah Palin has become instinctive behavior from the left-wing blogosphere.
Feminism is dead. The Palin haters killed it, and the left-wing blogosphere buried it.
As Dan Riehl correctly puts it, The Left’s Misogyny Spins Out Of Control.
——————————————–
Follow me on Twitter and Facebook
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
"The post title […] has nothing to do with the post (which was about fundraising)."
Uhmmm… sorry, wrong. Try googling "fundraising head tail". On the top page, I get the following links:
Feb 11, 2008: "The long tail of fundraising: how small donations make a difference"
May 26, 2008: "The long tail of Obama's online fundraising"
… and six more links about the "tail" (as in, the tail of a statistical distribution) and how it relates to fundraising. There's only two links that aren't about political fundraising, in fact.
Just so you know — Dr. Socks at Reclusive Leftist thoroughly debunks a list of lies about Gov. Palin at http://www.reclusiveleftist.com/2009/06/13/stop-the-lies/.
But I agree, the misogyny of the Left is mindboggling. Their principles apply to the behavior of others, not their own.
What do you make of the fact that while liberal feminists have not defended Gov. Palin, conservative lesbians certainly have?
The brand of feminism that defends the likes of Bill Clinton and works to destroy Sarah Palin cannot die soon enough. Smart women left that brand long ago. It's just cranks and crones now.
Cynthia, conservative lesbians like you and conservative gays like GayPatriot deserve much credit. But seriously you both are way too far and few between. We need a lot more bravery and a lot less cowardice, but too many lesbians and gays have closed, locked minds.
So Tarr,
The "All Tail, no Head" type commentary from this site has NOTHING to do with some sexual innuendo about Palin's looks and SOME people's perceptions of her sexual vitality compared to other women?
It dosen't take an interview with Dr. Sigmund Freud to figure out what is going on here for some feminists.
I couldn't find more poison from sites like the one mentioned if I dumped a vat of rattlesnakes on the kitchen floor.
Wakefield,
No, of course not. Did I say that? I think I was pretty clear: my point is that the title was clearly picked because it unquestionably DOES relate to the subject.
Was the title have a double meaning containing a not-so-subtle little bit of innuendo? Sure, of course it did. Again, I didn't say it didn't. Nate Silver would surely admit as much, and would probably admit that it was a bit childish, too. The "mysoginistic pink" line in the post was a bit of an obvious self-dig, too.
If you're accusing fivethirtyeight of being, generally, a site loaded with left-wing vitriol, then you obviously haven't given the site even a cursory look. Although the site does have some partisan posts scattered about, most of it is straight political analysis grounded in statistics. Even the non-statistical items are pretty nonpartisan – the next post after the Palin one is a vanilla interview with the executive director of the Republican Governor's association.