Thursday, September 4, 2008

my reaction, blah blah blah, part 2

First, let me just say OMFGWTFAAAAAAAaaaarrrgggghhh I'm in a horrible mood. I went to grandma's nursing home to hang out and watch the O'Reilly Factor and there was just a bitty clip of the thing and I can't sit through three more episodes and if I hear the words "liberal media" or "fair and balanced" ever again in my lifetime I will violently hurl. Then I had to stop at the pharmacy for baby laxative because the baby is shitting tiny adorable diamonds and not very often, and then at checkout that I asked for the smallest bottle of rum (because woo to the hooooo if you live in WV you can buy liquor at a drug store like the gods intended) and then the sales girl carded me and I smiled and said, "Oh, girl, I totally needed that more than the rum. You rock" because I am sporting crazy amounts of grays and they are pretty but they might be prettier at 40 than 32 and then I couldn't find my gawddamn driver's license and I almost burst into tears but didn't.
But now I'm wound up tight with gnarled nerves and even though I've been all "OK, now I'm a writer, so watch out world Imma be writin'" and decided- like I do- that my eccentric little personal blog is an Important Soap Box and I am a Political Commentator I got nothing except for linkie shorthand and it's OK because MamaPop thinks for me thankgoddess and they probably weren't responding to this thing at SkepChick (and don't take it that I don't rly rly HEART many of the things I read there when I do read things there) but if I were going to respond to that I would have written this and I'd be so fucking proud of it. 
But, now that I got two incredibly satisfying run-on parasentencegraphs out of my system, I can also add: There was a correspondent on O'Reilly who was trashing the hell out of Us magazine, and she was railing against the "Babies, Lies, Scandals" headline and indeed, ew it's very sensationalist and the editor admitted that the "lies" part were not actual lies told by Palin. But the thing is guys, it's Us magazine. It's standing in line at Mal*Wart journalism. I mean "journalism." Who fucking cares?
In the interest of helping to disseminate actual information about Palin's record, let me point you here: to a letter by Anne Kilkenny, who knows Palin pretty well. Teaser: Sarah Palin likes to bully librarians and ban books. But her hair is fantastic. How can I get bangs like that? 
I really want a drink. But there is no rum for me. I look young and have no proof that I am a tired ass cranky bleeding heart mama trying to simultaneously take down The Borg and defend moms everywhere from stupid distracting attacks and earning by all rights, a simple rum and coke to wash down my blog.
Oh. Also? I am going to try to choke down McCain's speech. O'Reilly says he's going to wrap himself in an American flag-

1. Vomit: distasteful and disrespectful, and that comes from a defender of flag burning. 
2. Desperate, ridiculous, sensationalist.
3. O'Reilly must be fucking kidding.
4. Degrading. Tell me it's a joke. 

Edit: Or, yeah... hehee? It's possible it was a metaphor flag and I'm now out as a crazy person. But in my defense, who knew Bill O'Reilly had the capacity for metaphor?


  1. This makes me want to come find you and give you a back rub, seriously. Also, Tea.

    I really don't have much to add right now, I think I need to think on this a little bit more before I run my mouth again. To be Continued...


  2. Hey, I saw your link to skepchick and your comment about my post.

    I just wanted to say that I'm sorry it upset you so much, but your rebuttal link is actually in agreement with me. MamaPop said that the criticism would be fine if it were doled out equally to men and women. However, they went the other direction from me and said it's irrelevant to both. My point is that it IS relevant to both, and that men should be held to the same scrutiny.

    I believe it is a relevant question, and I answered it. And I stand by my opinion even if it were her husband running.

    I apologize if you understood what I was saying to be anti-feminist or anti-woman. I was merely saying that our responsibilities as parents come before our ambitions. It's the sacrifice we make when becoming parents. Both men and women.

    Unfortunately, men do not get held up to this standard. They should.

  3. Oh, also, in response to your previous post:

    I do not believe in any way that by working you are sacrificing your family. I believe that decisions should be made in the best interest of the family as a whole with the children as the top concern.

    If a mom is going to be miserable as a SAHM, that's not a good choice for the family. Not for her and not for her children.

    Where I take issue is when the best interest of the children is sacrificed for the ambitions of the parent.

    If a single mom has to work 4 jobs to keep food on the table and pay the mortgage, and she can do it, hell, more power to her! I wish I could do that. If two parents have to take on 3 jobs each, that's what they have to do and it would be irresponsible for them to sacrifice the well-being of their children to NOT bring in that money.

    But sometimes our ultimate goals might have to take a back-seat for a while in order for us to devote the time and attention our families need.

    I think I'm going to have to write a follow-up post because lots of people seem to be misunderstanding what I'm saying.

  4. Elyse - I'm really glad you wrote these comments here. When I first read your post it was interesting to hear a different perspective on the matter. I couldn't quite formulate why I was pissed about it. Then my brain clicked on and I realized it seemed odd that you would be saying that women are damaging their kids by choosing to go to work. But something just didn't ring true. What was the point of 2nd wave feminism if people are bad parents by working? Just didn't seem like something a skepchick would say.

    Now what I love about skepchick (and feminism) IS that there can be a differing of opinions, but when it comes to working and motherhood, that seemed pretty much like a standard achievement of 2nd wave feminism. That was the point - we should have the CHOICE. I think a follow up post would be helpful because it seemed to me like you were saying that Palin was a bad mother because she is in the work force. But rather, if I could try to summarize your point back - you feel that Palin is a bad mother because her particular situation includes a family crisis and she obviously doesn't NEED to work, yet she's choosing ambition over the obvious needs of her family.

    And again, people always seem to overlook the issue that some mothers HAVE to work. They don't have the option to be SAHMs. Thanks for addressing that here too.

  5. Thanks for the continuing discussion:) I' m composing more thoughts, Elyse. I'm anxious to read your follow up.