Is it sexist that attacks on McCain die in this forum, while those on Palin survive?

[Onlooker]

I'm not alone in posting anti-McCain threads, but I can't help notice that anti-Palin threads seem to last much longer. Why does DU have so little interest in criticizing McCain and so much interest in criticizing Palin? Is it sexism?

I can understand the initial interest in Palin, but I would think that by now we would start focusing a little more on McCain. In some ways, our attacks on Palin play into the hands of the Republicans who seem to want this race to be between Obama and Palin.

It also strikes me that we are kowtowing to the Republicans by refusing to question McCain's military service (where his only accomplishments were to lose 5 planes and get captured by the Vietcong). We are allowing McCain to play the poor me card, and we're not even raising legitimate questions about his age.

We're not even questioning is womanizing reputation (that lasted at least until last year), his adultery, and the fact that he never held a real job.

We're ignoring the that he's authored very few pieces of legislation in his 25 years. We haven't even looked into his legislation in many of the threads.

We're not even challenging his claim that he was a maverick, despite the fact that he was almost completely loyal to Bush and Reagan, and only showed some limited independence during Clinton.

McCain has far more baggage than Palin, and since the right is attacking Obama and ignoring Biden, it's only appropriate that we treat McCain the same way. Otherwise, it's really two against one. It's McCain and Palin against Obama, and until we help change that dynamic, McCain will stay more competitive than he should be.

[Catch22Dem]

1. She's newer meat

We've been harping on McLame for months.

That's all.

[Dark]

2. Palin is rallying the conservative base. We don't want that to happen.

So, we're going after her. Also, she has virtually no experience with the press. This means that she's more vulnerable now. Plus after the lack of vetting that McCain did, there's a good chance she has skeletons in her closet.

Simply put, we want to defuse this ticking timebomb

[gabeana]

3. It has nothing to do with sexism

it is because she seems to be getting a free pass, especially during the convention by the talking heads, this woman is a phony and this is a forum where we can let out a little frustration and patiently wait for Obama/biden campaign to begin firing on all cylinders again

[Cirque du So-What]

4. I recall some anti-McAnus threads that went on forever

Perhaps it's just that we've uncovered all the anti-McAnus material that's readily available. SarahCuda is 'fresh meat' that many find irresistible in the short term.

I'd venture that - over time - there won't be a preponderance of anti-Palin threads as compared to anti-McCain threads. Glancing at the board today, it may seem that she's being attacked more vehemently, but that's just today.

[BumRushDaShow]

5. McLame has been the presumptive since March and his record is well known.

This one is being fast-tracked by the biased M$M to try to dodge a full vetting of her soap opera record.

McLame = POWPOWPOW

But their strategy is to have a McPalin ticket race through the next 60 days with her half of that unholy alliance charged with blocking all further criticism of both of them... They use her to do gutter hit-and-run smears and then quickly secrete her away from the media in order to keep from exposing her unsuitability.

[DeschutesRiver]

6. McCain is a joke

But Palin is so unqualified that to pawn her off as a potential president, should something happen to McCain, is a far more frightening prospect.

We'd know just how bad "bad" is with Palin, if she would speak and answer questions - which would lead to veriable, legitimate issues with her candidacy. However, since the McCain Camp won't allow that. There is not point in just acquiesing to their demands that we not talk about Pain, that we quit trying to ask her questions or that we fall for the line that daring to counter what she says or pointing out the veriable fabrications is "sexist."

I don't care he'd picked a man, or a moose, instead of Palin. Someone apparently unqualified enough that people want answers, and sooner rather than later, should not only expect to answer questions but should welcome the opportunity. No knowledge of foreign affairs or signs of any financial acumen, abuse of power investigations, a history of mass firings and favors doled, pork barrel spending, former Wasilla city budget gone wild,not to mention those pesky lies she told in her one and only speech suggests to a reasonable person that we need more information.

Until and unless it is forthcoming, Palin needs to be pounded over this. As any person elevated so far beyond their capabilties would be and should be.

Who gives a sh*t about her gender? It makes the race more historical - and that is the extent of it. A person like McCain would be horrific for the country. A person like Palin would be fatal; given the convergence of the right set of circumstances, it could be a perfect storm that would cripple everyone's lives and hopes for generations.

[Riddler]

7. Maybe it's "sexism" that is protecting her from the very same scrutiny

Obama has been facing for over a year. And anyone who whines about Palin being the target of "sexism" has drank the kool-aid the McLame camp wants you to drink so you'll overlook the fact that she's disgustingly unqualified and every bit the hate-mongering rabid attack dog the McLame people want her to be without having to answer to anybody about her views, experience, or past. The only thing more disgusting than this joke of a person as VP is the sniveling people making excuses for her and wanting to give her a pass simply because she's a woman.

[democracy1st]

8. this sexism cry is bs

[MNDemNY]

11. We should be nice to the little lady.

You know how they can get.:sarcasm: (in case any one needed that)

[MNDemNY]

9. No it just points to

the current level of interest, this is a user driven forum, after all.

[Motown_Johnny]

10. Palin is still being defined. If you have something new on McCain please share

[pnwmom]

12. She is that much more extreme, IMO. She could do even more damage.

We're going to start wishing he'd picked Lieberman.

[Gman]

13. Absolutely not

Palin is just much more oa a "target rich" candidate.

[Stop Cornyn]

14. It's odd how some people are more interested in new news rather than old news; go figure ...

[chatnoir]

15. Sexist? The woman is a psycho dominionist

And thus much more dangerous to our freedoms than McSame. She deserves obliteration.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

16. McCane Didn't Diss Obama...Falin Did...

Or at least McCane didn't do it to as great a degree...

I hope all kinds of dirt is dug up on her...

[kdmorris]

17. Is it sexist to keep suggesting it's sexist?

When John McCain first became the nominee, he was attacked for his views, his politics and also his family life, his character as a human being. And NO ONE said "Leave him alone. He shouldn't be judged for having deserted his first wife after she had an accident". Not a word was said about how it made us look bad to discuss every issue and his character.

So, now, there's Sarah Palin, who happens to be a woman. And half the threads that attack her for her politics, her views and her family life have at least one person bitching about how sexist it is to talk about her, how we should leave her alone.

So, it makes me wonder. Why did no one cry out when we were all attacking John McCain? Why is it only wrong to attack Sarah Palin? Perhaps that's sexist. Perhaps saying we shouldn't attack her is basically saying she is just too fuzzy and warm and womanly to be attacked, while John McCain is a man, so he can take it.

John McCain gets talked about a LOT, but Sarah Palin's entrance to this race is still pretty new and people are still discovering things about her.

(I don't necessarily mean that you are being sexist, but I have had it with people saying we shouldn't attack Palin.)

[krkaufman]

18. It is ridiculous... ridiculous.... one more time... ridiculous ...

> Is it sexist that attacks on McCain die in this forum, while those on Palin survive?

It is ridiculous ... for such an accusation to be made in such a generic fashion, lacking any specific instances of the threads in question, citing how they're sexist.

It's basic politics... McCain has been on the stage for decades and, unfortunately, the public has a certain perception of him and you'll be tilting windmills trying to change that perception -- via a frontal assault. In the case of Palin, however, she's brand new and so it is imperative that we fight back against the imaging that the Republicans are trying to do, before it takes hold in the public consciousness.

We need to propagate the image of Palin as a bitter, vindictive politician who puts loyalty and political retribution ahead of good governance... just like Bush. Palin's inexperience and inflated record need to be exposed, to demonstrate she's not ready for the White House this time around.

And the key is... by demonstrating Palin as unfit for the Vice Presidency, McCain's judgment has been demonstrated as faulty -- and his "Country First" campaign theme exposed as hollow (having selected a running mate strictly on the basis of politics).

Now, as for your main complaint, that McCain critiques sink amongst the flood of Palin threads, I'd think the best solution would be for DU to have a short-term forum dedicated to Palin -- from substantial critiques to rumor-mongering.

Cheers!

[Moochy]

19. All I have to say on the topic is

Sex is mmmmmm..

[lumberjack_jeff]

20. McCain? Been there, done that. n/t