Amy Siskind’s defective magnifying glass

image

Amy Siskind’s PUMA front organization, The New Agenda, styles itself as a nonpartisan women’s group that is dedicated to calling out sexism wherever it’s found. But Siskind got so caught up in lady-fapping over Palin’s lame-ass speech yesterday that she kinda forgot she’s always supposed to be “searching for sexism.”

Today, Siskind approvingly linked a Mooney Times column by unfunny wingnut troglodyte Eric Golub—the dude from yesterday’s rally in Iowa who made the tasteless joke about Trig Palin. Golub repeats the “joke,” which slams Democratic women—including Hillary Clinton—in the column Siskind links:

[T]he left should worship Sarah Palin and adopt her as one of their own, because the leftist haters are an entire political ideology of special needs children.

...and unlike Trig, they aren’t very lovable…

Every word out of their mouths is ‘gimme, gimme, I need, I need, I want, I deserve, I’m entitled’...no you don’t.

When you’re four years old it’s mildly adorable. When you’re 64 like Barbara Boxer, Hillary Clinton, or the Pelosiraptor, it is intolerable.”

Siskind’s organization has been anti-Obama and anyone who supports him from its inception. Still, it’s a bit surprising that Siskind would overlook a slam on her former idol Hillary Clinton.

Remember, this is the same Siskind who concluded that President Obama is a sexist monster because he once used the word “periodically.” If a Democrat had directed remarks like the above toward Palin or Bachmann, Siskind would be in an ear-splitting snit all over Fox News. But since Golub shares Siskind’s creepy, worshipful attitude toward Palin, it’s all good.

What’s the word for that? Oh yeah: T-O-O-L.

Posted by Betty Cracker on 09/04/11 at 01:22 PM • Permalink

Categories: Politics • Barack Obama • Election '08 • Hillary Clinton • Nutters • Sarah Palin • Teabaggery • Our Stupid Media • PUMAs •

Share this post:  Share via Twitter   Share via BlinkList   Share via del.icio.us   Share via Digg   Share via Email   Share via Facebook   Share via Fark   Share via NewsVine   Share via Propeller   Share via Reddit   Share via StumbleUpon   Share via Technorati  

How dare you. Golub’s feminist principles are unimpeachable.

@TYGRRRREXPRESS eric golub
A liberal feminist shrew has decided to send me more hate mail…. http://fb.me/17AajHT0j
19 Jul via Facebook

Comment by YAFB on 09/04/11 at 02:00 PM

Lordy, she couldn’t find her behind with an electron microscope, could she?

Golub’s at least got bitterness in common with her, though~~in his case, evidently from dating liberal women.

By the way, a real comedian called David Feldman tried to leave a couple of comments on one of Golub’s YouTubes, but both comments of the “thin-skinned liberal” were deleted.

So Golub has that in common with Amy, too.

Comment by Mrs. Polly on 09/04/11 at 02:24 PM

Remember, this is the same Siskind who concluded that President Obama is a sexist monster because he once used the word “periodically.”

No shit?!?  Geez…

That incident is reminiscent of a Washington DC city employee who got fired for use of the word niggardly in that largely Af-Am city (he got hired back later).

In defense of those who called for that unfortunate employee’s head at the time, that word at least sounds very much like a very bad and inappropriate racist word.  A more situationally aware person in such a politically sensitive job would know better than to to have used it.  But the word ‘periodically’ sees much more common and frequent use.  Yet more evidence - as if anymore is required - that the bizarre Ms. Suskind doth protest too much.

Comment by meepmeep09 on 09/04/11 at 03:00 PM

Hey, Amy Siskind offered to help cyberstalk women who publicly disagreed with her, including some of our own very fine contributors, so why should we be shocked that she’s a rat-fucker of the first degree?

Comment by Oblomova on 09/04/11 at 03:13 PM

Eric Golub, the MBA comedian?  Look, folks, I don’t even believe in religion, but we gotta be in the End Times.

Comment by lacp on 09/04/11 at 04:22 PM

In Amy’s defense, her program of sucking up to rich women who’ve already made it in life is a model of gender empowerment that was not adequately explored by the Feminists of the ‘60s and ‘70s.

Comment by StrangeAppar8us on 09/04/11 at 05:00 PM

I hate to tell Amy this , but she’s going to need something a hell of a lot stronger that that magnifying glass if she wants to find what’s left of her integrity.

Comment by Speedy on 09/04/11 at 05:09 PM

Cystkind, like the rest of those wretched dumbfucks can’t be bothered to keep her talking points straight when there is an Object to be Venerated.

Any bets on how long THIS will stay up?

I’m curious. Didn’t the author of this article make a joke about people with special needs in his comedy routine before Palin spoke? Did Palin call him out for it? If not, it reeks of the hypocrisy that Palin displayed when she objected to Democrats inappropriately using the word ‘retard’ and gave Rush Limbaugh a total pass on it.

Comment by Hunger Tallest Palin on 09/04/11 at 08:07 PM

Sometimes I do not know whether I am reading a real thing or whether I am hallucinating*.

I have got to get out less.

*Ooh.  Does anyone remember that X-Files episode where Mulder and Scully go into this cave where there’s a gigantic underground mushroom thing that wants to digest them for food, but they keep hallucinating that they got out of the cave (because the hungry mushroom wants them to think they are okay, because nom nom nom) only they are still in the cave.  Creepy.  Ever since then I’m afraid to take a shower while I have a headache, in case the whole thing dissolves into yellow goo.

Comment by Larkspur on 09/04/11 at 10:48 PM

How dare you. Golub’s feminist principles are unimpeachable.

Ha ha ha. “‘Help yourself to Stouffer’s pizza.’ I sure wish I could.” The feminism that cites this creep is a feminism I seem to have missed. What number are we up to now—would this be “fifth wave”? Maybe “zero-th wave.”

Comment by emo-prog on 09/05/11 at 12:14 AM

Remember, this is the same Siskind who concluded that President Obama is a sexist monster because he once used the word “periodically.” If a Democrat had directed remarks like the above toward Palin or Bachmann, Siskind would be in an ear-splitting snit all over Fox News. But since Golub shares Siskind’s creepy, worshipful attitude toward Palin, it’s all good.

And not only that, one of the articles claiming this also cites Violet Socks as some kind of authority; intellectual bankruptcy, indeed.

Comment by Mike on 09/05/11 at 02:22 AM

More mutiny in the comments section!

So… let me get this straight. In order to further elevate Sarah Palin, The New Agenda reposts a piece by a guy who made a “joke” with references to special-needs children that is in very poor taste, AND includes misogynistic and ageist language directed at three venerated female politicians?

Nice work!
Comment by Hunger Tallest Palin on 09/05/11 at 06:20 AM

I fear SugarSnap isn’t long for TNA…

Comment by Betty Cracker on 09/05/11 at 08:22 AM

Well, SugarSnap is still there. But one of TNA’s two regular commenters, Bes, just rationalized the organization out of existence:

Sugar Snap: Yes I would judge the remark as sexist and ageist. However if we spend all of our time objecting to every sexist utterance from Republicans and Democrats we women will never get anywhere. Sexist twits will have the power to waste our time just by continuing their idiotic ways, and keep us from focusing on Parity and improving the country in general. There are a lot of really stupid men in the world, they are best ignored, correcting them is a waste of time and energy.

Time to turn out the lights, I guess…

Comment by Betty Cracker on 09/06/11 at 08:19 AM
Page 1 of 1 pages

Sorry, commenting is closed for this post.

Next entry: You can't start your Labor Day

Previous entry: "Us the People" Vs. "Them the People": Tea Party to Protest Tea Party at Tea Party Rally

<< Back to main