Palin angered by 'sexist' Newsweek cover

Jarod said:
THe selling out offends me, but I agree he is smart. Also its about time we get someone from a religen that is not standard. As far as conservatives, he is one of the most acceptable to me!
Click to expand...
I recall similar sentiments about Mickey. Then he won the nom.
 
AssHatZombie said:
YEs, but the neocons shittards like you have been instructed to hate palin.

you don't even know why.
Click to expand...

Dumbass, the neocons love Palin. The problem is she doesn't seem to take the political scene seriously enough to expand her base of support beyond them, and I wager that even many neocons are losing patience with her.
 
time will tell about Palin, 2012 and 2016 is a long way off..

but it is fun to see all the lefties and the lamestream media go absolutely ape shit over her...she lives in the minds of the left and is showing the American people how incredibly insane and hateful they can be....way too funny..
 
meme said:
shows just how much you know about the elections in Alaska...NOTHING
Click to expand...


And your response shows just how pitiful your sense of humor is.

My GOD it was a joke you hateful shrew.

Is your soul really so shriveled that you find no humor in something so obviously written with tongue in cheek?

How sad your life must be.
 
Last edited:
ZappasGuitar said:
And your response shows just how pitiful your sense of humor is.

My GOD it was a joke you hateful shrew.

Is your soul really so shriveled that you find no humor in something so obviously written with tongue in cheek?

How sad your life must be.
Click to expand...

OMFG, crack me up..
funny-pictures-puke-kitty-11x.jpg
 
Last edited:
Yurt said:
everybody knows newsweek is part of the propaganda arm of the democrat party....they are not taken seriously, well...as serious at the national enquirer
Click to expand...

Actually the owner has explained that losing over 1/2 his circulation and getting rid of the news part is a great idea. LOL! He admits they've been bleeding red, and that was in the Spring:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/17/AR2009051702074.html

A Smaller But Better Newsweek?
Revamped Magazine Gambles on New Focus
By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, May 18, 2009

Jon Meacham admits it is hard to explain, even to his own people, why chopping Newsweek's circulation in half is a good thing.

"It's hugely counterintuitive," the magazine's editor says. "The staff doesn't understand it."

That step -- along with a redesigned, revamped publication that hits newsstands today -- may well determine whether the 76-year-old newsmagazine survives. Newsweek will concentrate on two things -- reporting and argument -- while kissing off any recap of the week's developments.

Time has been gravitating in that direction as well. But Newsweek, owned by The Washington Post Co., is accelerating the process because it is bleeding red ink, losing nearly $20 million in the first quarter. Newsweek, whose circulation was as high as 3.1 million in recent years, plans to cut that to 1.5 million by the beginning of 2010, in part by discouraging renewals. The magazine will begin charging the average subscriber about 90 cents an issue, nearly double the current rate.

"If we can't convince a million and a half people we're worth less than a dollar a week, the market will have spoken," Meacham says. The newsstand price will also jump from $4.95 to $5.95, a buck more than Time.

The new layout, with larger photographs, splits each issue into four parts: Scope (News, Scoops and the Globe at a Glance); Features; The Take (What We Think About the World); and The Culture. Meacham, an admirer of the Economist, is fashioning a serious magazine for what he calls his base, with a heavy emphasis on politics and public policy....
Click to expand...

Can't find their circulation numbers since. ;)
 
evince said:
Women wear dresess and show their legs, would it be sexist to show a picture on a magizine cover?


Her legs are showing, big deal.


She winked at an audience during a vice presidents debate. She insulted every woman in America when she did that.
Click to expand...


Desh, I get there's irony in an rabidly anti-choice woman who makes rape victims pay for their own rape kits, complaining about sexism.

I also get the irony of teabaggers complaining about this when apparently they sit by in silence as several of their cohorts parade around message boards with blatantly racist avatars of obama.



Leaving out of the equation what unprincipled teabaggers or Sara Palin think, it’s still a lame magazine cover which is intended to do nothing but titillate.


Titillation case in point: Cawacko.







p.s., j/k cawacko if you see this
 
Cypress said:
Desh, I get there's irony in an rabidly anti-choice woman who makes rape victims pay for their own rape kits, complaining about sexism.

I also get the irony of teabaggers complaining about this when apparently they sit by in silence as several of their cohorts parade around message boards with blatantly racist avatars of obama.



Leaving out of the equation what unprincipled teabaggers or Sara Palin think, it’s still a lame magazine cover which is intended to do nothing but titillate.


Titillation case in point: Cawacko.







p.s., j/k cawacko if you see this
Click to expand...

haha... trust me, it worked!

(I still wouldn't buy the magazine but I will stare at it for a long time at the supermarket). :)
 
christiefan915 said:
Did you forget this? <sarcasm> </sarcasm>
Click to expand...

In the case of the discussion we were having yesterday and Desh's argument there was no sarcasm intended because taking Desh's arguement to the next step that is essentially what she was saying. I know there were a lot of posts yesterday but if you are able to read through them all I think you will see that.
 
lostsoul said:
Dear lord. A feminist's nightmare? She is exactly what feminists have fought for! She is a working mother who reached the highest elected office in her state. She proved what feminists have screamed about all along...that women can have it all! Any feminist who believes she is a nightmare are hypocritical partisan hacks. So you don't agree with her politics. So what? Women must stand up for women.

A house divided against itself cannot stand.
Click to expand...

I don't care what choices she makes in her own life but she had no business trying to push a retro social agenda on the country. I read all of her positions at the link and can agree with her on many, but for me the negatives outweigh the positives.

Opposes embryonic stem cell research. (Aug 2008)
Choose life, even if her own daughter were raped. (Nov. 2006)
Opposes use of public funds for abortions. (Oct 2006)
Non-support of anything but traditional marriage. (Oct 2008)
Only exception for abortion is if mother’s life would end. (Jul 2006)
Would like support from women’s groups, but won’t woo them. (Sep 2008)
Marriage only be between and man and a woman. (Nov 2006)
Ok to deny benefits to homosexual couples. (Aug 2006)
No spousal benefits for same-sex couples. (Jul 2006)
Top priorities include preserving definition of “marriage”. (Jul 2006)
Opposes legalizing marijuana, but meth is greater threat. (Aug 2006)
Teach creationism alongside evolution in schools. (Aug 2008)
Supports teaching intelligent design in public schools. (Aug 2008)
Don’t push school boards on creationism but allow discussion. (Oct 2006)
I believe we have a creator; and many theories of evolution. (Oct 2006)
Support charters & home schools; not private school vouchers. (Oct 2006)
Opposes explicit sex-education programs. (Jul 2006)

http://www.ontheissues.org/sarah_Palin.htm
 
cawacko said:
Irrelevent what you think of her politics its the picture Newsweek posted on its cover that's being discussed.
Click to expand...

She's a private citizen on a book tour. Why is this such a big deal? She wrote a payback rant about how badly she was treated during the campaign, and she's playing coy about her future political aspirations so why does she deserve any special treatment from any magazine?
 
cawacko said:
To women like Desh and Christie (as I'm sure you already know) femimism = liberalism.

If you don't support liberalism then you aren't a feminist and don't deserve our support. When something as blatantly sexist as this doesn't get Desh's and Christie's support because they hate her politics then you know it is far from a house united.
Click to expand...

Why don't you just ask me my definition of feminism and why I think Palin's two-faced, instead of concocting an opinion and trying to put your words into my mouth?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top