Sarah Palin on Herman Cain: “Boys Will Be Boys”

sarah palinOn December 1st on Fox News’ HannitySean Hannity and Palin yukked it up a beat or two before diving right in to the Herman Cain fiasco, with Hannity taking the opportunity to charge the media with non-coverage of what he considered important issues during the 2008 campaign (like, you know, how long the President had been a terrorist-loving devil-worshipper and if he ever went back to visit his home in Kenya) and Palin leaping on the media-as-crucifier-of-conservatives bandwagon.

Hannity:  ”I hope you were just listening to Herman Cain. There’s a bigger issue in play here but it was long before the issue of sexual harassment and this most recent charge came up, he was being called all sorts of names and the media seems to just be willing to do this and go along with this.  You have experienced this as a conservative woman.  Why do we live now at a time of political correctness that if you’re conservative, you’re a woman or an African-American conservative you can say anything you want, nobody seems to care.”

Palin:  ”Yeah, isn’t that something, well, we need to not be afraid of being accused of being racist just because we call out, for instance, Obama and his socialist policies and his associations and his past record that prove that he would seek to fundamentally transform America.  We cannot be afraid of what the name-calling will do to us but yeah, you’re spot on when you talk about the hypocrisy and the double standards in the media.  You know, in regards to Herman Cain and what he’s going through, I’ll tell ya, Sean, in many voters’ book, including mine, character counts.  And if Herman Cain did not engage in this recent 13-year affair, screwing around on his wife and giving money tosome broad on the side unbeknownst to his wife, well, then, if he did not do this then the false accuser is really despicable and he should not have to put up with that kind of false accusation that results in somebody’s character being so besmirched and really ruined, if he did do it, though, Sean, if he did it, if he engaged in this recent affair and is misleading the public then, you know, like they say, boys will be boys but they shouldn’t run the country . . . .”

Hannity:  ”If the media only gave as much scrutiny to Obama in 2008, you gotta wonder . . . .”

Of course, Hannity can’t miss an opportunity to take a shot at the President – that’s as predictable as his defense of Cain as a victim of the media and unfair name-calling.  Hannity, being Hannity, didn’t mention the possibility that all these women weren’t lying, nor did he mention the obvious point that the media has an obligation to investigate the character, integrity and background of people running for president.  What was more telling was Hannity’s belief that a “bigger issue” than the character and integrity of a GOP presidential candidate was the media’s determination to report on Cain’s transgressions of character and integrity.  At Fox, as we know, the investigation stops at the doorstep of Republican candidates.

There’s something inherently mean-spirited about Sarah Palin, and it was notable with her reference to Ginger White as “some broad.”  But with her “boys will be boys” comment, she shamelessly pandered to the sexist right wing of the country, and probably had most Republican men wishing they were married to her, with her open-minded view on marital infidelity.

Call me crazy, but shouldn’t the “morality and values” party believe that cheating and lying and deceit and trashing of marital vows and violations of who knows how many biblical rules and regs shouldn’t be reduced to “boys will be boys?”

julie driscollNaturally, someone who takes such a casual approach to integrity shouldn’t be running the country – or a pizza joint, for that matter – but one would think that those values should apply across the board, to someone running for president or for conservative Joe working at the car wash.  Sadly, integrity for Republicans is a very fluid thing.

“Boys will be boys” but they shouldn’t run the country . . . well, we can release our collective breath, because neither Palin, who gives a moral pass to philanderers, or Cain, the philanderer himself, will ever get anywhere near the White House.

Julie Driscoll
Politics Anonymous 

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Comments

  1. dusty says

    Sarah isn’t an airhead though she acts and often sounds like one. On the other hand she is shallow and ought to be ignored. Then she and Herb can get together and talk with each other about how the boys are and the rest of us can get on to more important things. There is real life out there and these two are now irrelevant though some would question if they were ever relevant.

    Conservatives are no different around sex than anyone else: progressive, liberal, moderate, or libertarian — everyone likes sex, it is part of evolution. Without sex there is no human race and while that might be better for the long term survival of all the other species that we share the earth with I prefer to go on living. The only reason that we make such a big deal about monogamy is that men want to give their wealth, accumulated surplus value created by labor (Their own or others.), to their off spring and they like to think they know that the children they give their wealth to are their own. So, male dominated society has demanded that women remain loyal and pure within relationships while men can fornicate all they want as long as they are discrete or not. Most wealthy men don’t get caught because the women they use take the financial remuneration they receive as being enough. No one cares what poor men and women do, other than themselves, so all their little affairs never make the press. It is time we grow up and realize that monogamy is just a form of slavery and that the sooner we dump it the better. People who love each other don’t need marriage to bind them together — just their love, respect, and relationship should get them through — not some chattel property language in marriage vows.

  2. Nate says

    Don’t be too sure Julie ~ after all, the ‘ rules ‘ are _obviously_ NOT for gop members, they’re for the little people they want to enslave by force .

    -Nate

Trackbacks

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *