The Dawn Chorus

Fresh Australian Feminism

Self-Hating Conservative Women

Posted by Tom Jackson on October 2, 2008

Being an Australian living in New York, the thing that I find most fascinating about Republicans is that so many of them vote against their own self interest. For example, 98% of republicans will never make enough money to take advantage of the tax cut John McCain supports, yet they’ll still vote for him. And don’t even get me started on Log Cabin Republicans!

But without a doubt my favorite group of self-hating conservatives are the ladies. Anne Coulter, Elizabeth Hasselbeck, and of course my favorite, Michelle Malkin.

Michelle wins this game by not only hating her gender, but also her race! Michelle is an Asian American pundit who somehow managed to get a book published that’s main premise is the defense of Japanese internment camps during World War II, and racial profiling. Who doesn’t want to read that page turner?

The reason most of these women even have a platform to espouse their self-hating opinions is because of the Women’s Rights Movement, yet no one seems to have told them that. As far as they are concerned, feminists are as bad as those hell-bound atheists and people who torture small animals.

Anne Coulter hates her vagina so much she has even gone as far as to suggest that women shouldn’t be allowed to vote.

Below is a collection of my favourite clips from these oh-so-fascinating gals. If you’ve never meet these ladies, I’m sorry to have to introduce you to them. But hey, at least you now know the type of women voting for Palin, that is of course unless Anne has her way.

(Best bit begins at 3:02)

(The action starts at 1:20)

(I’ve never trusted dishwashers either!)

(Go Elisabeth, stick it to that shady Michelle Obama. Cindy McCain is quite clearly a better role model to little girls, what with all the face lifts, $313,000 outfits and addiction to Oxycotin.)

Advertisements

7 Responses to “Self-Hating Conservative Women”

  1. GP said

    “For example, 98% of republicans will never make enough money to take advantage of the tax cut John McCain supports, yet they’ll still vote for him.”

    But you do realise that the theory of those tax cuts is that they create jobs by encouraging entrepreneurial investment in America, don’t you? The theory may be wrong, but you have to at least understand it. It’s not enough to sneer at the poor who foolishly hope to “take advantage of the tax cut.” It would be like a Republican saying, “So many idiots vote Democratic even though they’d be throwing away a large slice of their pay-cheques to the government under a Dem administration.” Of course, the theory of higher taxation is that the government will be able to wisely invest that money, but that often doesn’t work out so well either. Still, you should at least be able to grasp the point.

    “Michelle is an Asian American pundit who somehow managed to get a book published that’s main premise is the defense of Japanese internment camps during World War II, and racial profiling.”

    But it’s not enough to pre-judge those arguments as “racist.” Unless she was advancing the arguments that certain “races” are inherently defective (which I doubt she did), her arguments were NOT racist. She might have simply argued that, though the interment of Japanese during WWII was painful, on balance it was worthwhile for the war effort. I would be extremely skeptical about that argument, but I wouldn’t consider it racist. As for “racial profiling,” I would’ve thought that’s quite obviously not racist when used properly. If the KKK starts plotting to blow up planes, I hope the police don’t waste their time and money scrutinising old Japanese women. Maybe you should have glanced at the book after all.

  2. scal said

    GP – while I agree in principle with your first point (although I don’t believe your logic is the same as that applied by aspirational voters in the US), your second point – that racial profiling, if done properly, is not racist – is gobsmacking.

    Racial profiling is used by law-enforcers as a means of identifying likely suspects based on race alone. I don’t see how anyone could defend the practise as anything other than racist.

  3. GP said

    I think you’d be surprised at how many “middle-class Americans” believe strongly in low taxes, and not out of some dopey fantasy that they will one day be millionaires. You’re right that not all of them are well-versed in even the basic theory, but it has been a lot part of the American tradition to reject high taxes (see, e.g., the slogans of the Revolution). The spirit of individualism and self-reliance and suspicion of government, right or wrong, is extremely popular in the States. They may be misled, but many Americans think they know how to spend their money better than their government, and they are unlikely to be convinced otherwise by sneers.

    As for your being gobsmacked, I don’t see what is so hard to understand. Racism, as I understand it, describes the belief that humanity is subdivided by races, with some being inferior to others. Racial profiling need not have anything to do with that. As I said, if I’m paying taxes to the police and there is a wave of Japanese gang-bashings or white supremacist lynchings, I want the police to be profiling, not pretending that each person is just as likely as the next to be a perpetrator so that Japanese or white people can feel good about themselves. Policing is not about your or my self-esteem.

    Sure, if the police decide simply to target a certain ethnicity for searches because they don’t like them or they think they are biologically crime-prone, that’s another matter. But I haven’t heard of such a thing for many years and I’m confident Malkin wasn’t defending that.

  4. Tom Jackson said

    “But you do realise that the theory of those tax cuts is that they create jobs by encouraging entrepreneurial investment in America, don’t you? The theory may be wrong, but you have to at least understand it. It’s not enough to sneer at the poor who foolishly hope to “take advantage of the tax cut.”

    Oh please, I UNDERSTAND that “theory”. And you’re right it is wrong. Rebuplican tax cuts are for the extremely wealthy. Those wealthy do not create jobs for Americans. Chinese, but not Americans. And I am not sneering “at the poor who foolishly hope to “take advantage of the tax cut.” One, because that is not possible. Poor people do not vote in this country. That’s why you will never hear Mccain or Obama appeal to them. The middle class are the ones voting for Mccain. And I feel quite comfortable ‘sneering’ at them as they have had every opportunity to study Mccain’s financial policies and discover that they do not benefit them in the slightest.

    And on your second point, do you really believe that Japanese American internment was “worthwhile for the war effort”? Come on! In what possible way was that worthwhile? Were the tiny population of Japanese Americans going to suddenly get a case of Japanese nationalism and attack the US from the inside? You should ask any of the families that lost their fathers, husbands and brothers during the war, if they thought it was worthwhile. Ridiculous.

    Perhaps you should have read the book yourself. At least 3 pages in you’d realise that racism is a sneaky beast that doesn’t always declare itself. But anyone with half a brain can read between the lines.

  5. GP said

    “Oh please, I UNDERSTAND that “theory”. And you’re right it is wrong. Rebuplican tax cuts are for the extremely wealthy. Those wealthy do not create jobs for Americans. Chinese, but not Americans. And I am not sneering “at the poor who foolishly hope to “take advantage of the tax cut.” One, because that is not possible. Poor people do not vote in this country. That’s why you will never hear Mccain or Obama appeal to them. The middle class are the ones voting for Mccain. And I feel quite comfortable ’sneering’ at them as they have had every opportunity to study Mccain’s financial policies and discover that they do not benefit them in the slightest.”

    How does entrepreneurial investment in America create jobs for Chinese, not Americans? And what’s wrong with Chinese having jobs anyway?

    Who told you that the poor don’t vote? Given the electoral college system, the rural poor have a disproportionately large voice in elections, which is probably why they disgust you so. (The term “middle-class” in American politics encompasses the poor. You won’t hear many Americans call themselves “working class,” though you might hear talk of an underclass… who are, through some ridiculous twist, still part of the “middle-class.”) And where is your evidence that McCain’s economic policies don’t benefit the “middle-class”? Bonus question: how are his policies different to Obamas? Bonus bonus question: where is your evidence that governmental policies, to the extent that they differ between donkeys and elephants, significantly affect economic circumstances?

    “And on your second point, do you really believe that Japanese American internment was “worthwhile for the war effort”? Come on! In what possible way was that worthwhile? Were the tiny population of Japanese Americans going to suddenly get a case of Japanese nationalism and attack the US from the inside?”

    Did you actually read what I wrote?

    “You should ask any of the families that lost their fathers, husbands and brothers during the war, if they thought it was worthwhile. Ridiculous.”

    Not that I ever argued that internment DID help the war effort (just that one need not be racist to defend it), but why would I ask the families who lost their fathers whether it helped the war effort? Surely they’d be too upset to tell me.

  6. Tom Jackson said

    huh???? I don’t know where to start, but I’m enjoying reading your comments, they’re fascinating if nothing else.

    “though the interment of Japanese during WWII was painful, on balance it was worthwhile for the war effort.”

    Yes I did read what you wrote.

    “Not that I ever argued that internment DID help the war effort.”

    Did you read what you wrote?

  7. GP said

    I think it was:

    “She might have simply argued that, though the interment of Japanese during WWII was painful, on balance it was worthwhile for the war effort. I would be extremely skeptical about that argument, but I wouldn’t consider it racist.”

    So, “extremely skeptical about” = “in favour of”?

    Yowch!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: