It has been pointed out that we have to be careful whenever we criticise women in positions of authority because of the extra baggage attached. By that I mean that unlike a man in a similar role, a women risks additional rancour due to her gender. Effectively, we demonise them because they are a woman (at which point some clever dick will make a snide comment about the chain being too long if they've wandered away from the kitchen/bedroom). However, just like Tony Blair's political hero Margaret Thatcher, there are some women who deserve every bit of scorn we can pour on them. For what it's worth I thought Thatcher was evil - bowel loosening evil. That she was a woman was irrelevant to her policies and the damage they did to British society leaving a fracticious legacy in her wake. But just because she is a woman does not mean she should be criticised any more or less than any other politician spouting the politics of hate. Not because they are women, but because of the evil corporate puppets that they are and what they stand for.
Stand up the Republican Party Vice President nominee, Sarah Palin.
I first saw SP on the news reports on the and then had the misfortune the other night of seeing her on BBC Parliament . I tried to watch to hear what she had to say but was utterly sickened by her false smile (which reminded me of a baddie in an Indiana Jones film - just with an American accent rather than a German one), the sycophantic Nuremberg like crowd and my low tolerance for the politics of hate and greed which she was spewing up. My initial thought was 'I have seen the face of Evil!' (more on this later).
When I had time to wash the filth of her words from my mind, I did some research which only reinforced my initial thoughts. I am therefore demonising SP because of her policies;
Her tacit reassertion of the Monroe/PNAC Doctrine 'With Russia wanting to control a vital pipeline in the Caucasus, and to divide and intimidate our European allies by using energy as a weapon, we cannot leave ourselves at the mercy of foreign suppliers. To confront the threat that Iran might seek to cut off nearly a fifth of world energy supplies ... or that terrorists might strike again at the Abqaiq facility in Saudi Arabia ... or that Venezuela might shut off its oil deliveries ...' Sarah Palin's Convention Speech. (Which translates as if they touch our oil, or what we think of as our oil we reserve the right to invade/attack or nuke.)
And last but not least the GOP standard of cutting taxes - '
Taxes are too high' (translation: 'yes, we will continue to rob from the poor to give to the rich paymasters who I am in the pockets of'). It's also a bit rich (ahem) considering that five of the last seven presidential terms of office have been Republican and until recently both the senate and congress were Republican. The reply to this is the tired free market economic mantra of, 'if it didn't work, it's because we didn't cut taxes enough!' (translation continue flogging a dead horse). Taxes could also go down if so much money wasn't spent bombing the planet. Over half a trillion dollars and counting on the war in Iraq alone (see the element on the sidebar for the running cost).
Whilst the campaigns for the presidency may be seen as a victory for the equality movement in the US, it is to the detriment of humanity that the nominees (Obama included) are war mongers in the pockets of corporations. I wasn't keen on Hillary Clinton either - not because she is a woman but what she stands for and has voted consistently effectively sharing 'much of President Bush’s dangerous attitudes toward international law and human rights'. I have described George W. Bush as the 'Grim Reaper' and the '5th Horseman of the Apocalypse'. If you had asked my comments on Dick Cheney when he became the GOP VP nominee I would have described him as 'the face of evil' too. Tony Blair quickly morphed into an evil SOB (the Grim Reapers grinning sidekick). Foolishly, the people of Britain placed their faith in him after nearly two decades of the conservatives so we replaced one lot of of evil bastards for the marketable grinning face of evil. .
The genocidal, destructive economic and military policies they endorse and which SP endorsed in her acceptance speech have led to the death of millions not only in Iraq and Afghanistan but also across the world where trade policies subjugate lesser 'unpeople'. That to my mind is evil, as evil as the whitewash in the media which are not analysing what Sarah Palin (or any other nominee) is really saying and instead focus more on the fact she is a woman. It's nothing more than a PR stunt, which she happily uses herself saying 'I'm a hockey mom', not that that is either here nor there, it's a spin on the usual average Joe/American Dream story used in American politics - 'hey I know all these corporations put me here but I'm just like you, really.' That she is a woman is just another unique selling point to the propaganda machine glossing over the politics of hate and greed with a smiling camera friendly face. It's there to take your eyes off the narrow agenda of issues. As Gore Vidal once said 'to be perfect for television is all a President has to be these days.'
Personally I prefer this from Alexei Sayle 'If you travel to the States . . . they have a lot of different words than like what we use. For instance: they say "elevator", we say "lift"; they say "drapes", we say "curtains"; they say "president", we say "seriously deranged git". This should of course include British Prime Ministers.
Unfortunately the gits, the collective media friendly faces of evil, vying for office on both sides of the Atlantic have left such a wake of destruction it will take the world generations to recover. Evil isn't just restricted to gender or race, however the odds are that evil will rear up one of its two ugly heads from the beast we like to call democracy.Give me a Grizzly Bear anyday!
