Friday: Found in the spam filter

In case there is any doubt that the left has a serious problem with women, I thought I would share this stinky piece of spam I found in our spam filter this morning.

The person who wrote this is too stupid to even think of a clever username.  He (it has to be a he) is coming from domain Hush.ai*.  Here’s the text of the spam:

**************************************************************************

RiverDaughter
RiverDaughter@Hush.ai
208.53.157.117

Yo, wasssup?! I just got done watching Game Change on HBO. Reminded me of when me and my bros pwned your site in the summer of 08 (we were doing the whole tag team faux-hacker thing via various proxy servers because your admin kept banning us/me, and you thought it was Team Obama trying to rile your silly site with all of 100 readers) because the PUMAs wanted to vote for McCain because Hillary didn’t get the nomination.

Seriously, can you now agree that your vote for McCain was wasted and would have put a dumb-ass cunt-a-zoid one heartbeat away from the office of POTUS?

We still have 9 months left until election day. Do you still want to make that bet? Really, you would want Palin to be your leader? Really? Really?!

Answer truthfully, or we will come back and pwn the shit of your site, silly-ass, angry old-ass beatches… Hollaaaaa….

We will pwn your site at will and cause serious dissension in your ranks. So you better answer honestly.

Where to start?

Yes, we do remember your silly games.  You didn’t upset us nearly as much as you think.

By the way, PUMA stands for Party Unity My Ass.  It was a response to the nauseating pressure on us to check our brains at the door of the voting booth and do as the party told us or be called racist, un-educated old ladies.  Well, we weren’t racist, uneducated old ladies but we were definitely right about Obama.  He’s an inexperienced, over his head, overly ambitious, mediocre at best, politician who was catastrophically miscast as president when our nation needed a more prepared leader.  And he doesn’t really work for us, so there’s that.  Don’t believe me?  Just try to get him to act like a Democrat.  We’ll wait.

We also weren’t pro McCain, although there were some people here who immediately decided to support him after the Democratic national convention.  Have you seen the pictures I took of Denver that week?  The police presence made an Occupy event look like a field day.  The Democrats brought in the fricking National Guard.  It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out which party is engaged in a full-on suppression of Occupy Wall Street.  But whatever, some people supported McCain outright.  Some voted for him as a protest vote against the primary vote manipulation tactics of the Democrats and sat in their cars and cried afterwards.  Maybe YOU are willing to let your primary votes be given away to a candidate you didn’t vote for without a fight, but we weren’t.  And now, the parties might as well do away with the primary system.  It’s all rigged.  The answer is already known in advance and you the voter have no say in the matter.  I assume that’s ok with you.

As for Sarah Palin, there’s a difference between treating female politicians with respect and admiring them for their political views.  We tried very hard to do the respect thing, until she teamed up with Glenn Beck and put a target on Gabby Giffords home district.  I would call that foolish.  We never admired her for her political views but we don’t think it’s particularly helpful for the left to indulge in misogynistic attacks on her.  These attacks would include calling her stupid, even before it had any proof, or calling her a cunt, which I have trouble typing, much less saying.  That’s one of the words that even I, foul mouthed as I can be, find unacceptable.  It goes right up there with the word nigger, which I also don’t say and haven’t since I was 4 years old and had my mouth washed out with soap before I even knew what it meant.  I don’t know how YOU were brought up but there are certain things you aren’t even allowed to think much less say and one of those things is you never should call any woman a cunt.  Ever.  Under any circumstances.

I haven’t seen the HBO series, because having been laid off in the biggest decimation of the science industry in history during the Obama administration, I have been forced to cut the cord to save money. But knowing as I do that Obama has a well known problem attracting independent women who previously voted for Hillary Clinton, I’m not surprised this film was produced and aired.  The only problem is that Palin is not running this year.  Obama is.  I have to ask myself why the president of the United States and his party are still running against the has-been female governor of a rural state.  Confident and competent political leaders don’t need to pile on a former female politician who poses absolutely no electoral threat to them.  What’s the point unless bashing Palin gives them a smug sense of superiority and machismo.  Does the Obama administration thinks it is scoring points by humiliating and shaming the women who still admire Palin?  If that’s their best attempt at winning over the wimminfolk, it’s a complete waste of money and makes me wonder what the hell twisted ideas they are thinking about the independent women who are sooooo not impressed with Barack Obama.

So, it doesn’t matter how many shows are rolled out to make Palin look like the biggest idiot that side of the Yukon.  She isn’t relevant.  We’ve got our eyes on Obama and Romney.  And Obama’s campaign is in the habit of ignoring the fact that there are two versions of the independent female voter: the kind that went over to the Tea Party and the kind that stayed liberal.  We are in the latter camp and have NEVER been Tea Party voters.  And I think that with this movie, he has just insulted our intelligence.  Again.  There’s also the famously insulting touting of the Lilly Ledbetter act as being some equivalent to the Paycheck Fairness Bill that never made it out of committee.  Like we can’t look at our paychecks, assuming we still get them, and figure out if we are any better off under Obama.  We aren’t.  In fact, we’re going backwards.  But the Obama administration still acts like women have the mental capacity of eight year olds and can’t tell the difference and that constant repetition of this deception is going to convince us otherwise.

I don’t come from a family where women are treated like dirt and their lack of mental gifts exaggerated or where african americans are treated like second class citizens.  That kind of crap wasn’t tolerated in my house.  But if you do, then that tells me all I need to know about the kind of people the Democrats are attracting these days. It doesn’t speak well of their fan base.  It’s not that we’re grabbing the smelling salts.  We’re just very, very angry. Or is it the kind of people the Republicans are attracting these days?  For all I know, your purpose in coming here and spewing this drivel is to try to drive people away from the Democratic party.

As far as I’m concerned, neither party should be playing games with women or using push-pull marketing techniques to get them to commit to one side or the other.

All that counts is the data.  What have you done for us lately?  Neither party should feel comfortable with its upcoming performance review by the women they are hoping to attract to their side.

So, to sum it all up: we’re not Palin supporters here, you ‘git.  We don’t like your misogynism, no matter which party you support.  And we will hold both parties accountable for being cynical political monsters who have done nothing to improve our lives in the past four years.  Keep playing these games and you might find yourself on the losing end of the biggest political protest vote in history.

*Rather unusual name, don’t you think?  Perhaps this is completely coincidental but Hushai was the name of King David’s counselor in the bible.  Hushai went to David’s son, Absalom, and pretended he was defecting.  In reality, he was spying for David.  Anyway, the whole rebellion didn’t end well for Absalom.

****************************************

In other news, Hell has officially frozen over and pigs are now flying somewhere in the world.  Maureen Dowd is trying desperately to not show a tinge of regret that women were stuck with Barack Obama and maybe he is an inadequate advocate for women’s rights.  She even quotes Hillary Clinton’s speech from a couple of days ago.  (See below)  Of course, she also rolls out the idea that Hillary will run in 2016 but I think that’s nonsense.  Who knows what Hillary will do?

One thing is for sure.  With 8 years of Obama under our belt, by the time 2016 rolls around, it will be waaaaay too late for women.  He will have set us back by 50 years.  The time to elect a woman was 2008, Maureen.  If only you had taken two seconds to think about it instead of gleefully and gratuitously bashing Hillary.

Violet Socks posted one of the comments from Modo’s thread on her post that merits reprinting here:

Who would have thought that Hillary Clinton would have to fight for women’s rights at home? Oh, I don’t know — maybe anyone who read your columns between 1992 and the present? The ones that simpered and snickered over her husband’s infidelities, called her “the most degraded wife in history,” repeatedly compared her to a sadistic dominatrix during the 2008 campaign, speculated without any basis whatsoever that she would hijack the Democratic convention, and then, when you turned out to be wrong about that, that she would secretly connive with John McCain to defeat Obama? And how like you to keep bringing up the ludicrous notion that Obama might replace Biden with Clinton on the 2012 ticket, even if you know it’s absurd. When will women finally be liberated? Well, for starters, when we learn to stop kneecapping each other.

Pretty much sums up MoDo’s shortsighted attacks on Hillary going back over the past two decades.  Let me add that given the number of elected delegates Hillary had going into the convention, she would have had every right to “highjack” it, if that means insisting on a legitimate roll call.  The blame for Hillary’s ritual humiliation at the convention can partially be laid at Dowd’s feet.   It’s no surprise that women should be feeling some regret now after the vicious attacks we’ve been subjected to in the past couple of months.  Let this be a lesson to Maureen, who is one of only two female columnists on the NYTimes Opinion page.  Let’s see, what is the Plum Line Metric for the NYTimes opinion page?  2 females / 10 males = 0.2. That’s pretty far from gender parity at our nation’s “paper of record”. Given that number, doesn’t it make sense, Maureen, that when women write about women political leaders that they try to put women in the best possible light so that women writers are treated with the same respect and authority as men?  Writing snippy, nasty little digs on Hillary Clinton over the past 20 years was the equivalent of carrying the water for the assholes who are attacking us now.  It would have also contributed greatly to your job security.  When it comes time to add another female columnist, it is much more likely that you will be replaced instead of supplemented.  Just sayin’.

Charles Pierce wonders if there are women who really feel that Barack Obama wouldn’t be a better alternative than Romney.  Um, Barack is certainly no better than Romney, Charles.  I know you don’t have ladyparts so your perspective on this is somewhat stunted but, no, Barack Obama is not our savior from the mean old Republicans.  It goes beyond birth control.  When both parties have been able to get away with sexism and misogyny virtually non-stop since the 2008 election, the fallout goes beyond the bedroom.  It starts to infiltrate the workplace and public sphere as well.  It becomes a free-for-all to undermine women in all aspects of life.  I have seen it up close and personally in the industry I worked in.  Men get carte blanche to undermine women because they know that no one in power is going to stick up for them.

I’m sure that I am not the only professional woman to have noticed this fallout effect from Barack Obama’s election, Charles.  Ask Christina Romer, Elizabeth Warren, Sheila Bair and Nancy Pelosi.  He was about the worst thing that could have happened to us.

Here’s the segment of Hillary’s speech that MoDo quoted:

About these ads

29 Responses

  1. Arrrgghh! I am trying to do with less and not spend money but I have fallen in love with copper lantern pendant lights and despair that they are ridiculously expensive. Yes, I will probably find some clever alternative that I can wire to create the look I’m going for at a much reduced price. But let’s not fool ourselves. It won’t be the same.

  2. Take a deep breath. And save your LOVE purchases for the house you’ll be living in. (Use Pinterest to keep track) …

    Your job today is to put your house in a sell-able condition. That. is. all.

    • It would be so much more sellable with copper pendant lights and glass subway tiles.
      Why wasn’t I born rich instead of beautiful?
      /snarktag

    • Putting your house in sellable condition? Somehow I missed that. I’m doing the same thing. Ran flat up against the wall 4 weeks ago when I ran out of money with only a few essential things…curb appeal…left to do. Regrouping. Good luck. I had to get over some of my obsessions too like glass cabinet doors and such. You’ll be happy if you just visualize yourself taking a handful of Valium when you start craving things like glass tiles and copper light fixtures. Been there. Done it.

  3. RD,
    We don’t always agree on the specifics, but I gotta tell you…I love your fire and passion. I’ll probably continue to read your blog and occasionally shake my head at some of your statements, but I deeply respect you.

    Have a wonderful weekend!

  4. We tried very hard to do the respect thing, until she teamed up with Glenn Beck and put a target on Gabby Giffords home district.

    In the interest of fairness, I must point out that Kos did exactly the same thing to Giffords and said she was “targeted for elimination” until she fell in (Party) line on the ACA.

    • I guess that’s fair except putting an actual target icon on Giffords’ district on your webpage goes quite a bit farther in the literally “targeted” sense than a metaphor that in retrospect looks like an unfortunate use of words. Any representative can be the target of a primary round of elimination. It’s quite a different thing when you look like you’ve got a bullseye on you and some asshole takes it as a suggestion.

      By the way, we’ve already gone over this argument to the point of exhaustion on the subject of the governor from Alaska’s webpage. You absolutely can not under any circumstances excuse it or make it better in my mind. Her judgement was already in question when she teamed up with Glenn Beck and her stupid webpage was the last straw. Her excuse afterwards was simply pathetic and should go down in history as a complete misfire. If you are still trying to rehabilitate her after that, don’t do it here.

      • I think you were being unfair to her then and are being unfair now.

        Enough said.

        • that’s alright to say.BUT it,s her blog to say what she pleases. :)

        • I’m being entirely fair to her now and then.

          NOW, there is enough said. If you want to defend her, do it at the Crawdad Hole and come back when you’re finished.

          • BTW, Game Change made Palin a lot more sympathetic than I expected (borrowed a video). She came across as a genuinely loving, warm mother and wife out of her depth. McCain was also treated sympathetically, but he’s the one who started the chain reaction that ultimately created the monster we see today.

          • “She came across as a genuinely loving, warm mother and wife out of her depth.”

            Heh. Haven’t watched GC, but its message seems to be: Women should know their place: Stay barefoot, pregnant … and in the kitchen.

  5. The captain reacts to the Oborg drone:

    THIS PIECE OF $#!+ CALLED WORDPRESS MADE ME LOG IN BEFORE I COULD POST! WTF?!?!? :mad:

  6. Fascinating indeed! The writing style of your correspondent — “Yo, wasssup?!” — reminds me of one of the more persistent cyber-haters on my own site.

    Statcounter revealed that the hourly hate-comments mostly came from one IP in Chicago. That’s consistent with origination from the Obama campaign, even though our mutual friend claims he operated independently.

    Also telling is the sheer cluelessness on display here. The author states his purpose as bringing you around to the Obama cause, and yet he can’t help himself — he uses alienating verbiage like “cuntazoid,” knowing full well that a term like that is going to make you furious.

    That was the spirit of 2008, wasn’t it? “I am going to seduce you by insulting you. Let me buy you a drink, bitch.”

    Way I see it, we have two possibilities:

    1. These clowns were and are really dunderheaded Obama supporters with absolutely NO comprehension of basic human psychology (not to mention their total lack of good manners).

    Or…

    2. These guys are particularly clever Republicans who hope to bring you around to their cause by pretending to be dunderheaded Obama supporters.

    We can’t discount possibility number two. The attacks on your site, and on mine, were a 24/7 operation, not the work an individual crank.

    I suppose there is a third possibility: There are people out there who just plain don’t like bloggers — of any stripe. They will spend enormous amounts of time trying to get under our skins. Why do they do this? Because we exist. Annoying a blogger, even a small-fry blogger, makes these twerps feel powerful.

    The NYT did a profile on these bastards a little while back.

    About Palin. As I say in my latest, I think she exemplifies a point that Alan Dershowitz has often made: It is possible to frame a guilty party.

    The initial media reaction against her was a frame job. Ugly, stupid rumors were presented as fact. The things said at that time were so demonstrably unfair that I couldn’t help feeling sympathy for her. And yet, it turned out that the victim of this frame-up really was unworthy of high office, or even low office.

    RD, you’re a lot smarter than she is. I don’t say that to butter you up; it’s just a fact. Have you ever considered…?

    (BTW: Something is wrong with your system. It keeps saying that my email address is associated with a WordPress account and that I have to log in with WordPress. I’m using a different email.)

  7. seems almost daily. :roll:

  8. Oh, Lord, Folks! Read this.

    My comment was: Oh, I don’t know. I would love to see a Republican President have to deal with what’s coming down. Obama has been a weak-ass President at best, but I still don’t want to see another Democratic President go through anything like what LBJ went through. The right has been dining out on that now for 50+ years.

  9. Jumping Jesus on toast, this is a great post! Damn, I wish I could write as well as you do.

  10. Fascinating indeed! The writing style of your correspondent — “Yo, wasssup?!” — reminds me of one of the more persistent cyber-haters on my own site.

    Statcounter revealed that the hourly hate-comments mostly came from one IP in Chicago. That’s consistent with origination from the Obama campaign, even though our mutual friend claims he operated independently.

    Also telling is the sheer cluelessness on display here. The author states his purpose as bringing you around to the Obama cause, and yet he can’t help himself — he uses alienating verbiage like “cuntazoid,” knowing full well that a term like that is going to make you furious.

    That was the spirit of 2008, wasn’t it? “I am going to seduce you by insulting you. Let me buy you a drink, bitch.”

    Way I see it, we have two possibilities:

    1. These clowns were and are really dunderheaded Obama supporters with absolutely NO comprehension of basic human psychology (not to mention their total lack of good manners).

    Or…

    2. These guys are particularly clever Republicans who hope to bring you around to their cause by pretending to be dunderheaded Obama supporters.

    We can’t discount possibility number two. The attacks on your site, and on mine, were a 24/7 operation, not the work an individual crank.

    I suppose there is a third possibility: There are people out there who just plain don’t like bloggers — of any stripe. They will spend enormous amounts of time trying to get under our skins. Why do they do this? Because we exist. Annoying a blogger, even a small-fry blogger, makes these twerps feel powerful.

    The NYT did a profile on these bastards a little while back.

    About Palin. As I say in my latest, I think she exemplifies a point that Alan Dershowitz has often made: It is possible to frame a guilty party.

    The initial media reaction against her was a frame job. Ugly, stupid rumors were presented as fact. The things said at that time were so demonstrably unfair that I couldn’t help feeling sympathy for her. And yet, it turned out that the victim of this frame-up really was unworthy of high office, or even low office.

    RD, you’re a lot smarter than she is. I don’t say that to butter you up; it’s just a fact. Have you ever considered…?

  11. RD,

    Wonderful post!! Your words rang so true that they made me cry out of shere frustration.

  12. The GOP-tards are up in arms about the perceived unfairness of the way Palin is shown in Game Change. Me, I just laugh and remind them of the hit piece The Path to 911 that was released in time for the 2006 mid terms. (BTW I still don’t watch ABC)

    As for Maureen Dowd she did hit piece after hit piece on Al Gore back in 2000 along with writers at the Washington Post with the result the election was close enough for republicans to steal. As you know the incoming Bush administration blew off warnings from Clinton’s transition team that terrorism should be of major concern, the result was 911. Could a Gore administration have prevented 911?

    If you think that answer might be yes, the Dowd and other columnists at the NYT and WaPo could be considered partly responsible.

    • I remember those anti-Gore sneer pieces. We don’t know whether a President Gore could have prevented 9/11. I feel confident that he would have tried preventing it. Whereas the Bush Administration clearly welcomed the thought of some kind of attack and did everything it could get away with doing to stand down every relevant layer of security to make sure such an attack would succeed so as to be exploitable for domestic tyranny purposes. Remember Bush’s parting words to the CIA analyst who came down to the Bush Ranch in Texas to give Bush a very serious warning? ” Okay, you’ve covered your ass now.” As in . . . ‘ tell me something I DON’T know’ . . .

      The best one can say of the Bushites is that they may not have imagined the size and scale of the attacks. But doubts have been raise about even that, as in this highly plausible little webpost from the Rigorous Intuition blog: ( Well, I will have to offer the link in a susidiary sub-comment, thanks to Microshit Shitsplorer).

  13. Your spam is hilarious — somebody’s cute little boy has quite the sense of humor. I like how he insinuates that we were stupid to believe that they/he (doesn’t seem to know if he’s singular or plural) were for Obama back in ’08, but implies later that he/they are for him now. Okay….

    The repeated use of “pwn” suggests that the little tyke isn’t terribly advanced in years, ’cause, you know, it’s like the hippest –er, coolest –er, whatever the hell the latest expression is that means “the latest” — expression. Also, he isn’t too up on the political scene, since he seems to think that Sarah Palin is running for office this year.

    Hopefully he’s an attractive hunk of manflesh with a deluxe set of equipment, because, you know, that’s really the only thing that would make him a worthwhile human being, right?

  14. What does one say to the clever young thing that visited your spam filter . . .

    Yo! like, Dude. Your madd computer skilz are having no doubt the old analog ladies to quivering in their sensible shoes! You are clearly having the mastery of how to pwning the ripe-for-the-being targetted blogsites! You are very much could be holding your own with best-masterful of Eastern European masters of web site deceptioning and pwn-owning! Are post-soviet Masters of Many Mal-Bots giving you the props and the cred? You Go! young chip warrior Dude!!

    . . . . fucking script kiddie . . . (did I use that term right?)

    That spam-filter visit goes beyond ad hoc misogyny and enters the realm of strategically-guided and tactically planned misogynism. The question is why?

    At some point soon it might be good to indentify and analyze the various different groups and sources of Obama’s support. different people may have come to it from different places and for different reasons. Some of those people may be susceptible to being peeled away from the Obama Coalition, or at least encouraged to stand down
    and withhold their support.

    Messages like this little spam filter-filler are designed to enrage their readers into treating any and all Obama supporters of whatever age and gender and intergender-behavior-attitudes with equal rage in return; thereby pre-emptively pre-nullifying studied and dispassionate efforts to analyze the Obama Bloc for various cracks and fissures into which wedges may be driven.

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 468 other followers

%d bloggers like this: