The new "liberal" normal: Sexism is okay.

Keith Olbermann is a sick, morally depraved, imbecile. Friday he unleashed his bottomless pit of snot on Senator Clinton yet again. This time it was about Clinton's remarks regarding long campaigns and RFK. Not that it matters. If she had said "I shop at Safeway" K.O. would have unloaded - provided he'd gotten the cue from his Obama Overlords. Olbermann is a joke and hardly worth a remark - except to point out what has not merited a Special Comment from the Rancid One in the past 6 months:

Obama calling female reporters "sweetie"
Obama's 20 year stint in a church in which the pastor dry humps the pulpit.
David Schuter's "pimping out" Chelsea remark.
Chris "my legs are tingling" Matthews comment that Hillary Clinton is only a senator because her husband cheated. A remark both wildly sexist and utterly, indefensibly false.
An Obama aid calling the former First Lady a monster.
Obama's throwing the bird to a sitting U.S. Senator.

The list goes on. And on. Olbermann is a two bit errand boy. He doesn't care one bit about fairness. He, like Donna Brazzile on CNN, is a paid Obama shill. The FCC should strip MSNBC and CNN of their licenses.

The silence on the rampant sexism that has frothed forth from alleged liberals and the alleged media is both the single biggest intellectual crime of the decade (except maybe the censoring of anti-war voices in 2003)and an attack on civil society. From "Bros before Hoes" to the Hillary nutcracker, to the mocking of her welling up, to the glib manner in which male "reporters" have discussed her laugh, to...to...

Obama himself is very much at fault here and should be called out on it. As the sexism became louder and louder this year his campaign either encouraged it or did nothing to stop it. This is a failure of leadership from an alleged liberal. Conversely, every time anyone in Clinton's camp did anything that could be construed as racially insensitive Hillary Clinton put an end to it. (I do not include Ferarro here because what she said was not insensitive. It was a statement based in observable reality. Obama gets a lot of traction because he's black. As well he should. So what. Good for him. The idea of an African American President is appealing to fair minded people. However, BHO is not up to snuff -a Tom Cruise to Colin Powell's Cary Grant.)

What Obama, the DNC, and the compliant, brain dead media has done in trashing Clinton all year is reactionary. It is the opposite of progressive. 50% of the population has been degraded and insulted as a matter of course. As if it is normal. As if it is part and parcel of the Democratic Party's values. This year we HAD a chance in the Democratic Party to choose someone other than a white male and base that choice on merit. The DNC did not (though the people did ). The DNC has gamed the system to award the nomination to an unqualified minority candidate - thereby proving all the conservatives right. They gave Obama a hand out not a hand up.

Like her or not, support her or not, Hillary Clinton is qualified for the job of President. The "community organizer" from Chicago is not. (Now every time I see an Obamite defending his resume and using "community organizer" as a qualifier for President my eyes roll back in my head automatically. It's a Pavlovian response. I can't seem to help it. As far as I can tell - and I've looked - he organized some voter registration drives under the umbrella of a church. I help serve meals to the youth group at my church. Can I be President next?)

Clinton's qualifications never come up in the media. Why is this? I suspect that it would then force an airing of Obama's. His rump resume would then be seen for what it is: smoke, mirrors, and speeches. What does come up daily is her gender. Usually covertly. References to "tears" and "every man's first wife". This is terror on the part of "news" men. Pure terror. What Olbermann and the rest are reacting to is their own fear of castration. You see, it isn't that woman can't have some jobs once reserved for men - we have moved past that - it's that a woman can't have THAT job. If a woman gets THAT job then all the mediocre men who got promotions over more qualified women are on notice. The jig, as they say, will be up.

What Clinton represents by her presence is much more valuable to true progressives than what BHO represents. The reason is simple. She's more qualified than him. I could not write that sentence if Colin Powell was running against Clinton. Obama represents the worst failings of late 20th century liberalism: the invitation to view anyone who could show up and be a minority as "qualified." (Obama is the least qualified serious Presidential candidate in our history - yes, including Lincoln.) This is the opposite of what was intended by affirmative action which was an attempt to right the ship in the face of inbred anti-minority bias. It was not meant to elevate those with thin resumes to jobs that they would not have gotten otherwise.

There are thousands of reasons to vote for someone other than Obama in the fall. Electoral nullification is one. Juries do it. I won't vote for him for reasons that go to his character. But if women and men across the country vote for McCain to let the media elites know that what they've done will not stand - I will not be upset or surprised.

Do we control the body politic or does MSNBC?

Nullify Keith Olbermann.