National Organization for (hateful liberal) Women Refuse to Condemn Maher’s Palin Tw*t Attack …Update: NOW Begrudgingly Releases Statement
Posted by Jim Hoft on Tuesday, March 22, 2011, 6:14 PM
If you still had any doubt that the National Organization for Women was just a group of hateful leftists, this ought to clear that up…
On Saturday Bill Maher called Former Governor Sarah Palin a “dumb tw*t.”
NOW refuses to condemn this vicious sexist attack.
FOX News reported:
Bill Maher uttered a female vulgarism when referring to former Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin on his HBO show Friday night.
“Did you hear this – Sarah Palin finally heard what happened in Japan and she’s demanding that we invade ‘Tsunami,’” Maher said. “I mean she said, ‘These ‘Tsunamians’ will not get away with this.’ Oh speaking of dumb tw**s, did you…”
Maher was offering an imagined Palin response in an apparent attempt at humor, as Palin had made no such statement.
The National Organization for Women (NOW) refused to comment on Maher’s use of the derogatory term. A rep told FOXNews.com it is a “known fact” that NOW does not correspond with FOX News.
That’s disgusting.
UPDATE: NOW finally released a statement condemning the Maher’s vicious attack.
Here’s NOW’s response.
“You’re trying to take up our time getting us to defend your friend Sarah Palin. If you keep us busy defending her, we have less time to defend women’s bodies from the onslaught of reproductive rights attacks and other threats to our freedom, safety, livelihood, etc,” wrote Bennett. “Sorry, but we can’t defend Palin or even Hillary Clinton from every sexist insult hurled at them in the media. That task would be impossible, and it would consume us. You know this would not be a productive way to fight for women’s equal rights, which is why you want us stuck in this morass.”
ADVERTISEMENT
-
Featured Story:
YouTube Pulls Video of Trayvon Martin at Fight Club… But They Can’t Hide It Forever – Here It Is Again
Published May 22, 2012 at 5:04 am - 44 Comments
coolidgerules commented:
NAGS.
M Malone commented:
I guess the C Word is also okay with them, which is good to know!
a former democrat commented:
2008 revealed a lot to women, who may be pro-choice, but they respect pro-life as well as the other side of it.
NOW is a useless organization, their latest project…. to go after Hooters, and no I am not kidding.
I say its useless, and I say that as someone who used to support them in the past and donated to them in the past.
A completely useless waste of space. Never once defended Sarah Palin, they didn’t defend Hillary much either against sexism. They just wanted to make sure they were on the winning side of the election, no principles, nothing. Utterly useless.
There is another women’s organization, called the New Agenda, made of pro-life, and pro-choice women, who truely is pro-women, and will defend women against sexist, irregardless of political stripes.
NOW—> USELESS.
Andrew commented:
NOW showed their true agenda colors when they would not condemn a womanizer president back in the 90′s.
Tumbleweednm commented:
When you consider that Maher is as Spineless as they come nothing should surprise anyone. This boy spends most of his time with his head up his A.. and therefore, most that comes out of his mouth is senseless and foul.
Sasja commented:
Who the h*ll cares. Get over it. Those on the left have always been vulgar and if y’all haven’t come to terms with it, perhaps it is time you do. The only thing that is important is
saving our country from those who want to destroy it. They are relentless in their quest, and it appears they may succeed while we fret over what some potty mouth said about Sarah Palin.
huckleberryfriend commented:
What is a female vulgarism and how is it different from a male vulgarism? Does it end in a instead of e?
BurmaShave commented:
This is one of many reasons why I can’t wait for Sarah Palin to be inaugurated as President of the United States.
NOW will simple go nuts and implode.
SpideyTerry commented:
“an apparent attempt at humor”
With Maher, they’re always attempts. Would be nice if he could tell an actually funny joke – which brings me to NOW…
Steve White commented:
If NOW won’t answer FoxNews, will they answer any of us who might ask?
Perhaps GatewayPundit could ‘flood the zone’ with polite e-mails each asking NOW for a comment. Could be entertaining.
Dave-O commented:
Maher ceased being funny a looooong time ago.
toongoon commented:
Its a good thing they don’t correspond with FOX, somebody might mistake them for a real organization instead of a democrat fund raiser.
bigkahuna commented:
NOW: National Organization of Whores. Take money from liberals for blowing them at any opportunity and screwing conservative women.
retire05 commented:
Back in the day, women, who judged themselves to be “modern”, ran about with their NOW membership cards in their wallets sporting t-shirts that said “A Woman Needs A Man Like A Fish Needs A Bicycle.”
But their real goals, as outlined by Helen Gurley Brown and Gloria Steinham, was not equality. That was simply the smoke to prevent women from seeing what was really behind the curtain.
Their goal was two-fold: free love and abortion. All other things took a back seat.
They have no importance any more, and they know it.
bg commented:
++
leftist women’s organizations either feel above it all, or they’ve become so
self loathing, they condone others who commit even more horrific acts in
order to, albeit artificially, make themselves feel better about themselves..
==
Valerie commented:
Once upon a time, NOW vocally opposed female genital mutilation, an act that is very popular in third-world Muslim nations. No longer.
All the liberated women recognized that they were liberated, and left NOW. The remnant is the breeder-haters.
nelle commented:
They can’t deal with Fox News? They should be ashamed of making women look like whiney babies.
Ginger commented:
They are a bunch of Lesbo’s so I would not worry about what they think they are useless.
a former democrat commented:
“Sorry, but we can’t defend Palin or even Hillary Clinton from every sexist insult hurled at them in the media.”
Gee, just like I posted, they didn’t really defend Hillary in 2008, and certain didn’t defend Palin.
So what exactly is their purpose as an organization??
bluebay commented:
Todd Palin should be defending his wife, Gov. Palin, in these personal attacks. IMO.
bg commented:
++
Ginger #18
i’m surprised at you Ginger..
what makes you think homosexuals are any more or less clueless than
heterosexuals these days, or are you just biased towards homosexuals
in general??
Mothers, of young teen girls in particular, who not only allow, but
promote their daughters running around looking like ‘dime a dozen’
whores of yesteryear..
==
Militant Conservative commented:
slow news day Jim??
I know it can be difficult in a 24/7 cycle.
Nags Can’t Understand Normal Thinking.
powder is dry
RS commented:
What a pity that shame went out in the 1960′s.
The NOW leadership really needs some badly.
And some honesty would be nice too, but it too is out in liberal circles.
bg commented:
++
re: the Update..
so NOW is busy making sure women aren’t subject to Sharia Law?? /s/
==
TammyChicago commented:
“Your trying to take up our time getting us to defend your friend Sarah Palin.”
Hmmmm shouldnt take ENCOURAGEMENT to get a supposed WOMENS watchgroup
to condemn very PUBLIC, hateful, personal and misogynistic attack on a high profile
woman. The “your friend” reference is proof they are selective in who they “defend”.
Otherwise, why would it matter whos friend Palin is? NOW is nothing but an
embarrassment to this country and to all women.
Betsy Ross commented:
Let’s face it. NOW lost the last shred of any credibility when they wouldn’t support Paula Jones in her sexual harassment case against Clinton.
I believe that was the beginning of the end of liberals hiding behind a cause to further their liberal agenda.
prairie dog in Alberta commented:
“…which is why you want us stuck in this morass.”
Who said anything about Michelle Obama?
Iconoclast commented:
I never thought much of NOW, but the crickets chirping when slick was assaulting / demeaning women as a matter of routine clearly exposed it as nothing more than a front for far left drones – allegedly female ones although in many cases this characterization is more one of convenience than of accuracy. Odd how their knickers become so knotted at the very idea of a strong woman leader given their professed beliefs, eh?
lynched1 commented:
It just another money filtering outlet.
ogee commented:
Yep “if you can’t dazzle with ‘em brilliance, baffle ‘em with bullsh*t.”
ogee commented:
He’s out of content and needed to come up with something quick. He’s such a faggot sexist.
ogee commented:
Yep “if you can’t dazzle with ‘em brilliance, baffle ‘em with bullcrap”
ogee commented:
That’s what they are trying to do to us as a huge distraction.
“Your trying to take up our time getting us to defend your friend Sarah Palin.”
So there they about told on themselves what their strategy is. It’s always the reverse of what they say. We all know that.
ogee commented:
They beg for money in spam emails. That’s what they are about. It’s a PAC disguised as a women’s movement. Movement alright. Bowel movement personified.
Ginger commented:
I had a friend who worked at McDonald Douglas and was faceing an awful sexual harassment lawsuit against them. She contacted NOW several times and they at first egnored her but was forced to finally respond to shut her up. They could not get envolved. Well not to long after that here came NOW to defend this Lesbian who was being insulted by her boss. Boy was it a big rally! My friend and I went to that rally and my friend confronted the NOW representative over the bias. The only response she got was the cases were different. Sure they were! I have not had any use for NOW for years. How many times in the news have you heard anything that NOW has done to help improve life in the work place.
0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
wpngjstr commented:
Call me crazy, but wouldn’t it have been faster and simpler to say “We condemn Bill Mahers sexist comments” rather than try to defend their lack of a response? Thus giving them more time to defend (other) women…
Gijkjd commented:
If you listen or watch Maher you are dumb. I never give this sh*t attent.
Just always address this sh*t as ‘stupid said wat?’
bitterclinger commented:
That task would be impossible, and it would consume us. You know this would not be a productive way to fight for women’s equal rights, which is why you want us stuck in this morass.”
“Like, it could take us all of 30 seconds or something.”
*eye roll* Don’t strain yourselves, gals.
I’d tell ‘em to give up the ghost, but that would probably take up too much of their energy.
Varmint Hunter commented:
NOW doesn’t have time to respond to every misogynistic slur in the media. Their 3 members are maxed out at the moment.
pst314 commented:
#35 Ginger “I had a friend…sexual harassment lawsuit…NOW…ignored her but…defended this Lesbian who was being insulted by her boss.”
Back in the 90′s a former NOW officer wrote that the organization was over fifty percent lesbians and that their culture was not pro-equal-rights but anti-men. (Which means that all the old jokes about NOW were true.)
SM-AZ commented:
antiquated (old) unimportant has-beens showing their bitterness. Say good nite Gracie!
CT commented:
What did anyone expect from such a vulgar coven.
befuddled commented:
Chris Brown and NOW should get together for a romantic candlelight dinner at his place.
Ginger commented:
pst314
Yes…in the 90′s exactly. It is none of my business what they do (used to) behind closed doors but to pretend to be a fem.. org. that cared for the rights of females but not all females was a dishonor and and just plain WRONG!
nocoen commented:
The silence from Demoncraps speaks volumes. If you vote demoncrap, your time will come and soon.
Valerie commented:
NOW was originally formed to pass the ERA. The country eventually decided that an ERA was not needed, and the proper remedy was Title VII and Title IX of the Civil Rights Act. That is, the language of the US Constitution did not need to be changed, but if Congress should spend money, it could not be spent in ways that discriminate on the basis of sex.
NOW lost the battle but won the war. Because NOW won, many of its members and supporters turned to other things, leaving behind the man-haters that had always been an extreme minority. That minority, the man-haters, became the remnant, and therefore the majority, of NOW. They also remained extreme. For some odd reason, they also were a bunch of tyranny-embracing commies. I have no idea why that should be true, but there it is.
AuntieMadder commented:
#27 March 22, 2011 at 7:45 pm
prairie dog in Alberta commented:
“…which is why you want us stuck in this morass.”
Who said anything about Michelle Obama?
~~~~~~~~~~~
LOL!
AuntieMadder commented:
#36 March 22, 2011 at 8:15 pm
wpngjstr commented:
Call me crazy, but wouldn’t it have been faster and simpler to say “We condemn Bill Mahers sexist comments” rather than try to defend their lack of a response? Thus giving them more time to defend (other) women…
~~~~~~~~~~
Excellent point made!
Dan commented:
We don’t want them to defend Palin, we want them to condemn Maher!
Morons.
AuntieMadder commented:
#3 March 22, 2011 at 6:26 pm
a former democrat commented:
2008 revealed a lot to women, who may be pro-choice, but they respect pro-life as well as the other side of it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I’m one of those women. Feminists’ feeble defense of Hillary Clinton followed by their thorough lack of defense of Palin (I won’t even go into the misogynistic treatment of Palin by many so-called feminists) showed me that they aren’t/weren’t about promoting, supporting and protecting women; they’re all about promoting, supporting and protecting the DNC. Only a few of them defended both women against the misogynistic attacks, among them are those who formed New Agenda. I read there for a short while but was soon turned off by the commenters there.
JPeden commented:
[mockery on/never off]
What, NOW and Maher still have their congenital fear of strong women as well as strong men and “unsocialized”= homeschooled children? No surprise there, or anything more revealing than their usual
progressiveinfantile, ano-genital body part and “precious fluids” and solids-fixated humor and “intellect”.But on the other hand, as we’ve all heard by now, who would have ever expected such a propitious Poll question to show recently that – along with their strong attraction to, if not near blood-brotherhood with borderline psychotics – a lot of people would allegedly favor the “emotionally damaged”* and also apparently strongly misogynist and sickly femophope Charlie Sheen over Sarah Palin as President? An astounding finding especially since it would then also help to explain so brilliantly why those particular people voted for Barack “The First Black
Pasta Spined, “We don’t need no stinking facts”, “The Oceans will cease their rise”, Islamophilic hence Femophobic DhimmiPresident” Obama in the first place? He’s apparently a lot like the provenly charismatic by acclaim, Charlie Sheen! But not quite so immune from the evil effects of some “strong women” who apparently lured him into Libya, eh? Better to stick with Porn Stars like Charlie, Mr.PastaPresident! He just might challenge you in 2012!This incisive Poll finding is almost a miracle. And, attn. Progressives, even more not to worry. For, Yea, even as I’ve just heard it again from the Master of Knowns and Unknowns, as a well-known known, “Weakness is provocative”, still.
*Martin Sheen/Fox News
Neo commented:
A statement from the National Organization for Abortion is not necessary, most especially since Maher’s statement has nothing to do with abortion.
eaglewingz08 commented:
Where was NOW in protecting women’s health and safety in Philadelphia from the gruesome abortionist? Voting present just like their President.