Courtesy of @TimLindell and @RichCrowther on Twitter, we finally have some insight into what drives Mitten’s “Stop Those Women Moms Grizzly Bears!” campaign panic. Now it all makes sense. After all, shouldn’t we all Know Our Limits? 😉

This section is for comments from's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Tammy agrees with or endorses any particular comment just because she lets it stand.
21 Comments | Leave a comment
  1. KatieSilverSpring says:

    Please post times-of-origins for pieces like this. I know there were wierd constraints on women but extremes like this need to documented by date or listed as fabrications. To be honest, it looks like a late 70s piece of comedy not a real documentary of thetimes.

  2. Tammy says:

    Katie, it’s a satiric parody, amplifying the absurdity of the issue.

    • RuBegonia says:

      This sketch was originally broadcast in the 1990s on a popular British television show starring Harry Enfield called Harry Enfield’s Television Programme and subsequently retitled Harry Enfield and Chums. That’s the short answer – info from the usual sources – Google–>YouTube–>Wikipedia–>IMDB.

      Trivia note inside the blue box: apparently Harry Enfield does the voice for the Travelocity Gnome.

      • Tammy says:

        Oh excellent. It felt very “Monty Python” to me 🙂 The English have a certain way with things 🙂

        • KatieSilverSpring says:

          … and that’s why it was lost on me; I have never understood Monty Python or English comedy in general (except some episodes of “Absolutely Fabulous”). Thanks for the info, Ru; sorry, Tammy, I’m just one of the slower TAMs.

  3. lord-ruler says:

    O.K I am going to be a little bit insubordinate to the commander in Chief of the Tammy army here. I am not sure this is an issue of women being treated badly but an issue of Mitt Romney’s campaign rival being treated badly. Huckaphoney wasn’t a woman and he got the same treatment Sarah Palin is getting. The article about this Romney / Palin dustup is trying to say that Romney just happens to treat women bad. Is it his fault he has had two female rivals before Palin? Jane Swift who was Romney’s rival for governor was disliked by both the voters of massachusetts and the Republican party insiders. The radio host who ran against him for Senate sounds like a lib. I don’t see this as a male candidate against a female candidate but rather the establishment against the non establishment. I hope women don’t get in the same boat as some of the civil rights activists who cry racism everytime on of their own is attacked. Politically this makes great sense and Tammy has put a big chink in Romney’s Armor. This is no time to play games with the establishment candidates so I will overlook what I see as going a little overboard in “protecting women” for the greater good of making sure people of principle are elected. When Trent Lott says that if the tea party candidate like Lee, Paul, and Angle get elected he thinks they should be co-opted to they can get things done it is a bad sign. Good Riddance Trent!!! You won’t see us lift a finger to defend you ever again!!

    • Maynard says:

      I wouldn’t rule out Mr. Ruler’s interpretation. Politicians slam each other with whatever sound bites they hope will seal the deal with busy voters. As with Hillary’s “3 AM” charge against Obama when she was a candidate, she hit him on the weak spot of being a neophyte. A serious charge, yes? Later, after he’s won and she’s lost, here she is, carrying Obama’s water. Or George Bush Sr. condemning Reagan’s “voodoo economics” back when he hoped to be the presidential candidate. That didn’t stop him from being Reagan’s veep, nor did it stop Reagan from bringing Bush on board. Seems these people curse each other and it doesn’t mean a thing. It troubles me that an election, and with it the fate of the nation and the world, may be decided because the loser had a big nose which made him the subject of derision. So I’m not endorsing any of this. But maybe it’s not about misogyny or racism or homophobia or whatever; maybe it’s just about winning at any cost.

      • Artgal says:

        If it was not about gender in the Romney camp, why did they bring it up? They stated she was not a real human being, for chrissakes! They made several derogatory remarks about her as a woman – not about issues she has stood on or the differences between where she stands and Romney. No, it was personal and meant to dehumanize her and advocating that no one is to take her seriously.

        You have to remember: the GOP establishment operates much like the left these days because they are the liberal fringe of the Republican party. Romney is part of that. He started this last year – NOT THE WOMEN! Again, it’s the women talking about issues, actually being proactive in fighting the Obama administration and offering real solutions. I’m not saying there are no men doing this, but it’s the women who are really making the difference right now and that threatens the GOP establishment because these women are NOT part of that.

        I understand what you’re both referring to in that politicians will go after each other then wind up working for the person they were against. They’ve already started the rhetoric they are prepared to sling in the election cycle, and it’s going against Palin simply because she is a woman – the most high profile woman who is doing more as an advocate for other candidates and in taking the administration to task than they’ve ever been willing to do – and it threatens them. It’s also true that this is about the GOP establishment politicians versus the non-establishment – and you certainly do not see the women being a part of that establishment swamp.

        It’s not Tammy or anyone posting here that’s dredging up the dreaded sexism. If Romney’s (or anyone elses) crap-slingers are going to dish this sort of thing out, we’re going to respond to their sexism appropriately.

        • lord-ruler says:

          Two of the worst Republican Senators in congress are women. The nitwits from Maine. Conservatives don’t attack them because they are female they do so because they side with the enemy. I refuse to back someone because of their gender and to make statement such as “congress needs a womans touch” mean nothing because that is what the Democrats have been saying for years. If we are going to say women are better than we might as well do everything we can to keep Nancy Pelosi in charge. After all we can’t be having men taking the country to hell. I think Michelle Bachman would make a 100% better leader than Boehner but not because she is a woman.

        • Tammy says:

          Artgal, obviously I agree with you. We were sitting around, working to get authentic conservatives elected, dealing with Obama’s crap in Arizona, etc and the next thing we know Romney’s people who decide it’s time to go after Palin in the most denigrating personal way possible. I do find it interesting how the Mittheads reaction to the Time piece is to run from responsibility, but any defense of Sarah Palin is unfair and uncivil, threatening the very fabric of unity in GOP! And for the Mittens Fans who suddenly are obsessed with that “unity” and “working together” there is someone who needs to hear that and it’s Romney, the man who began this.

          • Artgal says:

            Thank you, Tammy. You hit it spot on!

            I do want to add a few things to Lord Ruler’s response:

            I never said the women would be better BECAUSE they were women; they are better because they are taking on the REAL issues and NOT making their gender the issue – MITTENS ROMNEY DID THAT!!!

            The women referred to in Tammy’s original post earlier in the week and in my comments here are the new candidates giving new life in the GOP, and they are NOT establishment people – Palin, Haley, Angle, Nightingale, Brewer, Fiorina and others. I firmly acknowledged in my last post that there are men who do not engage in the establishment either. There are good guys that may very well be going to DC along with some of the women in January. But it’s the women who are really making a big difference right now – and those women do NOT include Snowe, Collins or Pelosi who are part of their party establishments & the problem. So please – let’s keep this on topic.

          • lord-ruler says:

            Well I was in a surly mood when I wrote my last post. : ) Most of it I still agree with. I took some cheap shots though. : ) I too think Mitt Romney needs to be held responsible. I have been disappointed by his silence. He can’t even bring himself to endorse Mike Lee in Utah. I have tweeted to him and his followers to show us the money. He can’t possibly think a single tweet is going to make everything better. Angle is the candidate who nobody has really been defending except for Mark Levin. She has been very impressive every time I have listened to her on his radio show. I think he might have been the person to put her over the top in the primary.

  4. girlsgotrhythm says:

    I enjoyed it! Hilarious!

  5. Artgal says:

    This is absolute GOLD! It’s hysterical, and I love it! And no – it’s not going overboard at all!

    We need to strike out against the absurdity of the establishment (which is a boy’s club by the way) because THEY are the ones making gender an issue – not the women! The women are talking issues and actually taking the Obama administration and their local governments to task. It’s the stupid little boys like Romney (who started this last year with his remark about Palin in People’s 100 Most Influential list – he gravitated to looks when there was no mention of it to begin with) who talk about looks and intelligence level. Who he associates with and selects for his ‘campaign’ says much about him in the end.

    Besides, where is the GOP when the women of their party are being attacked? Oh, that’s right – they have been so worn out from defending the likes of Mark Sandford they cannot muster any strength to help out the women. Remember how they were sooooo certain Sandford had a political future? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA That’s ok – leave it to a woman to actually get something done. Jan Brewer and Sarah Palin are shining examples of what can actually get done once you get the old boys network out of the way.

    The GOP and the White House sure can use a woman’s touch!

  6. Mrs. Malcontent says:

    Illustrating absurdity by being absurd.

  7. thierry says:

    i so wanted to post the saturday night live skit with jane curtain called “angora bouquet” after seeing this. it’s not on the utubes, damn it.

    “Hi. I’m beautiful, but stupid. And I’ve found the soap that helps me stay that way. My husband says I look natural and unspoiled, and he loves the way I never bother him with my opinions. Let’s face it — good looks and complex human emotions just don’t mix. I guess that’s why I use Angora Bouquet with pH Formula 23.
    Angora Bouquet’s thousands of tiny tranquilizers penetrate your skin to wash reality away, and make your mind and skin as clear as a baby’s. You see, Angora Bouquet actually contains methaqualone, the same tranquilizing agent that is found in those large white pills I often come across in Bill, Jr.’s jeans pockets when I do the laundry.”

    feminist mormon women are excommunicated because they object to the role the allmighty male thinks suits them best. they did not even let black males into their covens until the 1970s.

    “My feminist views were never welcome in church, so I turned to the public marketplace of ideas. Yet for two years, church leaders threatened me not to speak publicly about Mormon feminist issues. Excommunication was a small price to pay for my voice. It didn’t take away my theology or my spirituality, which the church does not control. God’s spirit cannot be homogenized, mass-produced and marketed by blue-suited septuagenarians from a high-rise in downtown Salt Lake City. “- maxine hanks

    “Mormonism has created an ingenious system of oppression, in which opposition towards men is tantamount to arguing with God. The Mormon religion makes no distinction between clergy and laity, at least with regard to men . All Mormon men are ordained as members of the ‘priesthood,’ with the absolute authority to preach the gospel, bestow blessings, prophecy, perform healings and baptisms, and generally speak for God. ‘Their priesthood gives them the right to advise and instruct the Saints (i.e., Mormons), and their jurisdiction extends over all things spiritual and temporal'”-Jessica Longaker

    “Obviously, the Mormon church is not going to alter its views on women in the immediate future. It is questionable whether it is even possible for Mormonism to equalize the roles of men and women, because the oppression of women is so integral to the religion. Men and women cannot truly become equal in the church, for the basic tenets of Mormonism are so fraught with sexism that equality would change the religion beyond recognition.”(ibid.)

    “There is a reason why one man is born black and with other disadvantages, while another is born white with great advantages. The reason is that we once had an estate before we came here, and were obedient; more or less, to the laws that were given us there. Those who were faithful in all things there [pre-existence] received greater blessings here, and those who were not faithful received less. . . . There were no neutrals in the war in Heaven. All took sides either with Christ or with Satan. Every man had his agency there, and men receive rewards here based upon their actions there, just as they will receive rewards hereafter for deeds done in the body. The Negro, evidently, is receiving the reward he merits” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 1:61, 65-66; ).

    “You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind. . . . Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been killed, and that would put a termination to that line of human beings. This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which was the flat nose and black skin. Trace mankind down to after the flood, and then another cursed is pronounced upon the same race–that they should be the ‘servants of servants;’ and they will be until that curse is removed; and the Abolitionists cannot help it, nor in the least alter that decree.” (Journal of Discourses, 7:290; Brigham Young)

    “Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be.” (ibid., 10:110; )

    • lord-ruler says:
      Really a repressed group of women there.
      Ask these people including Gladys Knight what they think of the mormon church.
      This kind of speaks for itself.
      Mormon church celebrates black heritage
      Here is an excerpt from a recent speech by Dieter F Uchtdorf a member of the first Presidency of the mormon church regarding the role of Women. You May not agree with everything in it but I don’t think it sounds as if he is telling these women to be wallflowers.

      “The lives of women in the Church are a powerful witness that spiritual gifts, promises, and blessings of the Lord are given to all those who qualify, “that all may be benefited” (D&C 46:9; see verses 9–26). The doctrines of the restored gospel create a wonderful and “unique feminine identity that encourages women to develop their abilities” as true and literal daughters of God.3Through serving in the Relief Society, Young Women, and Primary organizations—not to mention their private acts of love and service—women have always played and will always play an important part in helping “bring forth and establish the cause of Zion” (D&C 6:6). They care for the poor and the sick; serve proselytizing, welfare, humanitarian, and other missions; teach children, youth, and adults; and contribute to the temporal and spiritual welfare of the Saints in many other ways.

      Because their potential for good is so great and their gifts so diverse, women may find themselves in roles that vary with their circumstances in life. Some women, in fact, must fill many roles simultaneously. For this reason, Latter-day Saint women are encouraged to acquire an education and training that will qualify them both for homemaking and raising a righteous family and for earning a living outside the home if the occasion requires.

      We are living in a great season for all women in the Church. Sisters, you are an essential part of our Heavenly Father’s plan for eternal happiness; you are endowed with a divine birthright. You are the real builders of nations wherever you live, because strong homes of love and peace will bring security to any nation. I hope you understand that, and I hope the men of the Church understand it too.

      What you sisters do today will determine how the principles of the restored gospel can influence the nations of the world tomorrow. It will determine how these heavenly rays of the gospel will light every land in the future.4

      Though we often speak of the influence of women on future generations, please do not underestimate the influence you can have today. President David O. McKay (1873–1970) said that the principal reason the Church was organized is “to make life sweet today, to give contentment to the heart today, to bring salvation today. …

      “Some of us look forward to a time in the future—salvation and exaltation in the world to come—but today is part of eternity.”5

      Blessings beyond Imagining
      As you live up to this mission, in whatever life circumstance you find yourself—as a wife, as a mother, as a single mother, as a divorced woman, as a widowed or a single woman—the Lord our God will open up responsibilities and blessings far beyond your ability to imagine.

      May I invite you to rise to the great potential within you. But don’t reach beyond your capacity. Don’t set goals beyond your capacity to achieve. Don’t feel guilty or dwell on thoughts of failure. Don’t compare yourself with others. Do the best you can, and the Lord will provide the rest. Have faith and confidence in Him, and you will see miracles happen in your life and the lives of your loved ones. The virtue of your own life will be a light to those who sit in darkness, because you are a living witness of the fulness of the gospel (see D&C 45:28). Wherever you have been planted on this beautiful but often troubled earth of ours, you can be the one to “succor the weak, lift up the hands which hang down, and strengthen the feeble knees” (D&C 81:5).”

  8. Tinker says:

    The video would’ve been funnier if part it weren’t true. What she said about the going off the gold standard was stupid … and those “highly educated” women cracked me up because it’s really a depiction of leftist univeristy women. The longer they stay the more homely they get. lol! (well, about 75% I’d guess)

  9. morecowbell says:

    Does everyone understand that Time did this on purpose: Time laid it out as Palin vs all the others… and all the others are men. So all comments from “The Others” would be directed at Sarah Palin. Note how none of other fronts runners participated in the article. I am not so convinced the writers got the comments first, then created the article around the comments to get the reactions we are seeing today. It is Time magazine.

    First, the comments made by the advisers were stupid beyond belief .. they should be fired.. if for nothing else not having the foresight to know that anyone who says anything about Palin is going to get their butt kicked … that should be obvious by now. Romney should apologize, the sexism label has stuck, the truth does not matter anymore.. Time Magazine did their job well.

    Second, I am pissed because yet another 45-60 minutes of today’s show will be dedicated to GOP machine misogynistic framework thanks to those idiots.

  10. makeshifty says:

    LOL! This is hilarious! Really well done. It’s become a cliche to me that whenever the brits want to highlight the “old thinking” about the separation of the elites from the common person (which is set up as the second-class British subject) they always have the elites discussing the gold standard. I guess it highlights the status of the elite, because for one they’re talking about something I guess the common person wouldn’t experience much, holding gold, and secondly they knew more about the “complexities” of economics than the “common person could understand”. If you want to see another example of this watch the movie “The Remains of the Day” (made in 1993).

    After watching the above clip I was wondering if there would come a day when the Republicans would have the cajones to show it at one of their conventions, and afterwards have a speaker chuckle at it and say, “Shouldn’t we put those days behind us?” Somehow I doubt it. I’m sure many would cheer, but it would probably be considered “too divisive”. The only reason I “pick on” the Republicans here is I would never expect the Democrats to do the same thing, even though they’ve got their own problems with misogyny. They’re just so in denial that expecting them to acknowledge it would be like waiting for hell to freeze over.

You must be logged in to post a comment.