Complain to Washington Post About Vulgar, Sexist Comments, Please!

[OrwellwasRight]

The Washington Post has apparently received several complaints about posts like the following and refused to take them down. If you can take a moment to complain and we can DU the WaPo's inbox, maybe they'll get the hint that truly vulgar and degrading comments about women, homosexuals, and people with Down's Syndrome are NOT acceptable.

Just a few of the comments that WaPo has refused to take down:

Sarah is a real woman not like that angry hillary and her idiot husband. sarah palin is a real woman who knows how to keep her family strong. i bet she gladly gets dressed up in a little teddy and swallows her mans load and will even give up the boodie. would hillary do that? no. that is why her man had to get with a fat chick but our chicks are smokin hot and know how to keep us honest. mccain/palin 08!

Posted by: A real woman for change | August 30, 2008 12:39 PM

Great, this is what my party has come to?? A damn circus I tell you! We've got a 1000 year old Mummy & it's crypt keeper ghoul of a wife, and now the beauty queen that's squirting milk all over her blouse while the Retard kid screams. Great. Call me in 4 years when I can vote for Huck again

Posted by: Barnum & Bailey | August 30, 2008 12:38 PM

Bobby G Rutherford: That's very sensitive of you, sounds like you enjoy the touch of a man ya poof. Got bite a pillow I'm sure your master needs you to drink up some pee

Posted by: Real Man | August 30, 2008 12:37 PM

Freakin great! Just what we need for the convention, a VP candidate that has to go al Janet Jackson during her speech cos the retarded kid starts screaming for a feed

Posted by: Tom in Atlanta | August 30, 2008 12:36 PM

Read more (if you can stand it) and complain here:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/08/29/palin_pick_leaves_bruised_feel.html

[CC]

1. Not sure I would want them taken down.

Yes they are offensive but the sure do shine a light on the republicant mindset.

[OrwellwasRight]

4. Do you really live with all those animals?

There are so many sweeties there. :D :D :D

Re: WaPo: You make a fair point, but I am not sure that those comments offend anyone whose mind wasn't already made up.

And leaving them there perpetuates an assumption that it is OK to talk about other human beings that way. And that it is somehow valid political commentary. And it's really not. As another reader on WaPo pointed out, it's not cool if you are trying to do some political reading with your young children, and you have to explain "rim jobs" and "sucking spaghetti out of the VP candidate's backside." It's just not really respectful of readers, of the recipients of the hate, or of our democratic system (such as it is).

[CC]

9. I live with most of the animals

I have lost a few ferrets, they have halos. I just couldn't/can't bring myself to remove their pictures yet. Most of the cats were found in the yard, dogs given to us and some of the ferrets I foster for a rescue. The two birds were rescues too. I only take in the ones that can't be re-homed so they have a forever home here since once here I can't give them up.:)


I understand your point and some of the comments I am surprised they even made it on. Not sure I would read any comment section online with young kids with out reading it first though and I was pretty liberal about what I let my kid see. I just think some of those that think they are more moderate and are thinking of voting for McCain should see who they are voting with.
I live in a very red area and am running into a lot of subtle racism against Obama. I decided I was not letting them get away with their shoddy little excuses and am making them face up to their inner demons. Then I let them decide what type of person they want to be associated with and I do let them know I will associate them with the nut-jobs.If I can't convince them to vote for Obama I try to get them to do as little damage as possible by directing them toward Barr or staying at home. Most aren't thrilled with McCain either. Way to much is at stake for me to sit back and shut up.

[OrwellwasRight]

10. Yeah, I went to a wedding back home a couple of months ago

with folks I had gone to high school with. I was/am good friends with the bride and a few otehrs, but there are a group of the brides friends that I never really bonded with, for good reason. I learned years ago not to talk politics with them. It was just pointless frustrating and made me dislike them even more.

So I'm at this wedding, and they know I live and work in DC, and two of the guys started asking me a bunch of questions about the elections and Obama. I tried to keep it to one-word answers, avoid taking their bait, and hope they would get bored and move on to another subject. Then one said he thought Obama wasn't that bad. And the other said that if the first one voted for that black man for president, he would never speak to him again. Then the wives came up and chided me for talking politics and starting trouble. It was my friend's wedding, so I just walked away and remembered that there are things I don't like about my home town.

I only have one baby to take care of. Here she is.

[CC]

11. What a beautiful baby/

Her fur looks so soft and love that black nose.


People here know where my politics are and know if they don't want to hear it not to bring it up. They also know I refuse to do stupid so if they want to bring it up be prepared. I won't bring it up certain places (like the wedding you were at) but I also won't not talk if someone else brings it up. Not anymore.

[librechik]

2. "When you sow the wind, ye shall reap the whirlwind."

"When you sow the wind, ye shall reap the whirlwind."

With the help of powerful media corporations like the Washington Post, the Rape-ublicans carefully nourished the class of supporter that posts filth like the comments on Sarah Palin's nomination. Of all entities, the Post should have realized that no victory is worth destroying civil discourse. But they were greedy and schooled in language by Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh's hate-filled politics. The WaPost cultivated demons, and sicced them on Democrats.

Now in your own pages ye see that you can't really control an evil racist mob programmed to go violent at certain codewords; a mob bent on destruction and fat with encouragement from above.

Yes, complain to the WAPost, which should have acted like real journalists instead of partisan teenagers for the last decade. Instead, they joined in with the demonizing horde and egged them on, out of sheer spite that anyone (Democrats) could threaten their feudal castle.

Now they are reaping what they sowed--and it is poison.

[katandmoon]

3. Seriously, don't waste your time...the Post won't do anything about it

[stillcool]

5. there are some ugly people..

in this country and they spread their crap all over the net. Comments provoke violence, division, and the degradation of human beings. I have not written before to have these comments censored, and nor will I now.

[OrwellwasRight]

6. It's censorship if the government says you can't say it,

prevents you from publishing it, or arrests you for saying it, reading it, or repeating it.

Members of society getting together and saying "X" is not acceptable is not censorship. A group, person, or organization is free to encourage or discourage any kind of comments it wants. No one is being "censored" because they can still say those things, just not in that particular context or forum. And there is no "law" enforcing the "can't." It's either a mutual agreement of the participants, or a rule set by the person/group.organization providing that particular forum.

That is why it is censorship to remove a particular book from a public library, but not censorship when the local privately-owned bookstore refuses to stock the book.

So I am not arguing with your opposition to contacting WaPo, but I do think we as a society need act like a society rather than assuming that speaking out against hatred is somehow engaging in censorship.

To me, it's especially egregious when the organization has already set ground rules for the comments it has solicited. WaPo has set such rules and so has DU. WaPo's policy, which sits right above the box where a person can type in his or her comments, is:

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.

[stillcool]

7. I don't know where it ends..

but doing away with comments altogether seems like the likely place.

[Captain Hilts]

8. Because the post op-ed page was filled with sexist crap against Clinton and "Billary."

They hired Gerson. I cancelled my subscription.