NYT: Palin is ungrateful to McCain

It's nice to know where the NYT stands on feminism and female equality. According to them women should be grateful for being picked for a high-profile job based on their merits. Women should be grateful for having the opportunity and not "complain" or "whine" if they get treated like dirt by the people who chose them. Or, they are really scraping the bottom of the barrel to come up with reasons to hate Palin.

All in all, Ms. Palin emerges from “Going Rogue” as an eager player in the blame game, thoroughly ungrateful toward the McCain campaign for putting her on the national stage.

How about this? Palin earned the right to be picked as a running mate, based on her experience and merits. She also has the right to fight back against the people who tried to destroy her career. Michiko Kakutani, the author of this NYT review, apparently thinks that as a woman, Palin should just sit in the corner with her hands folded in her lap and not say anything ever again.

Kakutani shocked that Palin considered being VP a natural progression to her career. Why? If Palin were a man, I guarantee she would be praising her confidence and assuredness. I seem to remember many, many, people doing that when Bill Clinton said he and others close to him knew would be president someday - even his nanny said it when he was a baby. Talk about elitism.

I was wondering if the NYT would review Going Rogue. Not only did they review it, they got their top liberal attack dog to do it. And all she accomplished was pushing more sexist, liberal lies about Palin. NYT is not progressive, it's regressive. Wake up.