Be careful for what you wish. The fem blogs finally noticed the craziness going down in South Carolina. Rather than use this as an opportunity to attack the establishment good ol’ boy network, they question if the allegations were true.

Note the Jezebel‘s headline, which is the only fem outlet to cover this story the entire time, “Nikki Haley Refuses Polygraph.”

An article on The Daily Beast makes my skin crawl. This is exactly the type of journalism propels me to fight feminists:

Granted, Haley has a hypocrisy problem: Like Mark Sanford, the adulterous and love-sick Republican governor she’s trying to replace, Haley is one of those preachy “family values” conservatives who seem to think the rules apply to everyone but themselves. In a May TV ad, Sarah Palin is seen describing Haley as “a strong pro-family, pro-life…conservative reformer.” A campaign flyer announces that Haley “supports traditional, family values,” and in her latest TV spot, produced after the sex scandal broke, Haley introduces her silent and slightly dorky looking husband, the possibly cuckolded Michael, in what might be termed a Spitzer reversal. Watching the ad made me cringe; it’s uncomfortable to see Michael standing there next to Nikki, just as it was uncomfortable to see Silda standing by Eliot. “What are they thinking?” you wonder. “Why aren’t they mad as hell?”

Given that the allegations are likely false, and South Carolina has the political machine that would make Huey P. Long sick, how can feminists do this? They aren’t taking the high road or waiting for evidence. They’re sitting with baited breath waiting for clear proof to come out against Haley. They’re dying to bring her down.

This is wrong, wrong, wrong. This is exactly the same hypocrisy that feminists demonstrated with the womanizing Bill Clinton. This is one of the few times that feminists could have transcended party lines and fought for a true pro-woman cause. Every feminist blog, magazine, spokesperson and pundit should denounce the sexist operation going on in South Carolina. This type of campaigning should not be allowed to exist.

By primly sitting back, feminists are silently endorsing this sleazy behavior.

Is it too much for feminists to take a few minutes each day and read right-wing blogs? If they only read Red State, they would have seen the post penned by Lori Ziganto, a South Carolina voter, on the state’s corruption. That was the focus of the Haley campaign. Nikki Haley took on establishment corruption. Shouldn’t all women respect that regardless of political affiliation?

Hanna Rosin at Double X likens Haley to Riot Grrl, an early third-wave feminist movement. That’s a silly comparison because Haley has campaigned on her record for demanding accountability and transparency in a state that nearly operates under a cloak of darkness. Riot Grrl was a small under-the-radar movement that gave us the conflicting and ambiguous third-wave feminist definition of “as long as you’re empowered to make choices, you’re a feminist.” But through their actions over the past year, that definition has proven hollow.

I wish the Dana Goldstein, the sleazeball masquerading as an editor at The Daily Beast, and Hanna Rosin, sadly one of the more reasonable writers at Double X, would wake up and see how futile this quote is:

Weathering a scandal of this magnitude would help conservatives see modern women as we really are: complex, sexually liberated, and free to make our own decisions about what we do with our bodies.

No Dana and Hanna. Perhaps feminists should understand how silly and marginalized your movement is now? Modern women are far more complex and view politics through a wider lens than just abortion. That’s why your movement is decreasing in size. That’s why fewer and fewer women identify as feminists. That’s why pro-life PACS are out-fundraising the old dinosaurs like EMILY’s List and NOW. That’s why more and more Americans are identifying as pro-life. And that’s why mostly conservative women won primaries across America tonight.

Feminists, you had one last redeeming chance to prove that your movement was legitimate. I’d say you failed…miserably.

I’ve been silent on this issue because I’m still undecided. It’s a 8-way race. By all accounts, there are only three or four top contenders, but this is bloody primary. If you like dirty politics, TN-03 is the race to follow.

District three encompasses a slice of East Tennessee, and the Democrats can barely get people to turn out for a pancake breakfast. The winner of the Republican primary will likely win the general. This makes the August 1 primary even more tense.

And tense may be the best word to describe the race.

Swirling rumors, national TV appearances, fights over endorsements, presidential contender visits, and mud-slinging press releases. Folks, this is the stuff of political satire. Christopher Buckley couldn’t spin a better tale.

Today on Twitter, I joked with Joe Lance and Dan Lehr that I should write a novel based on the race or at least the screenplay for a telenovela. It’s that juicy.

Depending on whom I talk to, a different person is in the lead. I’ve talked to people following the race in DC and people back in Chattanooga.

Robin Smith appears to be running a smart campaign. A little heavy on the attack releases, but not out of line for a tight race. I confess to loving the “Send Mrs. Smith to Washington” bumper stickers.

Were this election cycle normal, I believe she would be the clear front-runner. After all, she’s a former TNGOP chair, a conservative woman and has high name ID. Her campaign has done all the right things and gotten prominent endorsements from organizations that I respect.

But this is not a normal campaign year.

Van Irion captures the essence of a tea party candidate. I also like him. He capitalized brilliantly on his class-action lawsuit to sue Obamacare, and he has the favor of Ron Paul supporters. As I’ve said before, never underestimate Paul fans.

He leans a little too libertarian for me on several issues (i.e. Fair Tax), but I believe that either he or Smith would do a great job of representing the conservative values in district three.

Then there’s Chuck Fleischmann.

Granted, I’m a little bias against self-funding candidates. As a grassroots person, I naturally side with the underdog. I dislike it when candidates can flood the airwaves with TV commercials and essentially buy a seat in Congress (ahem, Corker). Since most people are apathetic until close to election day, they vote for the wealthy candidate since he or she is the only recognizable name on the ballot. This campaign trick has turned the Senate into a millionaires’ club.

I think that strategy captures everything that is wrong with American elections. Also applauding Bob Corker is one way to ensure that I won’t vote for you.

I’m also wary of any candidate who spends money on a TV ad in a congressional primary race in 2010, especially for a smaller district like TN-03 (small by comparison to many other districts in America). Again, I work in online politics, but the ROI on TV ads is just not worth it. I’ll be disappointed if the other candidates follow suit.

Interestingly, none of the three prominent candidates have used online ads or ad words. Coming off the heels of the Rick Perry victory in Texas, I find that extremely surprising. Perry only engaged in digital media and didn’t use traditional advertising. It’s troublesome that in 2010 they haven’t engaged online as thoroughly as they should.

It is interesting that camp Fleischmann accuses Smith of having the support of “D.C. backers.” A former candidate for RNC chair is the campaign manager. Do you get anymore insider? Hello! Pot meet kettle. Also, would Huckabee have any clue who Chuck Fleischmann was without the Saltsman connection? That alone makes the endorsement ring false and come across as a personal favor.

However fishy that endorsement appears, I would warn Smith’s campaign from making too big of a deal out of it. They’re quick to flood inboxes with statements on endorsements. It comes across as whiny that she lost Huckabee when Smith has gotten numerous other ones.

Then there are questions about fundraising, but I haven’t had time to delve into FEC reports, so I can’t comment.

However, all of those issues are insider politics. The average voter is not following campaign drama.

Given the bloodbath between Smith and Fleischmann (read Chattanoogan’s opinion section for a taste), voters may be turned off by all of the negativity. Also, with the high animosity towards incumbents and “establishment” candidates, voters may turn out support for Irion. Never come between a ballot box and a Ron Paul supporter.

A primary like this will come down to who has the best get out the vote operation. Primaries typically have low voter turnout, and this race is dominated by one political party, giving independents very little reason to cast a ballot. Since I’m not on the ground, and I’m far from being a campaign insider for any of the candidates, I can’t predict the answer.

Cross-posted at Cosmopolitan Conservative