And if she really is, or has the potential to become the worst thing that’s ever happened to you, then you have had an enviable life indeed.
Think about Republican Vice Presidents in the recent past. Cheney, Quayle, Agnew. I’d take my chances with Palin over any one of them, any day.
I’m not going to argue that she has the right stuff today to be President. I don’t believe she does. That’s never been our criteria for evaluating a VP candidate before. Indeed, until this woman was nominated, we’ve never bothered to evaluate the VP candidate quite so exhaustively. (This was my perception. I tried to do some research to back it up. The only person who came close to having been studied so microscopically was Thomas Eagleton, who withdrew after concerns were raised about his history of depression and electroconvulsive therapy — shock treatments. At the time of that scandal, I recall feeling sorry for him. As I read about him this week, I didn’t feel quite as sorry; he had withheld information about his history of suicidality and the very powerful anti-psychotic meds he was taking, from McGovern, the candidate who chose him. Turns out it was as much or more an issue of honesty as of mental fitness. That said, I stand by my perception that no one has been scrutinized like Palin.) Could it be that there’s an element of sexism there? Whether you are left or right, don’t be blind to what’s happened to this woman. No man in her position has ever been the subject of this kind of scrutiny.
Some say it’s more important to evaluate the VP in this case, because McCain is older and has had skin cancer. This argument carries no weight with me. As someone who’s spent my mid-forties being sick as hell, and at times having no expectation of reaching my 50s, and wishing I had the energy and wherewithal of some of my 70something friends and relatives, the age thing means nothing to me. It is not McCain’s age or health that has prompted what I will write about here. There’s something uglier going on.
When I first heard that she was nominated, I didn’t recognize the name at all. I just reminded Jif (because I like to call attention to the occasions when I’m right), that I had been saying all along that McCain would have to choose a woman to have a snowball’s chance in the election. People do vote based on race and gender. Not all people, but enough to make a difference in the outcome. If you don’t believe that, take it up with Bill Clinton or Barack Obama, two men whom I find exceedingly intelligent, both of whom have expressed this belief within the past two weeks. I, for one, would be thrilled if we Americans were issue voters, especially if we were big-picture (as opposed to single issue) voters. But we’re not. So, on that point, McCain arguably chose rather well. He chose someone who will appeal to many of the people for whom he held no appeal at all, or not quite enough.
When I did start hearing more about Palin, I remembered who she was. I remembered reading about her when her son was born. I believe the article was about older mothers giving birth, and of course, the risks of chromosomal anomalies were mentioned. And the fact that the Alaska governor and her husband knew that baby Trig would have Down Syndrome, and chose to keep him. And after McCain chose her, when I put that in context, I thought, “This will be interesting. The Republican base has been saying they’re pro-life forever, but there was never an opportunity for them to put their money (their time, their energy, their love) where there mouths are. It’s been middle-aged and old white men before, who couldn’t have had an abortion or a disabled child. And frankly, if push came to shove, and biology permitted, I’ll bet a lot of those men would have had abortions in that situation. I don’t know of any stories, but it would not surprise me to learn that some anti-abortion men have fathered some children who were aborted for whatever reason. So, yea, it’s easy to talk a good game when it comes to saying you’d keep a developmentally challenged child. Here, for the first time, is someone who clearly backed up what she claimed to believe.” Those are the thoughts I had, when I remembered where I’d heard her name before. And I admire someone who practices, at personal sacrifice, what they preach. And I’m a little suspicious of anyone who preaches loud and long about an issue which can never directly affect them anyway.
Then, when the media and internet vultures, and various friends and colleagues started ripping Palin apart, I was offended, as I am when I witness any act of human-on-human incivility, and my “defend the oppressed” buttons were pushed.
Example: A woman in my life, who can go on for days about what a feminist she is, and what a champion for woman’s achievement she is, came into my presence right after Palin’s selection was announced, and made an announcement of her own: “Sarah Palin is such a bitch.” I had just barely heard Palin’s name, hadn’t formed any opinion at all about her. What did she know about Palin that I didn’t? Nothing, it turns out. And that offends me. Agree or disagree with her political platform, this is a woman who has accomplished quite a lot in her life. In a state that, I have learned in recent weeks, is arguably the most unwelcoming toward and disrespectful of women (based on incidence of violent crime against women). Are “feminists” going back to the days when a woman who doesn’t take shit from powerful men is, by definition, “a bitch?” Where is the element of feminism that applauds an ambitious, achieving woman? Where is the element of feminism that says a woman is free to think as she chooses, even if I disagree? I’ve been profoundly disappointed in many women’s responses to this choice. If you don’t want her in office, the solution to that dilemma is to vote against her. Demeaning her and yourself by calling her names is not an appropriate solution.
::tangent::And it’s not just women, being vulgarly reactionary. Yesterday a friend recounted a conversation with a male colleague who agreed with her that Palin is ignorant and unfit to be Vice President, but added that he still may vote for her, because he’d rather look at her than Biden. And he added, “I’d fuck her.” I haven’t heard that “reasoning” as a consideration in evaluating a male candidate.::end tangent::
Example: I’ve seen Palin damned to hell and raked over the coals for her personal religious beliefs. Including beliefs about abortion and creationism. From everything that I have read (and I really am one who investigates as much as I can, I don’t just eat from one media spoon), these really are personal beliefs. I have not been able to find any incidence of her attempting to impose these beliefs on her city or state government. We know that these are her beliefs because someone asked her about them, both in old debates and in recent interviews. And every time I’ve seen her answer, she also says that she respects other people’s rights to their personal beliefs. So where is the problem? She’s not allowed to have beliefs that differ from yours? She doesn’t feel that way about you. And to my knowledge, isn’t calling you names because you disagree with her. She seems to have a firm grasp on the notion that she can hold her beliefs and not have to impose them on you. Why isn’t she extended the same courtesy? Again, I am perplexed by the intense reaction to her. We don’t skewer men who hold these beliefs. They’re all around us; a bunch of them get elected every couple of years.
Example: Her children. Truth be told, this is what pissed me off to the point of writing something that will no doubt lose me a lot of “friends.” The first horrifying thing I read was the essay “calling her out” in The Daily Kos. The one that explicitly called Palin a liar, and exposed the ugly “truth” that her teen daughter, Bristol, was in fact Trig’s mother. The appearance of that article is what forced Palin to “formally” announce Bristol’s pregnancy, in order to refute the internet wildfire of erroneous information. The family had not been keeping the pregnancy a secret. Everyone who knew them knew. It just might not have been the whole world’s business at that very moment. Except then it had to be. Funny thing; that was one of the most heinous uses of media I’d ever seen, and I checked back for days and never did see any sign of an apology or a retraction. What I did see, though, was, “See?! We knew there was something bad here! Yippee!” And that made me want to puke. Rejoicing over a teenager’s unplanned pregnancy, because it makes her mother look bad (or so you believe) and it furthers your political agenda. Am I the only Democrat who finds this abhorrent? Even if I am — I do. Absolutely abhorrent.
And a related point: Get over yourselves already with the, “That’s what abstinence-only education gets you!” You cannot be serious. You think there aren’t pregnant teens whose parents believe in comprehensive sex education? You think there are no members of Planned Parenthood who’ve had pregnant teens in their families? If that weren’t such a tragic display of ignorance, it would make me laugh.
There may not be a lot of absolutes in this election; maybe there aren’t many absolutes in life at all, but here’s one: Teen pregnancy does not discriminate. (And this might be an absolute, too: karma is a bitch; as a mother, you will NEVER see me taking joy in the misfortune of another mother and her child.)
Example: Then there’s the hunting. I don’t hunt. I don’t own a gun. I took my kid to the Million Mom March. But I do recognize that there are perfectly legitimate lifestyles other than my own. Lifestyles that include hunting and eating wild animals. Again, it’s not my thing. But the way some people write about this aspect of Palin’s life, you’d think she were a cross between Michael Vick and Jeffrey Dahmer. Aren’t Democrats the ones who have the monopoly on acceptance of others’ lifestyles? Once again, I don’t get it. I can’t say I understand the hunting laws in Alaska; some of them don’t seem right to me. But then, I don’t rely on caribou or moose for my protein in the winter, and certainly have never had to compete with wolves for my family’s dinner. The laws are apparently consistent with regional, cultural values. And Palin’s behavior is well within the law.
Example: Speaking of behavior within the law, many people like to write about “Troopergate.” Because (for those who’ve forgotten) this is the country where one is innocent until proven guilty, I don’t see how this is presently an issue at all. The “victim” is a man who was removed from one job (where, according to his superiors, he performed poorly) and offered another job, which he refused. The allegations suggest that maybe Palin wanted him to fire her former brother-in-law (that would be the one who tasered his own 10-year-old son and made death threats against Palin and her family). But the guy wasn’t fired. I don’t know, but as a family counselor on the outside looking in, it seems to me that Palin has bent over backwards to minimize the drama in an effort to spare her sister and her sister’s children the humiliation of fully airing the extended family’s dirty laundry. And I have strong feelings about judging people based on allegations that are made. False allegations have been made against me, in my work. Not one scintilla of truth. They’ve been made against my pastor, who was taken all the way into a court of law over the matter. Again, not the tiniest grain of truth in the charges. They were made against my husband’s family business, and picked up by the local media. And like the other examples, those were absolutely false, and nearly ruined a good man’s name and life’s work. Again, some common sense is in order. The fact that there are “allegations” made sometimes simply means that you’re in the public eye and you’ve pissed someone off.
Example: Palin went to X number of different colleges, and it took her X number of years to get a bachelor’s degree! That must mean she’s stupid. I suppose it could mean that; but here’s another thing that sometimes means. I went to three different colleges and it took me 7 years to get a bachelor’s degree. That’s because I paid for every dime of my education myself. I worked full-time plus overtime during most of my pursuit of my first degree. It takes a little longer, and life may take us in different directions during the process, than when the parents are footing the bill. It didn’t surprise me to hear Palin’s father say that all his children knew they would have to make their own way through college.
I have some sort of rebuttal for most of the personal attacks that have been made against Palin. As you might have gathered, I don’t like personal attacks made on people. I’ve defended, where possible, the same kinds of attacks on McCain and on Obama. There’s no place for this kind of crap in the political discourse of a civilized, well-intentioned people. I don’t understand the joy that people are taking in this. A woman I know, love, enjoy, recently told me about the movement to make donations to Planned Parenthood in Sarah Palin’s name. And this friend of mine had done that. I’d never do that. It’s a Golden Rule thing. (Remember that outdated concept?) I wouldn’t want someone making a donation in my name to an organization that I find objectionable. So I wouldn’t do that to someone else. I have no problem with anyone donating what they want, where they want. But I do find it offensive when you take a charitable donation and turn it into an act of hostility. How is it that you don’t see that is not the product of healthy thought processes?
Then there were those attacks that are almost too stupid to warrant rebuttal. Sarah Palin banned library books! Oh, wait, a lot of the books on that list hadn’t even been written when she was supposed to have banned them. And even though that one was debunked almost immediately, supposedly intelligent, well-educated, well-meaning bloggers continued to include it in their anti-Palin diatribes. Then there was that adorable (I thought) video of Palin’s little girl, Piper, holding her baby brother and smoothing his unruly hairdo by licking her hand and wiping his head. I saw a little girl whose family had taught her kindness, gentleness, love, and resourcefulness. Gross resourcefulness, yes, but still. I saw a little girl who had probably seen her very busy, yet attentive Mom, smooth someone’s hair with a bit of spit. Others, however, saw: OMG! That is so unhygienic! Palin is such a low-class redneck, not teaching her children about proper grooming and personal hygiene! Oh, come on. Just this past weekend, I read how “crooked” she is — as mayor, she accepted a spa treatment, and a bouquet of roses . . . and there is evidence of such unethical behavior, in the undeniable form of *GASP* handwritten thank you notes! Have we really gone that far ’round the bend?
The more of this kind of bullshit I’ve seen, the more I’ve thought, “Wow. She’s really threatening to some people. And what’s apparently worse, for Democrats, is that they can’t find anything substantive against her. So it’s all about her lifestyle, her faith . . . ” To me, the frenzy over her personal life and family seems to indicate that there’s not enough to critique about her public service performance.
What is it about this woman that pushes your buttons so? Why do we have such a problem with a pretty, smart, successful, ambitious, popular woman who has an interesting career and a family? If you are provoked by Palin’s candidacy (or her very existence) into behaving in the ways I’ve described here . . . you have work to do. And it’s not political work.
This is not a post about supporting Sarah Palin for Vice President. As I’ve suggested, I don’t think she’s ready to be President. But there are ways to say that without attacking her as a human being. Here’s an example of someone who disagrees with her candidacy based on at least somewhat objective (although there are some errors in timing and some spin on interpretation) criteria. That was tremendously refreshing to me.
I deliberately chose to publish this just before Palin’s first national debate. I have no hope nor expectation of how she will perform. Well, that’s not entirely true. I hope she does well. Anyone watching my Twitter during last week’s debate will see that I hoped both candidates did well there. I said I prayed that they both brought their best selves, their truest selves. I don’t take pleasure in seeing someone publicly humiliated. Maybe that’s just me. So, yea, I hope the same thing for both Palin and Biden. Voters will be better served if both of them can fully articulate their true personalities, their true beliefs and positions. So will you be watching the debate hoping you get a glimpse of both candidates’ real strengths, weaknesses and intentions? Or will you be watching hoping that someone fails, and not caring what they have to say? Sadly, I know the answer for most. And once again, I’m out here on the island of misfit voters, because I’d rather really understand what both candidates mean to communicate, than to have a “gotcha!” moment, a moment to laugh at later on YouTube.
Palin might make an impressive showing in the debate. Or she might fall flat on her face. And either way, she won’t deserve the kind of treatment I’ve described here.
As I proofread this, the TV was on behind me, and former Democratic VP candidate, former Congresswoman from New York, Geraldine Ferraro had this to say regarding Palin in tomorrow night’s debate, “I want her to do well, because it’s important for girls to see that a woman can stand toe to toe . . . ” Ferraro certainly doesn’t support, isn’t going to vote for Palin. But she gets that this is a first; this is an historic occasion. It may not be ideal; in fact, it certainly isn’t ideal. But women, this is the occasion we have. If we don’t want to vote for her, we can call her a stupid bitch, or we can acknowledge the achievements she’s made and celebrate the fact that she has been able to make them, express our disagreement with her policies and vote accordingly. We’ve only been allowed to vote for 88 years! Our kids are watching how we treat one another.
Awesome, and thank you. All I have to say about this post.
Beautifully done, Susie.
(*wishes she had a Hello Kitty helmet…*)
i see what you are saying, but i disagree about the sexism… i think the reason she is so closely scrutinized is because:
1) no one knew her prior to her nomination. unlike a lot (i would say ‘most’ but would have to research) of vp candidates, she was not chosen from the pool of people who vied for her party’s nomination, making her a relative newcomer, and therefore inherently more interesting.
2) she has been held away from the press. like a lot of other things that are made “off-limits”, people become naturally more curious about them.
3) she DID inject so much charisma and vitality into her ticket that it would be impossible to expect the american people and media NOT to be in a frenzy.
4) after her interview w/ charlie gibson, regardless of how you feel about her or her performance, the things we had perceived or hypothesized up until that point got tossed topsy-turvy, making the desire to see and/or speak to her even more powerful.
so i would have to say that, with the exception of a few commentators/pundits, she has not been, imho, subject to overt sexism. and if she ever IS subject to overt sexism, i would have to do what so many before me have done, and use her own words against her… as she said in regards to hillary, “stop whining!” furthermore, there has been considerable upheaval anytime obama has been seen as playing “the race card” so why is the standard for “the sex card” so different? personally, i am sick of hearing any and all the candidates complain; they are competing for the hardest job in the world, and they need to be laid bare so that we can see how they handle pressure and what kind of people they truly are. if sarah can’t handle the pressure here in america, how dare she assure us that she can handle the pressure on the foreign stage? as archaic as our sex-relations might be in this country, they are FAR more developed then a lot of the rest of the world, and she will be subject to a lot more aggressive attacks on the world stage. what i thought was the most sexist, in fact, is the way the pakistani president (prime minister?) treated her. he is a self-proclaimed womanizer who has said many times that he can “seduce any woman in two minutes” and he treated her, not w/ the respect a foreign dignitary deserves, but as a pretty girl sent there for his personal pleasure. i was definitely offended for her when i saw the way he acted, but again, her reaction is what disappointed me: instead of acting MORE formally (NOT rudely) in order to set the tone for his behavior, she simpered and giggled @ his flattery. i assume you won’t like that assessment, but it is my opinion of what i witnessed, and you are free to disagree.
oh and PS: the reason why her lifestyle and faith are so important to us dems (and why it should be important to you, too) is b/c as a leader on the national level, those “personal choices” are often made into “national policy”. so yes, we have a responsibility to examine her belief system in order to make an educated decision on what kind of VP she would be, in the same way that all of the other candidates are examined and measured. please try to remember that although the scrutiny on her is certainly above average, EVERY candidate in EVERY race is held responsible for choices they make in their personal lives. it gives all of us the opportunity to see what we agree with and what we dislike, in order to decide who we feel would make the best people for the job. it’s that simple.
even tho i wrote a book, LOL, i would like to conclude by saying “thanks” for the well-written entry about how you feel and why… it lead me to examine the same things, and although it in no way changes who i plan to vote for, it did force me to assess how i feel and why, so thank you again. i appreciate your unbiased approach to researching what you hear on the news; it’s refreshing.
mrB, gee, thanks. (I’m not going to send you any Red Hots, if that’s what you’re after.)
htgt, you warm my misfit voter heart. Truly, you do.
kayce, welcome. I think you make some excellent points about why Palin is such an object of curiosity. As for the whining, I haven’t heard her doing that. Not to say that she hasn’t; I’m just not aware of it. I would guess that she’s accustomed to some of this. So, if there’s whining here, it’s all mine.
Like you, I would be very concerned if a candidate’s personal beliefs on important topics with which I disagreed, are at risk of being made into policy. I think the best of our elected officials can tell the difference between their beliefs (e.g., Biden on abortion), and the beliefs of the majority of the governed. I did not find, even among Palin’s detractors in Alaska, people claiming she’d tried to introduce her personal beliefs into law. It is possible, and I believe, absolutely necessary, for public servants to be able to distinguish the two. I hear the fear that people have that she can’t do that; but the evidence isn’t there.
I do think we have a double standard about the “personal life/job fitness” thing. Bill Clinton’s personal life was his personal life and none of our business; Sarah Palin’s personal life tells us something about her fitness for the job. Can we have it both ways?
Thanks for your comments. I welcome respectful disagreement, new ideas, whatnot. 🙂
Wow, Susie. Not only was that well-written, but I see a lot of truth in there. I disliked Palin before I even bothered to find out anything about her. She is a Republican and believes in many things that I do not believe in, therefore I had no use for her. When rumors and innuendos started to fly, it was very easy to buy into them and jump on the bandwagon. Thank you for making me think about Sarah Palin the person… Sarah Palin the woman – instead of just Sarah Palin the Republican.
Hey Susie. I’m sure you must know how much I love this post, I want to kiss you once again for expressing my feelings so eloquently. I think Kayce’s points about why she has stirred up such curiosity and furor are valid, but I think you underemphasized the real reason…she poses a threat. A threat to the die-hard Obama supporters who believed his election was secured, even destined, before Palin was selected. Underneath so many of the vile attacks I hear a spirit of “It’s just not fair!” that the GOP could get excited again and Obama will have to work a little harder. Palin has ignited a party that was largely apathetic if not even disappointed in McCain as the nominee.
Even if I didn’t agree with her policies, I relate to her as a working mother with a new baby, juggling a high powered position while trying to ensure her kids have a mom AND a dad. I’ve done that juggle myself for the past four years and it’s really really hard, and the emotions that go with it are more complex than most people imagine. I lie awake at night feeling like I’m not doing enough for my company (which I’m part-owner of) and I’m not doing enough for my kids. My poor husband and mostly my own appearance are usually what get the least attention. For Sarah to come across like she does speaks volumes to me. I fully understand why she’s been held back from the media for a bit…not because she can’t speak but because she needs to learn the ins and outs of John McCain’s LONG history in politics. Her job is really to support him more than run for herself.
People who really cared about Republican politics knew she was a potential VP LONG before she was selected, so I don’t buy that she was more unknown that any other VPs selections. Most people just don’t follow politics that closely until we’re right up against a Presidential election.
One other thing…if people don’t see the sexism going on here, from not only the media but the public, then they are blind. But you won’t hear her whining about it, just us. What has made me the most angry, of all the attacks, are the supposed feminists who have questioned not her ability as a VP, but her ability as a mother. That offends me to the core.
kayce: “EVERY candidate in EVERY race is held responsible for choices they make in their personal lives”
Susie: “I do think we have a double standard about the ‘personal life/job fitness’ thing.”
I agree with kayce, and Susie when you say “we” do you mean Democrats? When I think of Bill Clinton I think of the vehement reaction of Republicans who thought that his personal life was a crime against the state. I think this whole down and dirty thing among various Democratic sympathizers is that they have collectively decided to abandon the high horse and fight like Republicans.
However, it’s weird that I even have an opinion, because I am totally an outsider and I should be paying attention to my own national election.
I too am from the island of misfit voters. We need Ukon Corneilius to come and help us.
And as always your posts make me want to be more like you in the compassion and rational thoughts you have for/torwards other people.
I am undecided. There are things I like about all four canidates and things I dislike. I am watching the debates hoping that someone says something that will be a “gotcha” moment for me. Gotcha in the fact that they just got my vote. At this point I actually feel that I would be happy with whoever wins and if who I voted for wins I would be pleasntly surprised. I also believe that after there is a new Pres they need the support and not the hatred and vitriol that comes from the losers party. I am ready to support the winner and try to get past their flaws and look at their qualities. Kind of how I do it with my loved ones.
ps. I’d fuck Biden.
charlotte, thank you for getting precisely what I’m trying to say. It’s the gleeful bandwagon-jumping that has disappointed me so. And of course you’re welcome. Yea, she might be a woman with whom you disagree about nearly everything. Still a woman, a person. I believe we are all better served if we start with the premise that we’re all more alike — same basic hopes and fears — than different.
mainline mom, Palin was a big surprise to me, but as you say, many people knew of her, my husband (surprisingly) included. I have to agree, her speech at the convention was a breath of fresh air in a party that hadn’t seen a lot of fresh air in a while. I didn’t even address the mother stuff. But I will say, I remember how I was when my ONE child was a few months old. It was a good day if I showered. I certainly wasn’t running 7 miles a day and for public office, being watched 24/7. My hat’s off to a woman who can do that, and, at least so far, still smile and not bite anyone’s head off. I think there are many admirable things about her.
karen, yes, by “we” I mean Democrats. It was vocal Democrats who came to Clinton’s defense with the notion that one’s personal/family behavior was not relevant in a discussion of fitness for elected office. It seems to me it’s the same folk who are now saying something different. So, the double standard might be gender, or it might be political party. But it does seem to me that it’s there.
And you’re welcome to opine on our political process. Ours is so much more colorful right now 😉
william, Chupon Beneelius? I know him. I endorse your comment. There are some serious flaws on both sides (imagine that, with human beings running); but either way, I don’t think we’re going to be seriously screwed this time. As for Biden, I won’t go as far as you, but I do think he’s cute. In an old, senatorial kind of way.
Agreed. And hugs to you.
http://gawker.com/5057512/sarah-palins-got-talent
Well, if we’re gonna elect on the basis of fuckability, then McCain could’ve won all on his lonesome.
Um… what I’ve got to say about politics I’ve already said. Can’t it just be over already? I’m weary. I vote no. No on everything except wine.
Unless the wine can convince me otherwise.
I would much rather hear people say how they truly feel about an issue or a candidate and why they feel that way than hear them making assumptions and name calling. When people do that, I don’t think they understand how much a disservice to themselves and to the public discourse.
I’ve definitely heard name calling on both fronts. In my experience in real life, the Republicans have been most venomous. But on TV it is the opposite. Unfortunate that I learn some of the most interesting things (which I then research) on Bill Maher and The Daily Show. Because I really fucking hate the elitist attitudes. When people say everyone else is stupid, it pisses me off.
Though I will say, the way McCain has changed so much in recent weeks, I honestly feel that he is doing the same thing (thinking the voters are stupid) but not being honest about it.
I believe in Sarah Palin’s right to fair treatment for sure.
It’s interesting, some of the things you say are making me think long and hard about the difference between an opinion about a candidate’s statements/behavior and what consitutes a personal attack. For example I do take into account the things the candidates do and say outside of television interviews – some of those things tell me the most about where that person is coming from.
I mean, there is a big difference between saying, “I don’t think it is right to shoot wolves from an airplane.” and saying “Sarah Palin likes to kill defenseless animals for the fun of it.”
I have no use for observations about the romantic virtues of candidates.
Take a good look at her qualifications in relationship to the other Vice Presidents in US history.
Also take a look at the people who find her alarming, and the people who hate Hillary Clinton. The small area of overlap between those two sets, you might ascribe to sexism. But love her or hate her, Hillary is objectively far more experienced and can give solid answers to difficult questions.
Why not Condi Rice? I disagree with almost everything she says, but she can give coherent reasons without resorting to “let this pipeline be God’s will”. She has a long and distinguished track record. There’s no doubt in my mind a dozen other Republican women could be standing where Palin is now, and would serve both the party and country better.
So far 9 of 46 VP’s have had to step up to the top job.
umutha, hugs backatcha.
mrB, flautism.
bucky, crickets
shari, it’s almost over. Except that it’s not really. You sure you don’t wanna run for something?
sheryl, I can honestly say, I haven’t heard any of this type of commentary from Republicans. And that may have everything to do with the fact that I’m not even sure I know any, in my daily life now. Your last sentence is one specific instance that I did try to learn more about. Someone did say to me, something very close to “she shoots wolves from a plane for fun.” And that sounds horrible. But then I read what it’s about; there is some disagreement about the practice, certainly, but it is legal and sometimes encouraged by the government, to protect both the food source of the people, and the portion of the economy that benefits from sport hunting. I guess if the wolves don’t get the big game, there’s more there for the people on hunting trips. So, yea, it’s easy for me to sit on the East Coast and say that’s horrible; but I must defer to the law-making of the people most directly affected by the practice. It’s OK with them. All that to say, there is a lot of knee-jerk reaction to so many things about her.
decrepitoldfool, the link you provide is the same one I provided in the post. As for Condi Rice, I believe she made clear from early on that she wouldn’t be interested; and she’s much too closely associated with the Bush administration to have done McCain any good. In some ways, I understand McCain’s choice; in most ways, however, like you, I don’t see why he picked someone with such vulnerabilities in such vital areas. And I still think she’s been treated very shabbily.
M’s step father who is a dyed in the wool Republican (who hated Clinton and who uses the N word at family functions – which we argue about passionately!) hunts legally and daily during hunting season in various states including NY, Montana, Idaho *and* Alaska. He stocks his freezer with deer, moose, geese, turkey, rabbit, even squirrel. (Creeps me out). He is a retired auto worker and a 20 year card carrying member of the NRA. He says the people riding in planes shooting at wolves are not the same people who rely primarily on wolf prey to survive. He does not respect that practice. So there’s a perspective from a lifelong Republican NRA card-carrying autoworkers union member.
So I agree with you on this. Whether something is legal vs whether it feeds tourism or the economy vs whether a person in that culture outside of it thinks it is a fair practice, these are relative. But I believe it’s ok to have an opinion.
I don’t think she’s been treated fairly. Neither has Obama, McCain, Biden. However, I think some things outside the strictly political world *are* fair for balanced discussion and do not constitute personal attacks.
For example, I’ll say something here that will probably make me very unpopular. I don’t think it is possible to be a good parent to small children AND be president, vice president, governor, senator, etc. I think they are sacrificing their families for civic service. So I am viewing both Obama and Palin with that in mind.
she, we should probably both be sleeping. M’s Dad’s perspective doesn’t surprise me. That does sound like a questionable practice. I have no idea whether there’s an active movement in Alaska to change the regulations or what. Who knows, maybe all this talk about Palin and hunting will prompt Alaskans to take another look at such practices.
You are a brave and crazy woman to take on the whole mom thing. Honestly, I know I could not be a good mom, especially to that many kids, one with special needs, one expecting a baby, and do the job that Palin is seeking, or even the job that she already does. I guess it’s a matter of knowing one’s own limitations. No doubt, she is capable of more than I. It’s a tough topic. Certainly lots of moms are doing it, i.e., raising their kids and doing very stressful, very challenging work. And even though you view both Palin and Obama with that in mind, the reality is most people are only viewing the mama with that in mind. The daddies get a pass on that. Right or wrong, I think that is our current reality.
I agree with you that some things in “private” life are relevant to whether someone is fit for public service. And I will join you in getting in trouble here: I thought the discussion of Obama’s choice of a long-term “spiritual advisor” (his words) was a relevant one; I think McCain’s verbally abusing his wife (a number of ear/eye witnesses, and McCain has not directly refuted it, as far as I can tell) is relevant to the discussion. I think we’ve gone beyond that level of relevance with Palin, in many instances, though.
I read this whole post on my phone today, shortly after you tweeted about it. Right now I’m too tired to go back and read the whole thing again, and then try to come up with a coherent comment (Lord knows I have a difficult enough time with that when I’m NOT tired!).
But I did want to let you know I was here, and that you can put the HK helmet away. Thank you for being the voice of reason in the midst of all this crazy election talk.
That was spot on Susie! And as an Alaskan it gets incredibly frustrating to hear the negative attacks day in and day out that insinuate we are so backwoods that we’re all inbred and religious zealots. I also really really appreciate your levity. (my fav word lately thanks to mrtl)
I’m still unsure who I am voting for, because I have believed in her as our governor and will vote for her again if given the chance, as governor. But that doesn’t mean that I’m going to vote GOP this time…we’ll see. What does matter to me is that they quit sensationalizing all of this. She’s just another candidate. She gets more press time than McCain! and that is infuriating to me. I want to hear his policies (and Obamas).
I could rant forever. I just really wanted to thank you for putting your neck out there and saying what you felt. I haven’t been brave enough to do it in my own circles. Too many angry liberals in my world right now.
I have many, many thoughts after reading this, and reading the comments as well. (Your posts seem to be inspiring novella comments these days!)
For me, the age issue is definitely a factor. It’s true that anyone can cross off at any time, but it is more likely to happen to a 72 year old cancer survivor. For that reason, I’d look much more closely than I otherwise would at ANYONE McCain chose for his running mate. And while she was known to be a candidate for VP for awhile before her selection, to average Americans, she really IS virtually unknown.
It seems to me that there is definitely sexism at work here, but not necessarily directly against Palin. I think that there is still a (maybe largely subconscious, but…) perception that women can do anything a man can do, but they had better look good doing it. Especially in the public eye.
I wonder if Palin’s attractiveness, her relative inexperience (compared to many other Republican women that could have been chosen) and her laid back “I’m just like you!” demeanor make her less threatening to those in politics who are staunchly in the good ol’ boys corner.
I don’t mean to minimize her experience. I have a great deal of respect for her as a smart, savvy politician, who is juggling a demanding career with motherhood (something I see myself facing in the not too distant future). Brilliant, well-suited politicians can sometimes come from nowhere. But I do have legitimate concerns about her readiness, given the way she was carefully shielded from the press, and her performance in the interviews with Gibson and Couric. I really do want her to do well, although I disagree with her on probably 90% of her politics. But it is important, as you said, for girls to see women in places of power, doing just as well as their male counterpoints. And I’m worried she won’t do very well tomorrow night. I hope she does well, for all of the reasons you mentioned. If she doesn’t, it sends a bad message. I want to see a woman in the highest office who got there by kicking ass and taking names, not one who is there simply because her gender gave her running mate a needed boost in the polls.
But everyone making those deplorable personal attacks should seriously go jump in a lake. No really. Like now.
Biden is hot.
I agree with Ern about the need to consider that she may become president by default. Personally, I find that possibility alarming. I would like to go on record as a TRUE feminist here. I don’t give one toot about a candidate’s race or gender. I couldn’t mean that more. It’s completely irrelevant. I expect her to be just as qualified as any other candidate and she is not. I don’t believe she deserves any ‘extra’ respect or consideration because of her gender. She should not get any ‘breaks’ here at all. None of the candidates should. IMO, she would be in line for the most powerful and important job in the world and I don’t see how someone can be too closely scrutinized for that. And I am also uncomfortable when the White House is occupied by those who do not share my views. I think trying to separate a person’s ‘personal views’ from their office is risky when they have the power to inflict them on the rest of us with appointments to the Supreme Court. You can’t get any more powerful than that. Remember my fiasco with Plan B? I will never forget it and I will vote accordingly. I will never vote for anyone who has, what are in my view, fanatical opinions. I think certain types of people are a menace, and this particular person has come up hard on my radar.
Having said this about Palin, I have noticed a big difference between her current interviews and the debate with the former gov. of Alaska. She was brilliant there because she knew what she was talking about; knew the issues effecting her state. She doesn’t do well in the current arena because she is not suited there. She should stay in AK, where she seems to be a fine gov. I thought she was a ditz before I saw that. Now I don’t think she’s a ditz, but I still think she is not qualified for the White House. Even if she was, I would not vote for her because I disagree with too many of her views.
I personally don’t give daddies a pass on having demanding jobs that affect their relationships with their young families. But I recognize that other people do.
I have no desire to judge Palin for her daughter’s pregnancy. But I feel like I am not supposed to talk about parenting at all. Here’s where I am coming from on this issue: I work 60 to 80 hours a week. Been doing this for about 8 years. Recently I thought I was going to have a baby with M (unplanned) and immediately thought about all the ways I would need to change my life to be a good parent to a child: Changing jobs so I could work part time, changing the type of work I do, moving to a state where we could afford to buy a home with a yard in a safe area.
My sister and her partner have four children ages 6 – 12. My sister is home with the kids (when she’s not driving them to separate schools, soccer practice, karate, art classes, etc). Her wife works less than 40 hours a week. They devote nearly all the time they have to their family and home and it’s still a struggle at times to keep up with the emotional and other demands (read: laundry). I recognize that people in public office have help with household chores and driving kids to their activities which frees up some of their time to do other things, but if work responsibilities take up the majority of that time, I do believe family relationships suffer. I mean sometimes the only time my sister has alone with one of her daughters is while driving back and forth from a particular activity when her 3 sisters are not in the car. They need that time.
So, to me it’s just clear that while they value their families, Obama and Palin have made the choice that civic service is more important than family. I can’t imagine making that same choice myself. I respect the possibility that the decision to sacrifice family relationships could emerge from their commitment to public service and making a difference. But from my perspective, that doesn’t jive with their individual stated values. (I felt that way about JFK and MLK, by the way. You know, when I grew up and studied them in school.)
I agree with you on Obama’s spiritual advisor. I think, at worst, Obama was pandering to get black support in Chicago. At best, he either feels strongly about discrimination in our culture or feels sympathetic to that anger and wants to help channel it into productive change. Obama wasn’t very straightforward in talking about it. I understand the reasons why he didn’t, but again to me the way he handled it doesn’t match with his stated values.
McCain’s inability to control his temper (and when he’s angry, his disrespect of others around him) bothers me tremendously. There are several cases of his verbal abuse of Cindy or others which have been videotaped. He can’t really deny it.
These are not the core issues in determining my vote, just some of the things that I personally consider when I’m trying to understand who a candidate is and where they are coming from.
I will say the biggest issue I have with Palin come from her own statements during her RNC speech and the town meetings where she has claimed repeatedly and emphatically that she said no to the Bridge to Nowhere, strongly implying that she/Alaska didn’t keep the money earmarked for the project. Using US tax payer money is what they imply they were saying No to. But they kept the money. I do not believe she could possibly think she is telling the truth and yet she continues to repeat this. How can that possibly match up with her values?
I could respect her response on this if she said “Well, I said no to the bridge project in the end, but it was too late to give the money back, and we used it for _____.” I hope she addresses this topic at the debate. I want to hear her speak in a straightforward way about it.
I agree with what Lynn said above about the difference between her performance in interviews, speeches, etc as a gov in Alaska vs her performance as a candidate for VP.
I think this article says it best and says it in a way that seems fair, from my perspective:
[Excerpt]
Each of us has areas we care about, and areas we don’t. If we are interested in a topic, we follow its development over the years. And because we have followed its development, we’re able to talk and think about it in a “rounded” way. We can say: Most people think X, but I really think Y. Or: most people used to think P, but now they think Q. Or: the point most people miss is Z. Or: the question I’d really like to hear answered is A.
Here’s the most obvious example in daily life: Sports Talk radio.
Mention a name or theme — Brett Favre, the Patriots under Belichick, Lance Armstrong’s comeback, Venus and Serena — and anyone who cares about sports can have a very sophisticated discussion about the ins and outs and myth and realities and arguments and rebuttals.
People who don’t like sports can’t do that. It’s not so much that they can’t identify the names — they’ve heard of Armstrong — but they’ve never bothered to follow the flow of debate. I like sports — and politics and tech and other topics — so I like joining these debates. On a wide range of other topics — fashion, antique furniture, the world of restaurants and fine dining, or (blush) opera — I have not been interested enough to learn anything I can add to the discussion. So I embarrass myself if I have to express a view.
What Sarah Palin revealed is that she has not been interested enough in world affairs to become minimally conversant with the issues. Many people in our great land might have difficulty defining the “Bush Doctrine” exactly. But not to recognize the name, as obviously was the case for Palin, indicates not a failure of last-minute cramming but a lack of attention to any foreign-policy discussion whatsoever in the last seven years.
http://jamesfallows.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/09/the_palin_interview.php
Ok, I’m done with the giant comments, at least until I can come back here and read again tonight.
Susie, thank you for the forum for this discussion. And I hope I am not hijacking or distracting from the main points of your post.
susie I think we should send YOU some RedHots. And Little Debbie cakes.
A post worthy of celebration, and much pingbacking and tracking…
Palin should sell tupperware! Don’t cha think?
Amen, Susie!!!
In the same manner as you described, I look forward to watching tonight’s debate.
~KC (who hasn’t yet decided which way to vote)
shawkey, I always find you quite coherent. The helmet is really messing with my hair, but I don’t think I can put it away quite yet. I think I need chocolate, because your “voice of reason” sounds to me like “voice of raisins,” which sounds an awful lot like Raisinets.
amber, always happy to see you, but I must say, especially happy to see “an Alaskan” here on this one. I agree that Alaska and Alaskans have been broadbrushed during the efforts to ridicule Palin. From where I sit, Alaska is an increasingly important player in the big picture; population aside, I think it’s no small thing to be the governor there.
I absolutely agree that the feeding frenzy, particularly the absurd personal attacks like the ones mentioned, have taken too many eyes off the real deal. Maybe that was a McCain strategy? I don’t know. Anything is possible.
The last part of your comment is something that troubles me. The chatter from the folks I’m complaining about here is so loud, so long, and so ANGRY that calm people, or even curious people with different views, or even possibly different views, are silenced. I’ve heard this a lot. I enjoy calmly, respectfully wondering aloud about another possible scenario; that is not welcome these days. You’re either all in or you’re the enemy, it seems. This chip-on-the-shoulder environment is not in anyone’s best interest, IMO.
ern, except for the age thing, I agree with all of what you said. (My illness has definitely obliterated any assumptions about life/death/health related to age.His docs now say he is fine; I’m taking that as fact for now.) As a culture, we value beauty. Lots of research showing that attractive people are more believable, seen as more capable, etc. Crazy but true. And I would like to see a woman in the White House for the same reasons you would, not because she was used as a campaign strategy, and also, not because of her husband’s reputation. I eventually came to support Hillary, over the course of the campaign, but I couldn’t help wishing that Bill’s legacy hadn’t contributed to her success. I want to see a competent, ethical woman start “from scratch” and make it there on her own. I continue to hope.
gigglepotamus? I’m thinking it’s Bill. If it’s Lauren, well, it’s good that there’s agreement in your family on this issue. If it’s Bill . . . this is looking a little obsessive now, buddy. You’ve communicated your desires in the strongest possible terms.
Gotta go! I’ll talk back to the rest later. Thanks for stopping in and sharing your thoughts. 🙂
lynn, thanks for your thoughts. You are certainly not alone in your approach to voting. For me, though, if I only voted for people who share my views, it would be so rare that I’d get to vote. Sometimes I have to trust, as I said to Kayce, that elected officials will put personal points of view aside and keep the faith and trust of their constituents. If I didn’t count on that, I really would have to give up voting. I just don’t fit very neatly into any of the platform boxes.
she, on the family stuff, I can’t disagree with you. Choices and sacrifices are made, and we all have to answer to our own consciences and our own families for those choices. One of the families that I admire most is one in which the mom and dad (good friends of ours) moved from a very big, swanky house to a very ordinary, small house, when their child was born. She felt that “I have to work,” meant, “I have to work in order to maintain this lifestyle,” and they chose to trade “down” for a simpler, less expensive lifestyle, than to lose that time with their child. I really admire them for that.
I also agree on the bridge to nowhere thing. And it’s not just with Palin. It’s with all of them (except Biden; I just haven’t heard enough from him to say). More times than I care to count, something that Palin, or Obama, or McCain has said, has caught my attention and made me think, “Really?” Then when I go in search of the “truth,” turns out what they said had a speck of truth in it, but was a long way from being the whole story. That just seems to be the accepted way of politicking. It is terribly frustrating for people who are trying to pin down facts. I know you know this.
The link you provided is right on the money, I think. I do not think some of Palin’s recent answers are necessarily representative of her IQ. I do think they’re representative of her experience, preparedness, interests to date.
You can hijack anything of mine, any time. I always value what you have to say.
operagal, thank you for that. I don’t think I’ve ever been called Little-Debbie-worthy. 😉
zennia, truthfully, I think she’d make a helluva salesperson. But they have those kiosks in the malls now for Tupperware. Plus, she seems to like her current job, and according to her approval rating, her current bosses (Alaskans) plan to keep her on the job.
kc, I hope there’s something of value in the debate, to help the undecideds. (Not holding my breath, but we can hope…)
You know what I want to know? I want to know what those candidates plan to do that will help me. What are they going to do to help me get all three of my daughters through college? What are they going to do to insure that my daughters have a livable country when they’re done with college?
Are they going to make it easier for me to feed my family? Are they going to help me at tax time? Are they going to make sure I can get the medical care I need as I age? What are they going to do that will make one bit of difference to a single mother of three who works her ass off, has no savings and insists that her children go to college because she didn’t have that opportunity?
Are they planning on putting forth legislation that will affect my daughters right to choose what happens to their bodies? These are the issues that matter to me. I don’t care what gender someone is or what religion someone practices or how many children they have or how many of those children are pregnant, disabled, or in prison.
I don’t give a rats ass (not to be confused with giving a rat’s ass for Susie) if they hunt from helicopters or sleep with wolves or screw three waitresses and a cow in the restroom of their favorite bar on Saturday nights. I simply do not care one iota about any of that.
I want to know that the candidate who is chosen will care about ME and MINE and all the other people who have THEIRS… the “little” people, who don’t generally matter to those residing on what they view as higher planes. I’m tired of hearing lies and nastiness and hatred and all that generally goes with politics.
Tell me something that matters and maybe I’ll vote for you.
uhhh…obviously it’s time for me to put my little soap box away…
Susie, I think your point about the CLAMOR from the haters silencing the timid is so true. I know I have been silenced, because…as I said…I’m not a masochist. I feel like an informed, intelligent voter and I feel like I simply cannot voice my dissent from the “popular” thinking in certain forums. Maybe I should be braver about it, but I don’t particularly like being called an idiot.
I go back and forth between wanting to vote for which candidate will serve ME ME ME the best, and which will serve the whole of our country the best. Ya know, the whole putting others first thing? Thinking about the common good? At the moment neither ticket offers me great confidence that they will serve either me OR the country all that well. Taxes are the biggest direct effect on me personally. I have yet to hear either party mention the imminant reinstatement of the death tax, probably the biggest direct affect on me in my near future. And as a small business owner I KNOW personally that tax policies and how this bailout or whatnot affects credit and the stock market definitely will impact at least a few jobs…either the people we currently employ could lose theirs or we may hire a few more in the near future.
How refreshing! Thank you for this!
I knew who she was the moment she was picked. I was disheartened, that is the truth. It had nothing to do with her being a female, or most of the other hoopla.
Gov. Palin and I have had a one sided relationship for awhile now. Long before Sen Mccain announced that she would be his running mate. The one sided relationship is that I write and email her regularly. She ignores me, not once has she answered me.
Last year, 172 scientists signed a letter to Palin, expressing concern about the lack of science behind the state’s wolf-killing operation. According to the scientists, state officials set population objectives for moose and caribou based on “unattainable, unsustainable historically high populations.” As a result, the “inadequately designed predator control programs” threatened the long-term health of both the ungulate and wolf populations. The scientists concluded with a plea to Palin to consider the conservation of wolves and bears “on an equal basis with the goal of producing more ungulates for hunters.”
Apparently, Palin wasn’t fazed. Earlier this year she introduced state legislation that would further divorce the predator-control program from science. The legislation would transfer authority over the program from the state Department of Fish and Game to Alaska’s Board of Game, whose members are appointed by, well, Palin. Even some hunters were astounded by her power play.
Long before I stated writing to Gov. Palin I wrote to former Gov. Frank Murkowski, I heard back from him a few times.
As a result, I am having to say my view has not been a favorable one of her from the beginning. Not on account of any of the things you have stated above. Due to this important issue to me, she won’t get my vote.
traci, you should email your questions to next week’s Pres. debate. You look good on a soapbox. 😉
mainline mom, I think I know about some of the things you’re talking about. Both my husband’s work and, in a way, my private practice (when I’m able to work in it), are small businesses. What I would like to do for myself, votewise, may differ from what I think is good for the country as a whole, and that may differ still from what’s good for small business. To me, none of this is as black and white as it seems for so many.
And it is sad but true that people who don’t like to scream and name-call seem to be inhibited from expressing their opinions in the current environment.
kelly, welcome, and thank you, I’m glad there was something here for you.
nina, I already got you in email, but for the benefit of anyone reading here, I will say again, I was not aware of any of what you say in your comment. My investigation about the wolf-shooting thing was very cursory and only went so far as to see whether and why it’s legal. Clearly you are much more knowledgeable about the subject. And it is entirely unacceptable for you to write repeatedly and get no response. And it can’t be blamed on your not being an Alaskan, as the prior governor did respond to you.
Your impressions and opinions of Palin are based on personal experience and are issue-oriented, not at all the kind of behavior that I have called into question here. And I’ll say it again: OH HELL NO, she did not ignore MY NINA! Not OK.
LOL, Yes, she ignored your Nina, 🙂 I have been fighting for those wolves for a long time now. I always have been a big fighter for animals and children, those that can’t fight for themselves. I agree with you though, politic is so slanderous and nasty, add the lies and half truths, and well it is what it is.
I realized I might have sounded a bit grumpy here. Nevertheless, she ignores me!
I agree that she has not been treated well, I think that when you agree to enter the arena, you kind of know what you are up against. Every politician is fair game, and she is no different, Hillary sure took her share. Hillary was prepared since she had all those years of experience will Bill in the White House. Hillary sure took her share of abuse, too.
The wolves are near and dear to my heart. 😉
i heart you, this post, and wills. except i don’t heart when wills tells me to shove it. but he made up for it when he said he’d f>ck biden. when biden cried last night, i got naked.
nina, I think an emphasis on decorum and civility would benefit all of us. No need to treat anyone badly. And thank you again for the wolf info. 🙂
raz, that is so funny you would say that, because when I got naked last night, Biden cried!
Susie,
I started reading this at work on my lunch break the other day, but ran out of time; so I came back today to finish. I applaud you for this. I’ve been so sick of all the negativity, all the mud-slinging and lie-spreading.
Love, hugs, and prayers, my friend.
Susie, you rock. No really. YOU. ROCK.
Thank you.
Oh, and this?:
And a related point: Get over yourselves already with the, “That’s what abstinence-only education gets you!” You cannot be serious. You think there aren’t pregnant teens whose parents believe in comprehensive sex education? You think there are no members of Planned Parenthood who’ve had pregnant teens in their families? If that weren’t such a tragic display of ignorance, it would make me laugh.
THANK YOU. Again. I mean, good LORD, people. Be serious!
🙂
The only thing I disagree with is that sex appeal hasn’t been a factor with male candidates. Between JFK and Bill Clinton, you have some serious ladies men who charmed the panties off of a few voters.
nina, your comment makes me sing, “Bless the beasts and the children, for in this world they have no voice, they have no choice…” Love that song.
ladybug, yea, I know. And I got enough making me sick, without hateful people piling on more. I hope your “new life” is going well. xoxo
chassycat, you are most welcome, and thank you for affirming my rockage 😉 Good Lord, people, indeed.
CM, It’s a factor with both, for sure. Appearance counts, whether we openly acknowledge it or it remains unconscious. Right or wrong, for better or worse, it matters.
Oh now you go singing Karen Carpenter… could I love you ANY more?!?!
I think your post is very good. That said, I agree with kayce, sheryl’s, decrepitoldfool’s, Lynn’s, and Nina’s comments, among others. All of the candidates have been raked over the coals, including Obama and McCain. It’s just happening in a shorter length of time with Palin because everyone has less time to form an opinion. There will be the inevitable attacks, some of them valid, some not.
I have a hard time believing she can keep her personal beliefs out of her political decision-making. We have seen Supreme Court nominees with personal beliefs whose decisions later affected our country based on those supposedly only-personal beliefs.
I don’t agree she should be demonized, but neither do I take it terribly seriously when someone makes a joke about her. This election season has gone on for, what? Almost two years? I think the American people are exhausted. Let the damn thing be over already. But since it isn’t, if I want to blow off steam by making a Palin joke, I will, and I have. I will also post links to anti-Palin blogs because I think all sides of the issue should be analyzed, and sometimes because there are kernels of truth in a point of view that need to be investigated, even though that point of view may come across as demonic.
I have my own personal feelings about a woman who decided knowingly to have a Down’s Syndrome baby. I don’t think I could do that to another human being. But that’s me.
I have my own opinion about some of Palin’s other beliefs, and I’m not certain she holds the environment in the same high esteem that I do. I am against further drilling for oil (additional offshore drilling closer to shore and ANWR). I’m not sure Roe vs. Wade is safe in her hands. These issues; abortion, oil, environment, rape victims paying for their own rape kits and forensic analyses, the Bridge to Nowhere, the wolves, to me have nothing to do with sexism. Yet it is true as someone said above that as Obama has been raked over the coals for being black? white? Muslim? Christian? not enough experience? pastor? elitist? terrorist? that Palin will be raked over the coals, also. Our election process is dirty, divisive, and unfair. But I don’t see it changing anytime soon.
Do I wish it were fair, that all debates stuck to the facts without pointing fingers at an opponent and telling outright lies? Yes. I would love to hear nothing but facts. But that isn’t going to happen.
It leaves me in a place where on the one hand I feel frustrated, knowing it is harder to flesh out the truth, and on the other hand leaves me needing some form of release, even if that release is sarcastic humor. I need something to keep me sane until this election passes.
The age issue for me is a huge factor. Not only is McCain a cancer survivor; he is a POW survivor, and some studies have shown them to have shorter life spans. I see the chances as higher than normal that Palin could become president. To have any far-right Republican be president scares the hell out of me. I grew up in a small Southern town where Palin would have fit right in. Those intolerant beliefs do not have a place in my world. It is hard for me to be tolerant of the intolerant.
In my mind, if we are asking questions of any candidate, that is a good thing. If we are challenging them, that is a good thing. If we pull punches below the belt, that is okay, too. The other candidates have had to endure them, and no, this election process isn’t fair. Perhaps we should have asked more questions about the bailout package, or about whether we should have invaded Iraq. The American people seem to just lie there and take it, instead of opening things up and really looking at them from the inside out.
And I find myself concerned with those who are voting for the way a politician looks and speaks, voting with their gut, rather than voting on the issues. This holds for all of the candidates, presidential or vice-presidential.
All that being said, I still really enjoyed your piece and appreciate the impartiality it imbues. Good job.
shari, Don’t you remember you told me you loved me, baby? Said you’d be coming back this way again, maybe…
I was a big Carpenters fan.
dragonfly, that’s a lot of words for a little dragonfly! I’ll try to respond, at least a bit.
I appreciate that you have a hard time believing Palin can separate her personal beliefs. Many people agree with you. I don’t know whether she can or not. I only know what her public record shows. It shows she did; i.e., that she made no attempt to introduce a personal agenda, regarding the beliefs mentioned here, into law. I appreciate that.
I’m not sure if you heard me saying here that I condemn Palin jokes. If you think I said that, then I didn’t do a very good job of expressing myself. Some of my favorite current jokes are Palin jokes. My Palin impression rivals Tina Fey’s in some circles. Jokes=good; personal attacks=bad. The difference is quite clear to me, almost all the time.
Most of your specific concerns and areas of disagreement with Palin, I’m sure are quite valid, and I have no need to argue with them. I would say, though, to do your homework on the rape kits thing. When I first heard that, I went off, furious at her. Then I got the facts. She wasn’t a party to that, and there is no record of the issue ever having been made known to her — no one confronting her on it, no one bringing it to the attention of the mayor or the town council. The person who brought up the whole story now was asked if he ever confronted Palin about it when she was in local office. The answer was, “no, but I feel certain she must have known about it.” Not good enough. Especially combined with the $ and effort she committed to fight domestic violence.
I agree, it’s damned hard to track down the truth. That doesn’t mean I’m giving up.
I am ALL in favor of asking challenging questions. I would prefer that they have some basis in fact, where possible.
I guess the one part of your comment that really gives me pause — that I find chilling, really — is your suggestion that a person with Down Syndrome … I’m not even sure what you’re suggesting. When you say, “do that to another human being,” you mean give that human being a chance at life? Wow.
I don’t happen to know any adults with Down Syndrome very well right now. I do know some adults who are parents of Down Syndrome kids. Frankly, they would fight you. They would say that those kids have brought joy into their lives. And I would say, what greater pleasure is there, in the life of a human being, than to know that you are truly the source of joy in someone else’s life?
I’m gonna quote Obama here, and say that it’s “above my pay grade” to decide who should and shouldn’t be born, whose life is likely to be valuable enough to make it worth living. That’s not for me to say, where Palin or any other family is concerned. My only observation about Palin, on this topic, is that she’s not hypocritical about it; she’s practicing what she has preached.
“I have my own personal feelings about a woman who decided knowingly to have a Down’s Syndrome baby. I don’t think I could do that to another human being. But that’s me.”
Dragonfly, if you were pregnant with a Down’s baby, then you did do that to another human being. You had intercourse, and that was the result. It shouldn’t matter that the child isn’t the textbook definition of beauty, they are even more beautiful than words can express. It doesn’t hurt them to have the condition.
You should volunteer for the Special Olympics in your area some time to really understand what I’m talking about. Your eyes and your world will open up in ways that you could never imagine.
Hi Susie, Thank you for the response. This won’t be a complete response to you, just to a couple of points. As for the facts about Sarah Palin and the rape kit issue, since we must rely on the media, our sources will be imperfect and perhaps contradictory. It is hard to get at the truth with conflicting stories. There are a couple of sources, as examples, that gave me pause: The first one, not only for the article but for the comments that were made below the article, some of which were very telling: http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/09/sarah_palin_rape_kit_wasilla.html (I had to turn off Javascript to view that page as it kept crashing my browser) and this article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jacob-alperinsheriff/sarah-palin-instituted-ra_b_125833.html which states that “Palin, as mayor, fired police chief Irl Stambaugh and replaced him with Charlie Fannon, who with Palin’s knowledge, slashed the budget for the exams and began charging the city’s victims of sexual assault. The city budget documents demonstrate Palin read and signed off on the new budget. A year later, alarmed Alaska lawmakers passed legislation outlawing the practice.”
As for the Down Syndrome remark, I can only say that, first of all, I respect the right of any family to make their own decision, and I believe abortion should be an option on the table for fetuses with certain genetic conditions. I don’t consider my position “chilling” since no one knows what I have gone through in my life to reach my conclusion. Is it “chilling” when some of those with Down Syndrome choose to marry and have Down Syndrome children of their own? Are those who are born with certain genetic conditions, who had no choice in the matter, are their rights being violated? If someone is born with a genetic condition that they didn’t ask for, might not they have a different opinion? I would argue that perhaps their rights are being violated. People at least need to take a closer look at the subject. Who gets to decide who should and shouldn’t be born, and who is going to decide whether they made the “right” decision? Is it only the “right” decision if we agree with them? These are all rhetorical questions.
I think it has to be a personal decision, made by a family and respected by others. Perhaps I should repeat that. These are personal decisions, to be made by a family and respected by others.
We may not agree with another’s decision. “Agree” and “respect” are two different things. I may not agree with your decision, but I can respect it.
I hope I am allowed to have my own opinion as I respect the right of others to make their own choices and form their own opinions. I have no desire to get into a debate on this subject with the people that follow your blog, but to UCM, I say you have zero right to make that choice for me, nor do you know my personal experiences with those with Down Syndrome. This is a sensitive topic so I won’t explore it further here, but I believe the personal wishes of the family should be respected.
I will not respond further as this is a sensitive topic and everyone needs to make the decision they feel is best.
umutha, thanks for that. I know you are speaking from the perspective of a very personal, loving relationship, and as someone who, as you say, has very open eyes.
dragonfly, I just noticed that your comment had been held for moderation, probably due to the links in it. Didn’t want you to think I was choosing not to post it.
You are right; all of us who are trying to discern “truth” are at the mercy of the media, and the particular medium’s agenda. Having seen what you’ve written here, and what you’ve written on Twitter, I believe you are truly someone who’s trying to get at real answers, actual facts. And I so empathize with how difficult that is. Many of the sources the voters are using for information are hugely biased, for one party/candidate or the other. I’m not going to try to list who’s biased and who’s ethical here; I will say that we have a better chance of finding an objective source if we find someone who publishes both positive and negative information about a candidate. If they make someone look too good — or too bad — to be true, they’re probably not a valid source of information. As I said before, the rape kit thing infuriated me, made me momentarily have no use at all for Palin, and sent me in search of reliable information. I researched as much as I am able, discounting media that appeared to me to have an agenda (or that out-and-out claimed to have an agenda), and I am satisfied that Palin was not aware of that situation. Her record, over all, is very much in favor of protecting and advocating for women and children. That one budget item would be completely inconsistent with the other projects she’s undertaken in office. However, I also learned that there are still many communities across the country who require victims to pay rape kit expenses, and most of the citizens (and no doubt, many of the elected officials) simply don’t know that is the practice. Probably the best thing we can do with this item coming to light, is to check on how that works in our own communities.
It is almost impossible to convey true, nuanced feelings in a comment to a blog post, and I (and UCM) may well have misunderstood you. When you said, “I have my own feelings about a woman who would…” that did sound to me like you were judging Palin for her decision. But now I hear you saying what seems to be very different from that, “These are personal decisions, to be made by a family and respected by others.” I couldn’t agree more with your second statement. Again, these sensitive topics are probably not best tackled in a forum like this. Still, I appreciate your giving it a try. It’s not the best way to discuss these things, but it is one way, and it’s one that opens up avenues of communication we wouldn’t have otherwise, and I think overall, that’s a good thing.
I appreciate your sharing strong feelings on sensitive topics, in a forum that is sometimes very frustrating, due to the limitations and the propensity for misunderstanding that can so easily happen here.
Hope you don’t mind that I shared this link w/ my Facebook contacts, Susie. Wish I had time to read all the responses here- looks like quite a discussion going on. Very thoughtful, thorough, and intelligent.