More on Palin

I have a piece up at TAP:

Palin’s addition to the ticket takes Republican faux-feminism to a whole new level. As Adam Serwer pointed out on TAPPED, this is in fact a condescending move by the GOP. It plays to the assumption that disaffected Hillary Clinton supporters did not care about her politics — only her gender. In picking Palin, Republicans are lending credence to the sexist assumption that women voters are too stupid to investigate or care about the issues, and merely want to vote for someone who looks like them. As Serwer noted, it’s akin to choosing Alan Keyes in an attempt to compete with Obama for votes from black Americans.
[...]
It’s clear that Republicans believe that what made Hillary Clinton such a good candidate was her gender, not her political experience or positions on the issues. And McCain’s decision to pick Palin shows he took this message to heart and chose to add her to the ticket primarily because of her gender. In so doing, McCain has turned the idea of the first woman in the White House from a true moment of change to an empty pander.
Why is this a pander? Because Palin is not a woman who has a record of representing women’s interests. She is beloved by extremely right-wing conservatives for her anti-choice record (fittingly, she’s a member of the faux-feminist anti-choice group Feminists for Life). Palin supports federal anti-gay marriage legislation. She believes schools should teach creationism. Alaska is currently considering spending more on abstinence-only sex education. And when it comes to a slew of other issues of importance to women, such as equal pay, she’s not on the record.

Read the rest here. I’ll be discussing the article (and debating this woman) on CNN tomorrow morning at 10:30 a.m. eastern.
More from other bloggers after the jump…


Gina at What About Our Daughters:

McCain is doing what Obama supporters should have done this week in Denver at the Democratic National Convention. The Republicans are doing what Republicans do… whatever it takes to win the White House. Its cynically pitting the hopes and aspirations of Black folks against those of White women who vote… here is an FYI, White women voters outnumber us! [...]
Why do I place the onus on Obama supporters and not Clinton supporters to make the overtures to mend the rift? A) Because as the winner, it didn’t cost you anything to be kind to those who lost, even if you thought they were sore losers and B) You need the PUMAS, the PUMAS don’t need the Obama acolytes. As far as some of the Clinton supporters are concerned, their election is over.

Andi at the Bitch Blog:

Simply put, this cynical, calculated choice by the McCain camp — she’s a woman, so she’ll get the votes of all those cranky old bags who were pulling for Hillary! — is going to mean another round of headaches and frustration for feminists. Yes, many of us were excited at the prospect of a woman in the White House; no, not any woman will do. And, unfortunately, the folks who are supposedly on “our” side who want to drive home how bad a choice Palin is will do so with sexist commentary about her beauty-queen past, her smarts, her lack of any sort of foreign-policy experience, and, undoubtedly, her hair and wardrobe. And women who find Palin’s politics odious, but who are equally offended by the media’s treatment of her, will be in the always-awesome position of hearing from all corners how unfeminist they are for not supporting the sisterhood.

Rebecca Traister at Broadsheet:

But even among more reasonable Democrats, the Palin pick does create worries for the still-tender party, not the least of which is that it will reopen a debate about whether Barack Obama should have picked a female vice president, or more specifically, Hillary Clinton.
Biden is a strong candidate for Democratic women, with a good record of supporting reproductive rights and opposing antichoice nominees to the Supreme Court. Biden also wrote the groundbreaking Violence Against Women Act, and is great on the lunch-bucket economic issues so vital to so many American women.
But there was pressure on Obama, especially after the energy (and votes) generated by Clinton’s run, to consider as a running mate Clinton herself, or women like Kathleen Sebelius and Janet Napolitano. He reportedly did not formally vet Clinton, and none of his final top three candidates for the job were female.


Rachel Setzer
:

I have no problem with Palin being McCain’s VP. More women should be nominated for big national offices. I don’t think she’s going to fare well in debates with Joe Biden — who has an ability to tear someone to shreds without insulting their honor, as we saw in his speech on Wednesday — and I’m not totally convinced that she’s going to do a whole lot to help the McCain ticket. That is, unless those PUMAs really are stupid, which I’m pretty sure they’re not (oh, and they don’t really exist anyway).

Ta-Nehisi Coates:

Also, if you’re making a play for Hillary voters—older, middle-aged white women in rust-belt states–is the way to get it done by bypassing, say, Carly Fiorina and Kay Bailey Hutchison, to pick a former Ms. Alaska who’s only been governor for two years? There’s a meme about Barack Obama reminding older women of the slick, handsome guy who beat them out for a big promotion, even though they were more qualified. But here’s another very likely meme–Sarah Palin as the inexperienced, younger, attractive woman who beats them out for a promotion, even though they were more qualified.

Christian Progressive Liberal at Jack and Jill Politics:

Yeah, McCain’s trying to make a little history of his own, but considering the crowd he has to play to in order to win, his choice of Sarah Palin, while it would play under the big ticket Democratic party, the GOP continues to believe that a woman’s place is in the home (there’s those “family values” again), and it may not save him.

and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

97 Comments

  1. Yoshimi
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 7:08 pm | Permalink

    Sorry for having to ask, but what’s a PUMA? Wikipedia said it was a woman who dates younger men, so that wasn’t very helpful :)

  2. Allie
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 7:19 pm | Permalink

    I think it’s “Party Unity My Ass” or something like that.

  3. deerly
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 7:39 pm | Permalink

    I am happy about Palin. I am not going to even consider voting for her ticket, but it makes me very happy to see her in this position.
    So many democrats are bashing her for being conservative, and using all kinds of demeaning and sexist language and that is really terrible.
    It’s not like John McCain was going to choose a VP that would appeal to democratic values and make us want to support him.
    For a conservative, I give her props for being intelligent, articulate and CONSISTENT.
    The only pro-life arguments that have any respectability are the ones that are consistent.

  4. Allie
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 8:02 pm | Permalink

    I think it’s good that McCain chose a woman as a running mate, but I think the justification for his choice does a disservice to Palin and all women. I think it’s unfortunate that Palin doesn’t realize this, but don’t really expect that of someone with her views.

  5. a.k.a UltraMagnus
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 8:09 pm | Permalink

    For a conservative, I give her props for being intelligent, articulate and CONSISTENT.
    The only pro-life arguments that have any respectability are the ones that are consistent.

    From what I understand she supports the death penalty, so she’s automatically NOT consistent with her “pro-life” beliefs.
    And it’s pandering, plain and simple.

  6. indigo_8
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 8:11 pm | Permalink

    I am happy that Palin has been chosen for the vp candidate. It is good that there is a woman for the first time on the republican ticket. She is a conservative, she subscribes to conservative politics and I think it was a good choice. She is good at what she does and represents her party well. She isn’t afraid to go after the big guns and is well liked in her state.
    I don’t think that she was chosen because John McCain thinks that women will just see her as another H. Clinton and will vote for him. It is very presumptuous and attacking for people to think so. I don’t think that people who are considering voting for McCain would even think about considering voting for H. Clinton and if that is what he was going after it wouldn’t have been a smart decision.
    I personally am excited and happy about this and i am looking forward to the vp debate.

  7. Posted August 29, 2008 at 8:15 pm | Permalink

    As a Hillary supporter that may support McCain in November. I don’t think you all get it.
    Obama’s campaign is not one of gender equality. Hillary was never on the short list and his is the only presidential campaign staff in which men and women are NOT paid equally.
    I have never voted Republican but the Democratic party is no longer representing me. I recommend you read Riverdaughter before speaking for Hillary supporters http://riverdaughter.wordpress.com/2008/08/29/mccain-to-obama-you-got-served/

  8. Allie
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 8:19 pm | Permalink

    I don’t think that she was chosen because John McCain thinks that women will just see her as another H. Clinton and will vote for him. It is very presumptuous and attacking for people to think so. I don’t think that people who are considering voting for McCain would even think about considering voting for H. Clinton and if that is what he was going after it wouldn’t have been a smart decision.
    From what I understand about her views and experience (or lack of it), she essentially brings nothing to the table that McCain didn’t already have aside from her gender and her stance on ANWR.
    I don’t think it’s presumptuous or an attack for anyone to think that. I’m basing my opinions on what I know of her and McCain.

  9. Allie
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 8:29 pm | Permalink

    I have never voted Republican but the Democratic party is no longer representing me.
    So rather than vote for a candidate who actually does support many of the ideals for which we strive, you would consider voting for someone who has nothing but contempt for women’s rights?
    You’re right. I don’t get it. But I do understand that I’m not always going to agree with a political candidate on all issues. I wasn’t ever a big fan of Clinton, though I most definitely would’ve voted for her had she been the nominee, even though I don’t agree with all of her positions.
    But voting for someone who is diametrically opposed to all of Clinton’s positions? That sounds to me like cutting of your nose to spite your face.

  10. Posted August 29, 2008 at 8:37 pm | Permalink

    I liked what Bill Clinton said on Tuesday
    “Suppose you’re a voter, and you’ve got candidate X and candidate Y,” Bill Clinton said Tuesday at a Democratic event in Denver that featured his first public remarks since his wife Hillary Clinton was officially informed she would not be vice president.
    “Candidate X agrees with you on everything, but you don’t think that candidate can deliver on anything at all. Candidate Y you agree with on about half the issues, but he can deliver. Which candidate are you going to vote for?”
    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/08/26/bill-clinton-takes-a-dig-at-obama/
    Like I said, I don’t know what I will do in November.
    But I do believe that despite the pro-choice problem John McCain subscribes to less boy club politics than Obama.

  11. Allie
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 8:39 pm | Permalink

    I suppose we’ll just have to disagree.

  12. AgnesScottie
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 8:47 pm | Permalink

    The Republican Party isn’t representing you either. McCain votes no on pretty much any issue that effects women. Obama isn’t a perfect candidate, and he isn’t Hillary Clinton, but it doesn’t make sense to vote for McCain instead of Obama. A third party candidate, or heck, even a write-in of Hillary Clinton’s name, but actually casting a vote for John McCain, the epitome of an anti-women voting record?
    I was never particularly jazzed about either candidate. I loved Dennis Kucinich’s open views on gay rights and gay equality, and neither Hillary nor Obama came out in full support of gay marriage. However, not a single GOP candidate (Romney, McCain, Huckabee ::shudder::) came anywhere near my positions or point of view. McCain is the last thing America needs. I think Hillary would have been an amazing president, and I loved seeing a woman with such presence, intelligence, and oratory ability campaigning. I think Hillary deserved the VP spot, because of how close the primary race was. I think sexism in the media was probably an important factor in her not obtaining the candidacy. But the process went the way it did, and even if the Democrats aren’t 100% in line with how I feel, they will still pay more attention to women’s issues that are important to me than any McCain ticket, even one with a woman. Especially considering that woman is anti-choice, and pro teaching creationism in schools.

  13. Mama Mia
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 9:18 pm | Permalink

    Yoshimi,
    PUMA does stand for Party Unity, My Ass, and represents Hillary supporters unwilling to unite behind Obama. A “cougar” is the lovely term referring to an older woman dating a younger man. Men who date younger women are called “men”.

  14. northray
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 9:22 pm | Permalink

    Alaskan here. Been trying to get in a word most of the day but could not get the site to open up all the way. Good to see the traffic here.
    I did not vote for her in 2006 mainly due to the right to life and then all the other conservative stuff. The dem she was running against was a much better candidate. I hunt and fish, but that is were our commonality ends. Went to college with kids that went to high school with her. Worked with people that went to high school with her. Some loved her and some hated her. The guys just liked to watch her cheerlead. Blah Blah Blah
    All I can think of is that McCain picked Palin as a chess piece in a game he is playing. If he really knew her and if he really understood how much he himself hates women he would not put Sara on the stage with him. Palin and Cindy may share anatomy but Palin is not a wall flower. She will kick his ass in public if he talks down to her. She will turn DC upside down if the GOP pulls this off. The day that McCain drops the C-word on Palin is the last day he will be president.
    But the GOP will have to overcome the Stevens and Young FBI investigations and trials. Palin will have to overcome “tooper gate” with her ex bro-in-law Wooten. As an ethical hunter that double standard has me really upset with her and her do gooder family. I would have been fined and lost my hunting privleges for a year, but nothing happened to the ex-bro-in-law other than a change in job duties. The Palins never complained about the hunting violation until the divorce started. And her sister was part of the hunting violation, but nothing happend to her. Total BS.
    The positive insight I guess I can offer is that Palin does understand that there is middle ground. Her personal stance is toes over the right edge of the board, but in government she has shown a surprising amount of “lets get this done for the people” type of positions. The gas line, same sex benefits, oil tax surplus refund.
    You see this in the same sex benefits thing. The court said the state had to do it so she said I don’t personally agree, but the law is the law so I’ll sign it. She just pushed through a oil tax surplus funded plan to pay all residents $1,200 to off-set the high cost of fuel up here. This is far from conservative and she has been called a socialist many times over this. (Don’t get started on the irony. Its pumped out of our ground and then shipped to California, turned into gasoline and shipped back and sold for the highest per gallon prices in the nation. Stupid.)
    The funny thing about the pro gun thing is that Palin is more pro gun than McCain. He has voted for some things like registration at gun shows that the NRA has fought against for years.
    Something that Palin has going for/against her and that is something for discussion here is that her state leads the nation in crime against women and crime against native women in particular. What is she doing about that? Will save-it-for-later sex-ed work for the native villages where many women are assualted before they are twenty? In a village of 800 with no store or pharmacy how does a girl get condoms or the morning after pill? I have been in a few villages and there are no condoms for sale in the village co-op stores. Lots of pregnant teen girls around. Sad.
    On a voting note. The nation needs to consider that only about 40% of the registered voters in Alaska actually show up to the poles. Palin has a high approval rating tallied just before “trooper gate” happened in July and after today it is sky high again I would think. So 40% of those that could actually do, but the popularity polls are collected from everyone voting or not. I would say that the three little electorial votes for us are all going to the McCain/Palin ticket just because Alaska typically votes how ever the NRA tells them to.

  15. Allie
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 9:23 pm | Permalink

    Agreed wholeheartedly, AgnesScottie.

  16. moglidabear
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 9:30 pm | Permalink

    ostracizer, here is what you perhaps have failed to consider:
    the liberal wing of the supreme court (ginsburg, stevens, souter, breyer and sometimes kennedy)has a median age of 80, and ginsburg and stevens are fast approaching their 90s.
    if mccain is elected president this fall, he will have the opportunity to elect 1 if not 2 conservative justices, ensuring not only that Roe v. Wade Falls, but that the Supreme Court is conservative for the next 20 years.
    if you’re willing to vote mccain without considering the repercussions to the gains of women over the past 40 years, i’m sorry — that’s nothing short of irresponsible.

  17. Allie
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 9:30 pm | Permalink

    northray, I don’t really have much to say about the other statements in your post, but this one struck me as odd:
    You see this in the same sex benefits thing. The court said the state had to do it so she said I don’t personally agree, but the law is the law so I’ll sign it.
    Are you saying that she should be applauded for following the law, rather than expected to follow it?

  18. ZacRfron
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 9:59 pm | Permalink

    This woman’s youngest child has Down Syndrome, which she knew about before birth, and she still had the baby. And her son is gonna be in the shit very soon. Regardless of how feministing percieves this move, this is a woman who has the courage of her convictions.
    Wether you agree with her viewpoints or not I don’t see how this could be spun in a negative way by readers here.

  19. Allie
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 10:08 pm | Permalink

    This woman’s youngest child has Down Syndrome, which she knew about before birth, and she still had the baby. And her son is gonna be in the shit very soon. Regardless of how feministing percieves this move, this is a woman who has the courage of her convictions.
    Wether you agree with her viewpoints or not I don’t see how this could be spun in a negative way by readers here.

    Who is attempting to spin that she chose to have a child with Down Syndrome? I think it’s great that she made the choice she made, but I also think it’s great that she had a choice. Considering her anti-choice views, it is somewhat ironic.

  20. BlackFeminist
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 10:43 pm | Permalink

    How can any Clinton supporter vote for McCain…Im still trying to rap my head around that one. Truly. I don’t even know how sarcastic I am being. I mean is it a “Ill show you democrats!” *waving finger* kind of thing? Because…I am PRREEETTTYYY sure Obama cares more about women’s issues than McCain…
    And yes, I am happy that were going to have a historical presidential election. Whoopie Fucking Doo. Honestly I care, but I dont. Wheres my needs being met? The country’s need. I dont have time for the parties to be arguing over who has the best minority. I dont care if they have vaginas or their Black or White. You can be a racist Black and a sexist woman. So thats not at issue for me. But we doooo obviously have a sexist women running. I mean..how can she stand by the same man that wont support equal pay for equal work? besides that they agree on abstinant only and prolife bullshit. I mean…I just dont get it. And all the hypocricy (spelled wrong?) from the McCain camp. I mean…age this, experience that…realllllllyyy? Palin???
    And you know what really pissed me off, when she accepted her speech and gave thanks to the women before her (not that part) and THEN said that she was going to smash the glass ceiling…WHAT! Arent you sealing the cracks you just said Clinton made? Cause I dont know about you but…not supporting equal pay for equal work is a big problem…BIG…

  21. BlackFeminist
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 10:45 pm | Permalink

    Ok so I have a lot of typos in that. But I am just irritated. lol

  22. rileystclair
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 11:07 pm | Permalink

    yeah osterizer, count me among those who don’t get it.
    what stances made you support hillary?
    which of those stances are reflected in the mccain campaign?
    seriously. i’m not asking to be a jerk, i really honestly want to know because i just don’t see much overlap. if any.

  23. northray
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 11:09 pm | Permalink

    moglidabear,
    No applause for her on any issue. A politian that seeks and accepts applause is a snake oil salesman and needs to be ran out of town.
    In todays political rings of death any far right conservative faced with a decision that is 180 degres out from how they see the world, but goes ahead and does the right thing by society and the law should be acknowledged as “not too bad”. But applauded? No. Kids should be applauded for their achievements, but after the age of 16 you need to stand on your own.
    And for you folks that want to meet someone that really hates Palin check out Andrew Halcro. He must really be down in the dumps today.
    http://www.andrewhalcro.com/

  24. Posted August 29, 2008 at 11:12 pm | Permalink

    There is no question that it is amazing that a woman is VP candidate, but I sincerely hope that all the undecided women out there think about WHY they are voting for either party.
    I can appreciate Palin’s work as a mother of five, former union leader, mayor and of course governor.
    but when I hear pundits touting her experience as the head of the PTA as a qualification for VP – made my skin crawl. whether you agree or disagree with her policy, bottom line – this is not about her being a woman – its about who could potentially be President should something happen.
    What gets me more though is McCain only having met her twice before

  25. xtine
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 11:29 pm | Permalink

    Are you listening to yourselves here? Truly? This is exactly what the McCain camp wanted. A distraction. As we sit here and debate Palin’s legitimacy, we forget what we’re really voting for here. Women’s rights? Who’s been fighting for equal pay for women? Biden! Who’s been fighting for pro-choice ideals? Obama/Biden? Who’s not? Bush/McCain/Obama?
    Vote for McCain if you love to pay $5 a gallon in gas, you make more than $250,000 a year, want to watch our reputation as a country go to shit, watch Roe vs. Wade reversed, and you’d like to see our troops fight in Iraq for the next 100 years.
    I live in NYC. I don’t have a friggin car. McCain has voted against Amtrak funding. So when they go under, and we’re struggling for a way to get from A to B, I’d love all the McCain supporters to chauffer my ass around.
    Are you freaking kidding me?

  26. idiolect
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 11:57 pm | Permalink

    I thought of something earlier this evening — maybe it IS pandering, but NOT to former Clinton supporters. Maybe, just maybe, it’s slightly more insidious (and potentially effective) pandering — pandering to (white, male, and influential) voters who want to appear “moderate” and “sympathetic” to women, without having to actually compromise any of their politics to be more pro-woman.

  27. osterizer
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 11:57 pm | Permalink

    I like all of your thoughtful reactions.
    I do not trust Obama and I believe him on nothing. I found him to be extremely disrespectful towards women, mainly Hillary. I wrote up several examples of it in my blog.
    http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=2123550&blogID=394509327&Mytoken=F302830F-335C-4192-877B3E11B51C68E56732340
    I find it insane that he didn’t even put Hillary, a woman who received 18 million votes (more than anyone in any Presidential primary), on the short list for VP. That is his choice. It would’ve been fine if he chose a running mate that represented “change” and not the all mighty experience but he chose Joe Biden someone with more congressional experience than McCain. That makes no sense to me. I like Biden but where is Obama’s head at?
    I think Hillary and McCain have integrity that Obama is seriously lacking. They also both offer a judge me kind of attitude. Hillary repeatedly said, “I am applying for the toughest job in the world please hold me accountable”and McCain has constant Toen Hall meetings. Obama has a don’t ask don’t question attitude. I am not one for blind faith.
    I care about the democratic party and I truly believe that if Obama is somehow elected he will be such a failure that we will not see a democrat in office for 8,12, or 16 years. I love Jimmy Carter (he is my favorite president) but Obama’s legacy will be some much worse.
    Do you really think the candidates are that different? McCain voted No to the Bush Energy Bill that Obama voted yes to. Do you really think that Obama will be able to end the war?
    I was just in Denver and didn’t leave feeling energized or inspired http://carinaost.blogspot.com/2008/08/den-puma-and-gd-dnc.html
    Like I said, I do not know what I will do in November but I don’t think my conscience can vote for Obama and it probably won’t be able to vote for McCain either.
    I have always been a passionate democrat and I feel completely ignored by the DNC. I am young, educated, and Obama is NOT my candidate.

  28. AgnesScottie
    Posted August 29, 2008 at 11:58 pm | Permalink

    ZacRfron: As far as I have read, the only criticism about her child with Down’s Syndrome I have read is not in reference to her choosing to keep it. It was something about how the kid is 4 months old, and she will be doing extensive campaigning as VP with a 4 month old child with Down Syndrome either staying at home or coming with her. Still not very feminist to be questioning her commitment to taking care of her child, but a potentially valid concern. Not like “She should have aborted her baby” or any of that nonsense.
    I think it was also brought up because she talks about knowing he had Down’s and never even thinking about abortion as part of her pro-life cred. Spinning the story for the news, sort of, though I imagine she has nothing but good intentions and love for her child.

  29. rileystclair
    Posted August 30, 2008 at 12:07 am | Permalink

    “Do you really think the candidates are that different? McCain voted No to the Bush Energy Bill that Obama voted yes to. Do you really think that Obama will be able to end the war?”
    yes, on both counts.
    as to the first, look at the whole of their voting records, including obama’s from the IL state senate. choosing one bill is not representative of their respective records as a whole. i point you alone to their stances on reproductive rights and contraception. john mccain couldn’t even say whether he thought condoms could prevent the spread if HIV. seriously.
    as to the second, yes, but even if it isn’t as fast as i would like, i pose another question to you: do you really think mccain will even TRY? he’s plainly said he’s against it. is it worse to try and not get it perfect than to give up and pour billions more dollars into a fraudulent, pointless conflict?
    “I have always been a passionate democrat and I feel completely ignored by the DNC. I am young, educated, and Obama is NOT my candidate.”
    i respect your choice, but i’m sorry to hear it. i really do think that if you look at mccain’s record and his policies, that you could perhaps find a third-party candidate who you would feel better about voting for than mccain, for sure and maybe even obama.

  30. Mina
    Posted August 30, 2008 at 12:07 am | Permalink

    McCain’s veep choice is like when Bush didn’t appoint an all-white cabinet – a sign that it’s getting harder for either heavyweight political party in the U.S. to focus on rich white men alone.
    AgnesScottie commented at August 29, 2008 8:47 PM: “Obama isn’t a perfect candidate, and he isn’t Hillary Clinton, but it doesn’t make sense to vote for McCain instead of Obama.”
    Very good point.
    AgnesScottie commented at August 29, 2008 8:47 PM: “A third party candidate, or heck, even a write-in of Hillary Clinton’s name, but actually casting a vote for John McCain, the epitome of an anti-women voting record?”
    …but it’s a pretty consistent anti-women voting record, and some people really like consistency…
    Allie commented at August 29, 2008 10:08 PM: “I think it’s great that she made the choice she made, but I also think it’s great that she had a choice. Considering her anti-choice views, it is somewhat ironic.”
    Exactly.
    xtine commented at August 29, 2008 11:29 PM: “Are you listening to yourselves here? Truly? This is exactly what the McCain camp wanted. A distraction. As we sit here and debate Palin’s legitimacy, we forget what we’re really voting for here. Women’s rights? Who’s been fighting for equal pay for women? Biden! Who’s been fighting for pro-choice ideals? Obama/Biden? Who’s not? Bush/McCain/Obama?”
    Great questions!

  31. Allie
    Posted August 30, 2008 at 12:09 am | Permalink

    osterizer: You’re obviously entitled to your own opinions, and I think we just won’t be able to agree on this. But, I don’t feel you’re applying the same scrutiny to McCain as you are to Obama, and in the end, McCain is still anti-choice, anti-equal-pay, anti-gay-marriage and a host of other anti-stances.
    I personally feel the idea of NOT voting at all because you don’t fully support someone is just silly. Obama may be a bit of a toss up on some issues, but we know where McCain stands when it comes to women, and allowing him to get elected through frustration is as bad as voting for him in my book.

  32. Posted August 30, 2008 at 12:21 am | Permalink

    Not pleased enough to see her in particular here to feel happy for “A Woman” here.

  33. AgnesScottie
    Posted August 30, 2008 at 12:26 am | Permalink

    I think that McCain eight years ago had integrity and wanted people to question him, but I don’t think that is his policy now. His “straight talk express” has been derailed. He doesn’t allow open access to the press like he did before. Probably due to campaign pressure more than personal decisions, but press don’t have nearly the same access. McCain has said some very nasty things to people asking him questions at town hall meetings (I could provide some youtube links), and the audiences at “town halls” are often quite orchestrated. He used to denounce religious idiots like Falwell and Pat Robertson, and then he goes to speak at Liberty University? I used to have a modicum of respect for McCain, but over the Bush administration and especially during this campaign I have lost all respect for him as a politician. That and, when I had respect for him, I was 18 and didn’t know as much about his record as I know now.
    Not to mention his mix-ups between Sunni Iraqis and Shia Iranians, and the “Iraq-Afghanistan border” And his support of offshore drilling as something which will lower gas prices now, contrary to the statements of experts in oil drilling/refining.
    I think Obama will be able to end the war, because Bush has already agreed to a timetable. Bush…agreed to a timetable. Who would have ever thought they would see those words together? It will be pretty easy for Obama to cooperate with the current time table and the will of the Iraqi prime minister. At this point, I don’t see ending the war in Iraq as that difficult, considering Bush has actually acquiesced to a time table and it is clear that the Iraqi government wants us out. Even the repubs have tended to always say that we should leave when the Iraqi government feels ready.
    Obama isn’t who I wanted to be president, but I think that McCain’s performance over the campaign, forgetting and mixing up extremely significant details, is extremely worrisome. Not to mention his 0% NARAL rating. There is absolutely no way that Obama can be worse than McCain, if only for the Supreme Court justice nominations. Even if he is an abysmal failure (which I don’t think will happen, with Biden as VP, and he will probably choose an excellent cabinet, whether by his own decision or those assisting him), then he will still put non-conservative justices on the Supreme Court, and I think that is one of the most important things about this upcoming election.

  34. rileystclair
    Posted August 30, 2008 at 12:35 am | Permalink

    “I used to have a modicum of respect for McCain, but over the Bush administration and especially during this campaign I have lost all respect for him as a politician. That and, when I had respect for him, I was 18 and didn’t know as much about his record as I know now.”
    that’s how i feel as well. when he ran in 2000, i still didn’t agree with him, but i did think he possessed more integrity than most republicans and i did like his openness with the press. i at least felt that he had something distinct to offer from bush and now that is no longer the case.
    this is really tangential and it’s anecdotal, so i don’t expect anyone to really base their judgment of mccain on it, but i will say that i was an intern on capitol hill in 2002 and a friend was an intern for john mccain. i spent a lot of time with mccain’s interns that summer and i was told many stories of how outright mean and insulting he was to his staffers. i’m not saying politicians i agree with are necessarily not jerks either, but the rep i worked for was incredibly nice and sincere and mccain’s was the only office whose interns i interacted with who had bad things to say about the elected official on such a personal level. that started to change my opinion of him, and i can’t say that hearing things like the “cunt” comment to his wife, that i’m surprised, based on what i heard that summer. i believe that personally, he’s kind of an asshole and that’s just one more count against him in my book. hill staffers work very hard and are the lifeblood of every politician there, so when i hear someone who frequently mistreats his or her staffers, it makes me sad.
    anyway, like i said, unsubstantiated hearsay coming from a stranger on the internet, so take it for what you will, but i just wanted to share it.

  35. merfyt
    Posted August 30, 2008 at 12:47 am | Permalink

    Maybe I’m alone here, but I have a big problem with anyone here holding Obama’s VP choice against him…in terms of him not picking Hillary. I don’t think that this is evidence of him being “disrespectful towards women.” (esp. Hillary?)
    I don’t think Obama’s VP choice had anything to do with Hillary’s vagina…just sayin’.

  36. osterizer
    Posted August 30, 2008 at 12:57 am | Permalink

    I like Obama’s VP choice if I do end up voting for him it will be solely because of Biden.
    I think for him not to consider Hillary was a big slap in the face for her supporters (myself included)
    My problem is with the person on top of the ticket.

  37. AgnesScottie
    Posted August 30, 2008 at 1:05 am | Permalink

    I would say, vote for Obama, for the country’s sake and all that, but California is probably going to be solidly Democrat, and my state (GA) is probably going to be solidly Republican. It feels kind of sad to think that no matter which way you vote it won’t really count for anything if you don’t live in Ohio…

  38. Michael
    Posted August 30, 2008 at 1:08 am | Permalink

    osterizer: If your issues with Obama stem from the primaries, and as such, you would like to show the democratic party that your vote should not be taken for granted, I would strongly urge you to vote for Cynthia McKinney, a strong female candidate for President, as opposed to voting for McCain, a candidate with an abysmal record on women’s issues, especially issues of reproductive rights (a record which Sarah Palin shares).
    In fact, I would urge all Hillary supporters considering voting McCain as a protest vote to vote for Cynthia McKinney (and Rosa Clemente for VP) instead, a strong, progressive woman candidate who has much more in common with Hillary’s positions than McCain ever will.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynthia_McKinney#2008_Green_Party_presidential_candidacy

  39. MM
    Posted August 30, 2008 at 1:16 am | Permalink

    Ostercizer,
    I know that you are likely sick of people trying to convince you, but in response to your question “are the candidates even that different,” I would argue that the far more relevant question is “is the country that different under a supreme court with 2 justices appointed by McCain versus Obama?” Because in that a country with two more justices appointed by McCain, we can not only kiss Roe goodbye, but would probably see the most anti-woman, anti-consumer, anti-labor, anti-civil rights court since the Berger years, and because of the younge age of the republican justices, it would stay that way for a MINIMUM of 20-30 years. I would also say that from the perspective of a woman overseas who needs an abortion or contraception but can’t get them because of McCain foregin policy, yes, the candidates are vastly different.
    I understand your frustration about the VP thing, but I would offer the following thoughts: When Obama became the democratic nominee, I would argue that he had an obligation to pick a VP who would maximize his chances of winning. To his supporters and to most Hillary supporters, the most important thing after the primary is him winning in November, and that was the goal to be served by his VP pick. Given that, from what I have seen in DC, the entire idea of a Hillary VP nomination was a ficticious idea created by the media. No one in national politics thought that was going to happen, including the Hillary people. When they talk to HIllary supporters on the news who wanted her to be VP, those were not her political advisors, and there is a reason for that. If Hillary really wanted to be VP, she could have made some noise to that effect, but neither she nor her political advisors did, cause they knew it would not make sense.
    I guess it is wierd to me when people say it is a slap in the face for him to not consider Hillary, even when acknowledging that he likely made a good choice. Hillary Clinton is one of the most formidable women in America, a United States Senator, and I am guessing on her way to becoming the most powerful person in the senate. In my mind, the idea that she would feel snubbed is kind of belittling to her.

  40. osterizer
    Posted August 30, 2008 at 1:17 am | Permalink

    Michael, thank you for the suggestion. A lot of people mentioned her in Denever. I will definitely look in to it.
    I would love to have some confidence and pride in my decision when pulling the lever.

  41. LlesbianLlama
    Posted August 30, 2008 at 1:18 am | Permalink

    I am probably going to vote for Cynthia McKinney, Michael. I am a MA voter, and it’s pretty obvious that my vote doesn’t count for anything; MA will be solidly blue, as usual, and our electoral votes will go to Obama. If I lived somewhere else I might second guess that. For a long time I bought on to the idea that votes for 3rd party candidates “lost” elections for Democrats, but I really don’t think that holds up unless the state you vote in is a contested state.
    Not that the Democratic party really cares, but I am fucking SICK of having them take my vote for granted just because they are better on the issues I support than the Republican party. Being a more progressive candidate than McCain isn’t exactly a huge accomplishment.
    The Democratic party has shown time and time again that they have no problem distancing themselves from the barely-tolerated LGBT community because it alienates swing votes and the religious right [who likely won't vote for him anyways- I consider that a pretty lost cause]. Well, guess what? It alienates ME, too. I won’t stand for being treated like a 2nd class citizen, and while obviously I will be happy to see Obama take the White House, I can’t feel good about my vote if I vote for him.

  42. MM
    Posted August 30, 2008 at 1:26 am | Permalink

    I should have phrased that last part better: the Hillary Clinton that I admire would want Obama to pick the VP that would help him win, so that they could advance the causes that Hillary has fought for all of her life. The Hillary Clinton that I admire would not want to be selected if it meant a McCain White House, 2 more conservative justices on the court, and the erosion of women’s rights continuing for 8 more years. The Hillary Clinton I admire is a seasoned politician who recognizes the political realities which make Joe Biden a better VP pick against John McCain. When people say Hillary was snubbed I feel like they are treating her like a child who did not get her way, rather than a kick-ass US Senator who cares more about the issues then whether she is selected or not. I think that better explains what I was trying to say before.

  43. AgnesScottie
    Posted August 30, 2008 at 1:30 am | Permalink

    MM: I think I would much rather have Hillary Clinton stay in the Senate than become VP. I think that she would actually have more power there, and there wouldn’t be the chance of losing her seat to a Republican. Losing Biden is bad, but I would hate to lost Hillary in the Senate.
    (Just thinking about this now*** Thanks for bringing it up MM!)

  44. River
    Posted August 30, 2008 at 2:38 am | Permalink

    I have read several accounts from credible sources that say that Hillary Clinton herself told Obama “Don’t vet me unless you are going to pick me”. She took herself out of the running this way, because I don’t think there was a guarantee given to anyone who was vetted.
    Hillary ran a historic, groundbreaking campaign and has my deep respect for doing so. But if she didn’t want to be vetted without a guarantee, then Obama did the right thing in respecting her wishes.

  45. River
    Posted August 30, 2008 at 2:40 am | Permalink

    I have read several accounts from credible sources that say that Hillary Clinton herself told Obama “Don’t vet me unless you are going to pick me”. She took herself out of the running this way, because I don’t think there was a guarantee given to anyone who was vetted.
    Hillary ran a historic, groundbreaking campaign and has my deep respect for doing so. But if she didn’t want to be vetted without a guarantee, then Obama did the right thing in respecting her wishes.

  46. visibility
    Posted August 30, 2008 at 2:44 am | Permalink

    This actually makes me really angry. No, I do not think it is good to have THIS female VP on a Republican ticket. I do NOT think this is progress. She is being used as a symbol, pure and simple. Used as a symbol = no progress. More of the same.
    When Clinton ran for the nomination, she was 100% qualified. She didn’t run as some sort of symbol. She didn’t run because any one person asked her to. She didn’t run to appeal to one kind of demographic. She ran because she felt she was the most capable and qualified to run the country for all Americans. She wasn’t running as “I’m Hillary Clinton, Symbol of Feminism and Diversity.” She was running as “I’m Hillary Clinton, and I’ve got some serious credibility to back up this campaign.” And she proved it – by debating the issues furiously, and earning millions of votes along with the respect of Americans of all political creeds.
    Now, THAT was real progress for women in politics. No doubt Senator Clinton will continue to create progress for women in government. But Sarah Palin? Perhaps one day. Today, however, in this election, Sarah Palin is no Hillary Clinton.
    The day that Republicans choose a woman to run on the ticket NOT primarily because she’s a woman – that will be a happy day for feminism. Or the day that a woman REFUSES to run on a ticket BECAUSE she knows she is being used as a symbol – that will also be a great day for feminism. But until then, sadly, the men and women who make up the Grand Old Party are up to the Same Old Tricks.

  47. visibility
    Posted August 30, 2008 at 2:45 am | Permalink

    This actually makes me really angry. No, I do not think it is good to have THIS female VP on a Republican ticket. I do NOT think this is progress. She is being used as a symbol, pure and simple. Used as a symbol = no progress. More of the same.
    When Clinton ran for the nomination, she was 100% qualified. She didn’t run as some sort of symbol. She didn’t run because any one person asked her to. She didn’t run to appeal to one kind of demographic. She ran because she felt she was the most capable and qualified to run the country for all Americans. She wasn’t running as “I’m Hillary Clinton, Symbol of Feminism and Diversity.” She was running as “I’m Hillary Clinton, and I’ve got some serious credibility to back up this campaign.” And she proved it – by debating the issues furiously, and earning millions of votes along with the respect of Americans of all political creeds.
    Now, THAT was real progress for women in politics. No doubt Senator Clinton will continue to create progress for women in government. But Sarah Palin? Perhaps one day. Today, however, in this election, Sarah Palin is no Hillary Clinton.
    The day that Republicans choose a woman to run on the ticket NOT primarily because she’s a woman – that will be a happy day for feminism. Or the day that a woman REFUSES to run on a ticket BECAUSE she knows she is being used as a symbol – that will also be a great day for feminism. But until then, sadly, the men and women who make up the Grand Old Party are up to the Same Old Tricks.

  48. visibility
    Posted August 30, 2008 at 2:56 am | Permalink

    sorry, i didn’t mean to post that twice!

  49. merfyt
    Posted August 30, 2008 at 3:50 am | Permalink

    osterizer: my apologies for perhaps misunderstanding your argument. For the sake of understanding, I would like to ask a question: if Obama had chosen Hillary as his VP, would your feeling be different? Would you feel like his “head” as you called it was in the right place? (I know you’re probably tired of being on the defensive, but I think your insight is important.)
    One point I would like to make about Palin. My initial reaction was that this was a clear move by the McCain camp to replace Hillary’s ovaries with another set. But now I’m not so sure. If this were the case, don’t you think that McCain would have announced his decison before the DNC? and don’t you think he’s aware that Hillary supporters probably don’t align themselves with most of what Palin stands for?…I guess my point is…I’m really clueless about why he chose Palin in the first place. If he wanted a woman just for womens’ sake, there are clearly more *experienced* Republican women he could have chosen as his running mate. Any thoughts?

  50. Posted August 30, 2008 at 8:49 am | Permalink

    I wrote about Palin on my blog @ http://didntaskme.blogspot.com/
    and quoted my friend Tanya Melich’s article in her Women’s Media Center Commentary…”John McCain may think he can seduce American voters by having Sarah Palin by his side, but when the majority of Americans learn the Republican platform does not bring health care to Americans, will not protect woman to make their own reproductive choices, does not bring legal protection for equal pay for equal work, Sarah Palin, the McCain Trojan filly, will not fool American women.”
    http://www.womensmediacenter.com/ex/082908_c.html
    The trick will be to inform what appears to be an ineducable American public on these facts – a public that appears to still believe that McCain is a moderate on reproductive choice.

211 queries. 1.841 seconds