10 Things I Freaking Love About Sarah Palin

Yeah, really. In spite of her politics.

Palin lives in Alaska - it's in her consituents' best interest that she bring the oil economy there and it's in her people's best interest to allow them to hunt game there. She's doing her job as an elected official of Alaska. An environmentalist wouldn't get elected there. I know a ton of people who share her conservative religious views - and I defend her right to believe it - and I don't think Roe v. Wade is what gives women physical autonomy in today's world, 30 years ago, sure. Today? No.  

Crazier than all of Pali's politics is that supposed feminists can't find a woman candidate to push forward to break the glass ceiling in 8 years. There's plenty of time. If Democrats can't get it done they're bad feminists OR apethic to women's empowerment or too damn negative and lazy to be supportive of women leaders. None of which are attributes I'm willing to excuse or overlook anymore.

I just saw in the paper who Obama is putting in his Inner Circle of advisors and there are only 2 women - out of 9 men. McCain would have appointed more to avoid looking like a chauvanist pig. That's not impressive.

Black men got the right to vote 100 years before they voted for their wives, daughters and sisters to have the same right. I am not about to go 100 years to manifest the dream of a woman president.  Gloria Steneim had a dream too. Not just MLKJr. I don't care what politicians SAY - I care what they DO. Democrats can talk pro-woman, it remains to be seen whether Democrats can deliver. I'm pulling for em, but I'm a Vajayjay Voter come 2016 - even if it means Palin for President. 

There are millions of adult women to choose from - many professional, brilliant, strong, inspiring. Pick one. Send her money. Be her fan. Propel her upward. 

 Empowering Girls: So Sioux Me ( http://www.traceesioux.blogspot.com )

Blog Fabulous ( http://www.blogfabulous.com )

Quote: I WILL vote for Sarah Palin in spite of her politics to break the glass ceiling in 2016.

I truly can't understand this kind of thinking. Um. What if her anti-choice, creationist/fundamentalist, pro-oil (let's see how AK handles the drop in oil prices!), anti-sex ed, anti-environment ideologies were still in place?

I'm surprised at how many people DO NOT know that the very lake she built her home on is seriously polluted now, due to runoff from nearby development and the relaxing of environmental policy to help businesses grow in AK... or about the million dollar sporting complex blunder that put Wasilla deep in debt ... and of course let's not forget her fight to lift protections for some endangered species.

By all acounts, she's not the smartest nor the most forward thinking individual, and she is certainly NOT a "sister" who should be breaking that glass celing if she wants to dictate how other women live their lives in terms of reproduction. Wrong.

KeegsMom blogs at:

KIDSFLIX ( http://kidsflix.blogspot.com )

I enjoyed seeing her when she came to Virginia and would love to see her in a higher political office.  I loved the way she inspired my daughter to become more interested in politics and to look at the possibilities in front of her.  Of course I'm on board with Gov. Palin's conservative politics and am thrilled at the way she energized the Republican party in the election.

Will I vote for her in the next Presidential primaries?  I don't know..depends on who she is running against.  I still want the most qualifies conservative candidate to win.

I don't think it has to be Hillary. In fact, I would prefer not - evidently she doesn't have the support of Democratic women. 

If this election taught us anything it's the Experience isn't nearly as important as Inspiration and Marketing - otherwise we'd be looking at Madam President-Elect Hillary Clinton right now instead of President-Elect Barack Obama. 

If Sarah Palin has taught us anything it's that the world is a mysterious place and conservatives like powerful women as much as liberals. And conservatives are capable of getting behind a working mother. Are Democratic women able to do that? I wonder.

Which means that for the next 8 years we have time to support The White House Project and Emily's List ( http://www.emilyslist.org/ )and get some awe-inspiriing, feiry, powerful and women in the Presidential Pool. Senators, Congresswomen, Governors, etc are in the pool. Businesswomen are in the pool. 

Nancy Pelosi, we just elected 4 new women through Emily's List. The trick is to be supportive and build on thier initial success and create positive buzz. 

 If Arnold Swartzenegar can be Gov of California, I don't see why we can't elect Oprah in 8 years. 

Empowering Girls: So Sioux Me ( http://www.traceesioux.blogspot.com )

Blog Fabulous ( http://www.blogfabulous.com )

i am not american so i did not vote for anyone. i am merely a canadian living in this wonderful country as a permanent resident. hopefully i will get to vote at the next election. and i will vote for sarah palin so long as tina fey is out there doing her sarah palin impersonation. maybe we should just get tina fey to run for office...

who might bring the energy required and be tough enough to handle the Republican Mean Machine?

If Hillary doesn't do it, and at this point, I don't think she will, who else is there?

-Lisse

@ Home in the World ( http://homeintheworld.typepad.com )

But Mitt Romney will come back and push her off the stage the way he pushed Jane Swift.

I really would like this woman's 15 minutes to be up already. She makes us all look bad.

-Lisse

@ Home in the World ( http://homeintheworld.typepad.com )

No, I like Obama and I'm going to do everything I can to see him succeed and get reelected in 2012. We need 1 president over the next 8 years because it takes time to impliment plans and change legiislation. Four years is a highly optimistic timeframe to expect any one president to turn things around.

But, during that 8 years we need to groom, propel forward and build momentum around the Democratic women who we want to take his place. And for me, being the pro-woman party - if that is what the Democratic Party wants to be anymore - means we actually put a woman in the office. There IS a woman out there who can be "good enough" and we need to really focus on helping her get there instead of tearing her down before she has a shot (I wasn't too thrilled with women's support or lack thereof with Hillary frankly). Let's leave the dirty work to the Republicans and Unify around the goal of a Madam President. 

If the Democratic party doesn't want to make a female president a priority and focus during Obama's campaign, then I guess I'm a swing voter. A vocal one with a pen that's mightier than the sword.

Empowering Girls: So Sioux Me ( http://www.traceesioux.blogspot.com )

Blog Fabulous ( http://www.blogfabulous.com )

I have my doubts that Palin will be on the ballot. Even if she ran, I doubt she would survive the primaries. But that's a whole other question.

 Curious about one thing. You said you would vote for her in 2016 once Obama's had time to implement his agenda and she's matured politically. Would you vote for her in 2012?

 If she runs, wouldn't she be likely to run in 2012?

If you don't want Palin then find the one you like and push her forward, propel her upward and try not to rip her to shreds picking apart her every flaw. 

Too much like your mother? 

Too much like yourself? 

Too much like your aunt or your 4th grade teacher or the cheerleader who was mean to you in high school?

Had sex before marriage? Didn't have sex before marriage? 

Has the wrong hair or wears the wrong color of skirt that's too short or too long? 

Go to therapy and get over it. 

Find Ms. Perfect, The ONE, you're willing to support in 2016 and get behind her. It will take 8 years to propel her forward and build her momentum. I'm voting for the woman that's on the ballot - "sexist" or not. Give me a better alternative that Democratic women CHOOSE not to  hypercriticize and pick apart like it's lunch time at Junior High. I dare you.

Empowering Girls: So Sioux Me ( http://www.traceesioux.blogspot.com )

Blog Fabulous ( http://www.blogfabulous.com )

@HeidiChick I wouldn't feel the need to go to a blog post supporting Sarah Palin to leave a counter comment. There are probably hundreds, if not thousands, of such blog posts. But I do feel the need to challenge the notion that voting for her just because she's a woman is in any way sensible or a feminist / pro-woman thing to do. If you like her for other reasons, that's fine.

Thanks for the post - -I love her too.

Interesting that posts like this draw more 'disagree-ers'  (I agree, there are a few haters, but most are disagree-ers)  to the comments section.   I never felt the need to go to a blog talking about some political figure I disagree with and write how I feel differently.....  I think I must be the only one though!! : )

Sarah Palin has all the qualities that so disturbed me about George Bush:

Guided, and frankly, blinded by religious principle and often unwilling to acknowledge game -changing facts.

Doesn't value science.

Ignorant of history and geography and not understanding the problem with that.

In the pocket of the oil companies.

Determined to tear down the wall between Church and State.

Unclear on the difference between management and leadership.

A poor communicator. Showing the FOX propensity to repeat inanities over and over again thinking that will make them true.

There's a debate going around as to whether we saw the "real" Sarah Palin or whether she was "forced" to play the pit bull.  Given her record, and some of her personal decisions, I'm inclined to believe that it is the latter.

Regardless, that some would view yet another anti-intellectual as the future of their party is incomprehensible to me.

Women should be demanding better.

Lisse

@ Home in the World ( http://homeintheworld.typepad.com )

I did a squidoo lens about Sarah palin with a lot of information, books and more

see the LENS >>>HERE ...http://www.squidoo.com/maverickmomsarah

Love her or hate her she's here to stay. PLEASE COMMENT on the lens

@traceesioux I'm sorry if I ruffled feathers by calling this sexism. I believe that sexism is the belief that one gender is inherently superior to another. I don't know whether you hold that belief or not so I don't want to accuse you, the person, of sexism. However, a statement that you would vote for someone solely on the basis that she's a woman does smack a little of what i regard as sexism. I'm questioning that statement rather than your entire belief system, of which I obviously have little knowledge.

 Based on your statement you either:

a) believe that she would do a better job than any man simply because she's a woman. If that's the case, I believe that to be a sexist belief.

or b)You don't believe that she would do a better job but you don't care about that because the principle is more important than the results. If that's the case, it's not sexism but it does seem to be a little cavalier and blinkered by ideology.

@wineplz Re: "On a related note, I actually KNOW people who voted for our current president-elect STRICTLY ON HIS SKIN COLOR instead of on his merits.  Yet that is acceptable and was encouraged and somehow isn't considered racist/discrimatory."

Actually, I disagree. I think voting for Obama on the basis of race IS racist. However, I don't know anyone who did that. I know plenty of people who think it's a good thing that the US finally has a black (or strictly speaking, non-white) president but that's not why they voted for him. Everyone I've spoken to, on both sides of the fence, made their decision based on policy.

I fully support initiatives like Emily's List but I don't buy the argument that women will automatically change the way we are governed. There have been female political leaders in Europe - Thatcher in the UK, Merkel in Germany and so on - without any significant changes to the system.

@ everyone 

I think it's important that our elected representatives represent the population at large. So it's important to ensure there are female senators, congresswomen, female judges and so on. It doesn't mean that gender should in any way be the deciding factor when there are so many other important criteria, such as competence, intelligence, ethical integrity, policy.

I think Hillary was a good candidate. Unfortunately for those of us who want to see a woman president, this particular year Obama was better. It's not all bad though - I like what he stand for and have every confidence that he will be a great president and that's the most important thing to me.  But Hillary was totally a better candidate than, say, Kerry. She just didn't happen to be running against Kerry.

I don't hate Sarah Palin and I agree that she copped a lot of sexist flak during the campaign and coped with it well. However, I would not want her as president of the United States. To me the bottom line is: WE DON'T NEED A FEMALE DUBYA! 

I'm not an American so I won't be voting for US president

but I'd vote for her just because she's a girl

It's not considered sexism when the "lesser represented" group is favoured

Affirmative action for example is not racism or this website

I love Sarah Palin

 I love everything you wrote in both your comments!  Yay for intellectualism.

http://rantsofapublicdefender.blogspot.com/

Hate is ridiculous and uncalled for. Only folks who are not well read or well educated come to this conclusion. Because perhaps this is their first time being excited about a candidate...not the issues mind you.  It takes more than just being a woman to be fit to be PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. Just like it takes more than being a woman to be a mother....everybody ain't able.

So for all the folks who are whinning that nobody likes Sarah Palin...go to the libray or go to the internet and look up women of character and merit and then come back and speak truth to power. 

Sarah Palin is unqualified and unfit to serve as Vice President of the United States.  That is not about hating her, or not liking her. I want better. America deserves better. I want someone who is academically and intellectually my equal or superior. If you have never read the constitution, or have no idea what your own party's doctrine is...that pretty much says you ain't qualified.

Be loving & Be in LOVE

First of all voting for someone because they remind you of your mother, mother-in-law or you is not well...sensible.

We need to look at that Office of the President with a critical and intelligent eye.  Remove the "feelings" aspect of such and be smart.  We need diplomacy and intelligence not bullshit and "you betcha."  If women want to be in the seat of power they must be prepared...well read...well learned and well rehearsed.  I don't want a PTA, Soccer Mom who thinks this might be a good idea. I want someone who had dedicated their lives to public service and is ready to step in and be smart.

Like Sarah Palin all you want. I for one am GLAD she didn't win. I rather like the return of intelligence, academic scholarship and diplomacy to the White House.  America has had 8 years of mediocracy and frat house mentality.  All the C and below students can get their asses back to study hall and open a book.

 Read and know something about the history of America and the world and perhaps you won't be so quick to vote based on someone looking like folks in your family.

Thank GOD being smart is back in vogue.

Be loving & Be in LOVE

they should compare the likes of Palin with the current female leaders of nations right now and past one's too.

Can you picture her with any of these women.....I can't.

Hillary? Yes.

Sarah? No.

http://www.filibustercartoons.com/charts_rest_fema...

Look for me at http://crunchycarpets.com or check out the ladies at www.wetcoastwomen.com ( http://www.wetcoastwomen.com )

Not because I'm a woman, or because I lack self-esteem (and I seriously am laughing hard at that) ...but because I hold zero degrees, I have never worked in government, law, or done anything else a person who governs an entire country SHOULD DO.

Breastfeeding does not qualify me to run the country. Juggling work and family does not qualify me to run the country. Having someone who's like ME is really nice and all, but I really am NOT qualified- based on education and experience I am NOT qualified.

I want the best person for the job, not the person with a vagina that might be within spitting distance of the job.

Although I can totally give a better interview than Palin.

Oh, I know...low-blow. But I really am not a fan. I mean just compare Palin to a Linda Lingle. Case CLOSED. Seriously.

Politics & News Contributing Editor
Queen of Spain ( http://queenofspainblog.com/ )

I respectfully disagree with this premise.

The fact of the matter is, women HAVE been totally under-represented. And that should, can, and will change.

But I disagree that our duty is to elect whatever woman happens to be shoved in front of the camera.

 Especially one with anti-feminist policy beliefs.

The first woman we elect to be President will be setting the standard in a way that any other man (including one of African American heritage) will not. Everything she does will be scrutinized under a lens of "Oh, so THIS is how women lead."

And if that first woman to "lead" does so by being anti-feminist, what have we gotten? What message are we sending all those impressionable children (and the rest of the country and world)?

It says: Sure, American women can be leaders...as long as they toe the antiquated, patriarchical line to help ensure that men retain the majority of the power. Women can be in power...so long as they use their influence to help men.

I don't vote for anti-feminist men, and I don't vote for anti-feminist women. I don't think that it's good enough to vote for a woman just because she's a woman. Women DO change everything, because they're smarter than that.

---

Kristy Sammis
is BlogHer's Conference & Event Planner, and her views do not necessarily represent those of BlogHer, Inc.'s, even though she thinks that everyone should agree with her about everything.
e. kristy@blogher.com

Seriously, I know a lot of women who could be considered "good moms" who I'd never vote for in a million bajillion years for President of the United States. And I know a lot of other women governors who'd be better at the job, and more pro-women than Palin. It's fine that you love her, it's a free country, but can Palin supportes please stop saying that those of us appalled by her politics ( http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kim-mance/rnc-speech... ) or her tactics "hate" her personally? 

I hope Hillary is still up for the job in 2016, because she's qualified, pro-woman, and won't reverse the progress (presumably) made by an Obama administration.

Kim Mance
Co-Editor-In-Chief
Galavanting ( http://www.gogalavanting.com/ ) online women's travel magazine

for writing this.  The sad thing is so many women chose to hate her because of her looks, how she sounds (I couldn't tell you how many women I heard make fun of her northern accent), and how she seems to speak (although you'll notice in the debates, where she wasn't edited beforehand, she sounds like an educated, competant woman).  I got so irritated hearing that from the Dems and the Feminists.  I was stunned that when she was doing exactly what feminism espouses (pulling yourself up by your bootstraps, doing it on your own, etc) that they turn their backs on her just because she sits on the other side of the aisle from where they THINK she should be.  They call her Anti-Choice, when really, she's Anti-Abortion (she supports birth control).  I don't know how they get away by demonizing someone who won't kill unborn babies.  I don't know how they call her Anti-Family when she has been married to what seems to be a wonderful man not threatened by her success, who SHARES child-rearing, has five beautiful children, and supports a woman's/couple's right to family planning as long as it doesn't terminate a pregnancy.  How is coming into political office on your own merits, without leaning on a trust-fund or a wealthy husband or a family or husband already in political power, not Feminism/Pro-Woman?  Just because she can weild a powerful rifle, take down and field-dress a moose, they painted her as some sort heathen brute, when in reality, that is life in Alaska.  A full-grown moose can feed a family of four for SEVERAL months. 

The media skewed her interviews to make her out to some sort of idiot.  They took what was obviously supposed to be a light-hearted joke and turned it into her supposed statement Foreign Relations.  And when she actually made mention of how refreshing it was to speak, unfiltered, to the American public, they mocked her.  Absolutely atrocious.  I agree they were bad with Hillary, but they were worse with Sarah just because she's a conservative.  So while I have much more conservative views, I agree it would be refreshing to have two women running for the top of the ticket in 4 years (hey, you never know if the Dems will want Obama next time around), and I hope Sarah Palin is one of them.

On a related note, I actually KNOW people who voted for our current president-elect STRICTLY ON HIS SKIN COLOR instead of on his merits.  Yet that is acceptable and was encouraged and somehow isn't considered racist/discrimatory.  Interesting that since we may just vote for someone because she's a woman, that makes us sexist/discrimatory to those same groups of people.

No one here has called you sexist.  I have stated reasons for why I will not vote for this particular woman or two other very particular women.  I don't think I'm sexist for refusing to vote for this particular woman and I don't think you are sexist for wanting to vote for her.  I think we both have valid reasons behind our decisions, both of which ultimately have the best interests of women and this country in mind.  We just disagree on what is in the best interests of women and this country.  So why must we bash people who disagree and throw harsh labels around?

The fact that I don't want to vote for Palin does not mean that I secretly want to be taken care of by a big, strong man.  Suggesting that we who don't like Sarah Palin really don't want to vote for a woman only serves to spread further antagonism among women, which isn't helpful.  I would have been thrilled to vote for Hillary and there are lots of women out there that I would be thrilled to vote for the next time around.  

And I agree that it is sane to want to be represented by women in government.  In any given election, though, I still want the candidate I vote for to believe in the same issues I do.  I did not vote for 44 men in a row.  It's an unfortunate history, but I don't want to sacrifice all the issues I think are important just to put one woman, any woman, no matter how bad or dangerous or unqualified I think she is, in the office.  

http://rantsofapublicdefender.blogspot.com/

 "But I'm not qualified to govern this country,"

 Maybe you hate her because she reminds you too much of yourself and YOU feel unqualified.  Therefore, she must be too. Men seem to have gotten over this self-esteem hurdle. 

It baffles me how women can think that voting for a woman is "sexist" but voting for 45 men in a row isn't.

I think perhaps Democrats have become so consumed with "equality" and fairness to miss the fact that 44 to ONE would be less sexist and more fair for WOMEN. To insist on being represented by my own gender in politics is sane not sexist. To be against that is self-defeating. Women are pros at that.

No taxation without representation - of women, by women. That's my brand of feminism ladies. To get ahead we have to push the "imperfect" ones forward too. Men don't require perfection from each other and that's what makes them great leaders. 

 I also love that my only two choices in the current woman-hating I hear from supposed Feminists are "if you vote for this woman" you're only doing it because she's a woman which is "sexist."

And somehow this argument applied to both Hillary and Sarah - though they have very, very different politics.

Is it at all possible that Democratic women turn out to be voting for the cute sexy football quarter back instead of thier own self-interest? 

Is it possible that Democratic women prefer to be taken care of by big strong men and are only interested in bashing other women and picking apart their flaws? They had their go at Hillary and then they had their go at Sarah. Who are you waiting for?  

So basically, one can't vote for a woman and make Democratic "feminist" women happy. Ironic isn't it? 

Is this still earth?

Evidently, I'm "sexist." Somehow I'm fine with that. Oh and the women will hate me? After this election and the way women behaved toward these two female candidates - I'm convinced there is no other outcome possible. 

Men have been getting by just fine as "sexists" forever. Perhaps that's why they always win. Maybe it's the recipe for success.

Empowering Girls: So Sioux Me ( http://www.traceesioux.blogspot.com )

Blog Fabulous ( http://www.blogfabulous.com )

I'm with you for the most part, but I think you take it a bit too far.  I'm all for Emily's List, actively seeking out women candidates to run for all offices, and I, too, think it is way past time for us to find out what a woman in charge can do.  But it's not self-defeating to refuse to vote for whatever woman happens to be on the ticket.  No matter the context, I would not vote for Phyllis Schlafly.  We have a woman senator in my state who has said that the 20th Amendment should not have been passed and only was because men weren't taking good enough care of their women.  I would never vote for that woman.  I think we do more damage by willingly voting for a woman, any woman, rather than finding a good woman.  I happen to think that voting for a woman like Sarah Palin does more harm to the cause of women in power than it does good.

(side note: can anyone tell me how to make the link to the signature in my blog live?  I cannot get it to be a link no matter what I try!)

http://rantsofapublicdefender.blogspot.com/

her stances are on issues that, in my opinion, actually hurt women. I have no idea why anyone would vote for a woman or man running on an anti-woman platform. But hey, that's the crazy feminist in me talking. And I realize there a lot of women out there who like her politics and believe in anti-choice and anti-family and medical leave and anti-all those things.

I guess I can even understand liking her simply because she believes in God. Or because she's like you-or your mom-or your mother in law.

But I'll be honest. I don't want someone like you in office. No offense. But I'm not qualified to govern this country, and I would expect neither are most Americans. I breastfed both my kids everywhere, but that doesn't make me a good politician.

So while I might not wait for the perfect candidate- I certainly will not be going anywhere near this one.

Politics & News Contributing Editor
Queen of Spain ( http://queenofspainblog.com/ )

If the thought of Sarah Paliin turns your stomach I highly recommend donating a lot of money The White House Project ( http://www.thewhitehouseproject.org ) and Emily's List ( http://www.emilyslist.org ) to get a strong Democratic Woman in office.

You can be sure that I'm not the only woman who isn't into seeing 2016 turn into Male Presidents 45 - Women Presidents still ZERO. You can be 100% sure I"m not the only woman who thinks 20 years between Geraldine Ferraro and Hillary and Sarah was an absurdity I'll repeat over my dead body.

We need fresh thought in our leadership. Women will change the way we govern. Warren Buffet, at the latest Women's Conference said, he personally, only had hope for our innovation and new ideas because women, the most underused and underrepresented resource in this country are finally in positions to take power.

 If Democratic women choose to self-defeat by not getting behind a woman and waiting for "the perfect one" - I've no problem voting for Sarah Palin. 

Empowering Girls: So Sioux Me ( http://www.traceesioux.blogspot.com )

Blog Fabulous ( http://www.blogfabulous.com )

I frankly don't think she's that smart and I'm not impressed with the difficulty she has in expressing herself in clear, coherent, diagrammable sentences.  And I'm more than a little tired of having any criticism I make of her be brushed off as sexist.  I have never once criticized her for seeking the VP spot while a mother of young children.  That would be sexist.  I have never once criticized her clothes or her hair.  That would be sexist.  I have thoroughly criticized her politics, her inane interviews, her claim that being close to Russia gave her foreign policy credentials, and her general lack of understanding of the issues that matter on a national level.  That is most definitely not sexist.

She does not remind me of myself, my mother, or my grandmothers. 

I, too, NEED to see a woman in the White House.  I think we all need it.  But if  Sarah Palin is the only woman on a presidential ballot, I will once again have to vote for a man because I don't see any way for her to earn my support.

http://rantsofapublicdefender.blogspot.com/

Actually I can vote for someone based on any criteria I want. Do you know how many Americans base their vote on way stupider things? 

 Who taught you the definition of sexism - Bill O'Reilly?

It's SEXISM to have 44 MALE Presidents and NOT ONE SINGLE  WOMAN President.

Empowering Girls: So Sioux Me ( http://www.traceesioux.blogspot.com )

Blog Fabulous ( http://www.blogfabulous.com )

You are one proud Vagina-American!

Seriously though, you can't vote someone into the presidency because of their gender. That's called sexism. Either way you look at it. I'm all for a great female candidate, but I would never vote for someone based on their sex.

Just because I'm a mom doesn't mean I have to drive like one. - Nominivan.com ( http://www.nominivan.com )

Waaa freaking WAAA Arrietty. 

When it's 44 to ONE then you can bring your "reverse sexism" NONSENSE to the table. 

Not "nice" if it's a woman - REQUIRED. At least by me. I'm not being bought off with the "pro-woman MAN" B.S. anymore.

 A WOMAN President is what's best for the country.  Add women change EVERYTHING - including policy, if I may quote The White House Project. 

Empowering Girls: So Sioux Me ( http://www.traceesioux.blogspot.com )

Blog Fabulous ( http://www.blogfabulous.com )

You're mad. Voting for someone just because they are a woman is incredibly sexist and demeaning to all women. Let alone voting for someone because she's a woman in spite of her incredibly anti-women policies (such as making rape victims pay for medical attention).

She's attractive and she has a nice mnner. She's not stupid but I don't think she's all that smart either, based on what I've seen.

God help us if she becomes president. "Entertaining to watch" doesn't cut it when the world is in such a mess and you're even countenancing her for two terms! We need Barack Obama in for 8 years and we need someone to carry on with a progressive agenda after that time. Sure, it would be nice if it were a woman and I agree that the Dems should start looking for credible candidates, but someone's gender is not as important as policy.

I'm not quite sure I am in complete agreement with you. I was more than thrilled to have her run as McCain's VP... thrilled enough that I switched parties and voted McCain/Palin.

Can I vote for her for president in four years or eight years? She's going to have to do a lot of moving toward the middle before I can do that. And she is going to have to mature politically.

It will be interesting to watch her, that's for sure.

~Denise
BlogHer Community Manager

Flamingo House Happenings ( http://www.flamingohouse.net/ )

I've been recently accused of being a closet Republican because I can see why so many women like/liked Sarah Palin and for saying we should be OK with her trying to grab the brass ring while she can reach it because women and girls aren't socialized to be that ballsy.

I personally don't want Palin anywhere near the White House, but I agree with your premise that the progressives in this country need to step up and find some more women candidates because many are tired of the fact that we haven't had an elected woman near the Oval Office.

I don't like Palin's politics, but I will stand up for her right to try and will not defend the people who criticize her in a sexist fashion.

Uh-oh -- are those my liberal sisters coming after me now? ;)

PunditMom ( http://punditmom1.blogspot.com )
Politics & News Contributing Editor. ( http://www.blogher.com/blog/punditmom )

I don't think you get to decide when and if she runs. What if she runs in 2012 and not 2016?

I still think this whole 'in spite of her politics' thing is more than a little nuts. Would you vote for Ann Coulter?

Not only that, I think it undermines the whole credibility of the women's movement. This isn't what we need.