BlogHer - Sarah Palin: How Many Women is She? - Comments

one more thing

womanforobama — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 15:06:43 -0500

Sarah Palin is NOT a reformer. She accepted millions of dollars in earmarks both as mayor of Wasilla and as governor. She supported the Bridge to Nowhere until the outcry got embarassing, and kept the $430 million Washington gave the state to build it. Reformer? I don't think so.

Woman for Obama

I don't care about her kids.

womanforobama — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 15:04:38 -0500

Questions about Palin's motherhood should be off limits to BOTH conservatives and liberals. I don't need to criticize her life style. There's plenty to criticize about the choice of Sarah Palin as VP nomination just looking at where she stands on the issues. She opposes abortion even in the case of rape or incest. She tried to get polar bears taken off the threatened species list, claiming there was not enough evidence they're threatened. Even George Bush's administration accepted the evidence. It was his EPA adminstrators who added polar bears to the list. She tried to get books censored in the Wasilla Public Library. She's against sex education in the schools (except for abstinence, so don't say she opposes teaching about it in schools; she just doesn't want to teach all sides of the issue) For more, see http://www.womenagainstsarahpalin.org.

Sarah Palin has nothing in common with Hilary Clinton, a bright, experienced feminist, except her anatomy. That's not enough for me to want to vote for her.

Woman for Obama

A Big slap for feminists

Perplexed in DC — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 18:42:38 -0500

I am so happy to see so many reasoned opinions here about Palin.

I cannot believe that some women are actually swayed to vote for McCain becasue of this underqualified spokesmodel of a VP! Honestly, she looks nice and can read a speech - and repeat it every day of the week since it was first uttered at the RNC. We have to expect more.

This election and for the next four years I want someone in DC that is smart. Shrub (young Bush) has been a discrace to this country. I am equally embarassed by McCain and Palin stretching the 'truth' to ends I have never seen before. My goodness! Do the women who are swayed by Palin not see that she has overly exagerated what she has done and is nothing more than a pretty face that can read a speech and support 'her man', McCain. Haven't we women evolved to a higher standing in society? My goodness, I feel like there are women out there than have been wrapped up in time capsule since the 1950s! Say it isn't so. Tell me that even the blue collar stay at home moms get it - that women have to be equally as competent as our male counterparts. We don't get to play in the big game just because we are women! We actually have to be able to do the j - o - b!

If she and McCain get elected they will either turn on everything they have said about reform (my prediction) and vetoing earmarks, OR, the government and this country will come to a screeching hault. The reason earmarks happen is that they get written into crtical laws to get senatorial votes to get the law passed. If McCain vetos all the critical bills - those with earmarks - we'll be paying him and the rest of Congress to accomplish absolutely nothing.

One more thing. I am a small town girl too. But that and beng a mother do not in and of themselves qualify one for VP. My goodness, I have done more than Palin has. So have many, many women. This is why we should all be offended that the bar has been set so low that Palin can clear it. And has she been to DC before? Other than for the Govenors' convention?

Palin's potential damage to women in Politics

ReElectNoOne — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 10:35:20 -0500

Given Palin's lack of experience in almost every way related to running a super power with super-economic problems and two wars means serious danger to America.

I don't think the issue of being a working mom is relevant. My mother was a working mom. Dad was gone and she picked up the full load. She is 93 now and still going stong.

I believe women belong and are needed in politics. I voted for Hillary and now support Obama because he is the only "change".

But I fear Palin's election and subsequent disasters could haunt the future of politics for all women for years to come. If she screws things up, and I believe she would, future voters, when asked to vote for a woman, ANY WOMAN, will likely point to Sarah and say "we tried that...look what happened'.

If America is going to elect a woman we need one we would not be afraid would screw things up worse than they are now. I would trust a Hillary but never a Palin.

That's my two cents worth.

====================================================

Congress is not on our side. We need to replace them with people who understand

the principle.."Of the People, By the People, For the People"

http://www.reelectnoone.com

Elusive Facts

judithL — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 10:52:08 -0500

Elusive, better check out some of the hard facts instead of blindly towing your party's line. If you don't trust the links that have been posted here, simply do a search on her name and see what comes up.

That's what I did. She has a well documented history of contention with people who simply don't agree with her. McCain spoke of the difference between people who use their career to advance good government and people who use goverment to advance their career. An insightful statement, but I think the lack of a complete vetting process for Sarah Palin is going to come back to haunt him and the Republican party. Her meteoric rise in politics (when you check the facts) is a case-book of using government for her own glory. She does not have the sense of compassion, values, sacrife and service to others that John McCain came to embrace and has since put into practice since his POW days.

And should such a phenomenal rise continue, eventually putting her in the top office, I would be in extreme fear of having the finger of such a hot headed, vindictive woman on the button of nuclear war.

Sarah Palin is a dangerous powder keg with a fuse waiting to be lit by the very people who put her where she is and who will hide behind her misdirected enthusiasm and inexperience when the crap hits the fan.

Remember, life is a journey, not a destination. Here's to Living Well! www.themadgoddess.blogspot.com & www.lwbms.blogspot.com

"and the willingness to

L16 — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 17:19:13 -0500

"and the willingness to truly serve,"

Ok, so here is another thought since this thread seems to be more war related. In the 2004 election Kerry represented a potential president with war experience. The Republicans did this to him, trashing the means under which he got some commemoration of service:

http://www.factcheck.org/article231.html

They did something despicable in my view, of thrashing a man who had the courage to join the armed forces. If he wasn't fit to be president they should have found another way to make that point. Sadly, their tactics worked.

So now they have spun around since they are the one with a Veteran on their ticket and McCain's POW experience seems to qualify him for the presidency. Why is the"willingness to truly serve" only a relevant experience for a president to have when a republican is running? It is insane that a party that so trashed a man who served in 2004, is now building an entire campaign using service as a reason for entitlement to the presidency.

And if someone could elaborate on what is meant by Obama being an elitist it would be cool.

My Apologies

elusivelise — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 15:32:47 -0500

I do apologize, as I was not aware of that. Will refrain from doing so in the future.

Really? No.

elusivelise — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 15:30:27 -0500

Quite frankly, you just need to re-read what I said up-top. And I, really can only imagine the dandy sort of place we'd be in had one of those other two guys been in office INSTEAD!

Tsk, tsk, Elusive. That's

miteegirl — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 15:28:02 -0500

Tsk, tsk, Elusive.

That's considered bad form in the blog world to go back and rewrite a post when someone has responded to you already so that their original reply cannot be read in the original context.

Remember, although Bush thinks it is fine to rewrite history, the rest of us think that sticking by what you REALLY said is kind of important in civilzed discourse.

Safety First

elusivelise — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 15:26:33 -0500

Republican policy has indeed been helping us, not only win in Iraq, but secure world-wide national security. I'm just glad Gore and Kerry were not elected - I'd fear for my life enough with them, but most especially with Obama in office. That is a scary thing. Wish more people would actually BACK our current President instead of fight him on literally every betterment he tries to implement; it would be like having younger siblings, and trying to explain to them all WHY it's working, and having a good number of them deprecate and belittle EVERY achievement and play up all failures (which are made by the ENTIRE GOVERNMENT ADMINISTRATION and it's constant tug-of-war goings-on). And then he takes the flack because, really, no one cares enough to band together and help the admin; instead we've all got to tear it down, and render it useless - no matter how you slice it, people who do that sort of thing are neither helping the President nor our nation! No, you haven't cleared up anything. But I am sorry that you've bought the media bias.

The Republican Congressin

miteegirl — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 15:16:46 -0500

The Republican Congress in 2000 - 2004 fought the Republican President?

Really?

Because that is when everything I cited was originating.

Instead of the sibling analogy, I believe you meant to imply that they were punching themselves in the face.

YES! YES! YES! We MUST

miteegirl — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 14:55:01 -0500

YES! YES! YES!

We MUST VOTE REPUBLICAN!

The REPUBLICANS have been helping us WIN at the economy, and foreign policy! And in Afghanistan! And by capturing Osama Bin Laden!!! And tightening up nuclear materials protection during travel within the US! And cutting the DEFICIT! And putting people back to work! And creating jobs!

And receiving the most COMPELTE information we had ever received about the projected attacks on 9/11 and thereby immediately tightened airport security because they knew that terrorists were strongly suspected to be interested in attacking via airliners! (See memo entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US")

Yes, we MUST vote Republican! Because the Republicans have....

...wait, a minute. My bad.

That isn't what happened, is it?

p.s. I'm not afraid of Sarah Palin. I'm disgusted and angry over the RNC's hubris and hypocrisy. There. Cleared that up for you.

Strong Leadership REQUIRED!!!

elusivelise — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 14:38:35 -0500

We must not elect a weak leader in this time. We have troops in Iraq right now fighting to serve our country. Don't let this be another Vietnam. Don't let our nation be turned over into the hands of someone who, though sincere, is sincerely misguided, and is, what I believe, a blank slate in the hands of puppeteers who would propel this nation into DEPTHS of darkness, and entrench us in corruption and danger we can't even begin to fathom nor understand. For those of us who still believe in the necessity of, the sacrifice in, and the commitment to VICTORIOUS wars - We MUST WIN!!! We MUST act now!!!

We have two heroes on the ticket - and only two. I see the good heart in John McCain, and the willingness to truly serve, even though differentiating from the conventional "party wisdom" (I truly do NOT agree with him on every point). But I am glad that he still retains some of that old school "get-it-done", "don't-give-up-even-through-unbelievable-opposition" attitude that has stuck out to me in a man, whose lifetime of experience, sacrifice, and perserverance have crafted a warrior.

Speaking of conserving energy and rescuing the economy, check out the modest stage used at the DNC - it looks like it came straight out of Vegas. Now you know where your tax dollars are going. You won't have to worry about anything if we have a liberal, *ahem* socialist White House - the government promises to care of everything for you. If that's before or AFTER we get blown up with nukes, you'd have to ask them.

What IS important, is that we learn to conserve, be modest with spending, and take care for our decisions - build a fence at the top of the hill, instead of putting an ambulance at the bottom of the hill. Also, FOLLOW THROUGH - don't start out on something without the intention to finish it - and finish it right. DON'T LET OUR TROOPS COME HOME IN DISGRACE, as if their sacrifice has been an unavoidable mistake because of the president (oh, please). God forbid.

Every bit of everyone's efforts count in this war, and this IS a vital war, and WE MUST WIN. We must not switch horses mid-stream, switch plans, and decide to put better jobs, healthcare reform, and the lovely environment above COMPLETION and VICTORY in our worldwide battle for national safety and security. In a hierarchy of psychological human needs, safety and security are fundamentally at the base of the pyramid. Being able to have better jobs and more affordable schooling are not even the third or fourth layer up!

And, Lord have mercy, left-extremists are scared to death of Sarah Palin. Well, she's confident, she derides all of their faux stereotypes - and even better, she's very tricky to attack (unless you want to be go through torturous and painstaking explanations the the 58% of Americans who LOVE Sarah to death - or look sexist - or look spurned - or look like you're jealous, which you probably are - or look like you really don't have the best interests of women in mind (maybe just yourself), after all this IS a victory for women all across the board). She tops Obama and McCain, both at 57% approval .. Biden's down there at 46%, honorable mention. As Newt Gingrich said, liberals MUST destroy Sarah, because she belies all of their most integral messages - which aren't true, of course. And she proves the opposite, which makes them look TERRIBLY bad.

Give Me a B!

judithL — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 11:36:45 -0500

For bullying (were you thinking of another B word? Come on, you know you were.)

The observation that her behavior doesn't fit with the party-line of family values is spot on. I too was unimpressed by her smug, "better than the rest of you" impression of herself. The facts are starting to leak out, and if verified, will show that she does have experience after all, in using the power of her office to eliminate people who disagree with or displease her. I know she was a great basketball star, but she sounds more like a spoiled, misdirected cheerleader to me.

Perhaps she should go back to that university where she studied journalism and political science and brush up on a few ethics courses. I studied art, but that doesn't mean my paintings should be hanging in the MOMA - or even stacked in the 50% off bin at the local gallery.

Remember, life is a journey, not a destination. Here's to Living Well! www.themadgoddess.blogspot.com & www.lwbms.blogspot.com

Why is the media so

IVF Friends — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 04:03:01 -0500

Why is the media so infatuated with Sarah Palin? She comes across
like a horrible woman to me but I keep hearing on the news over and
over that Sarah Palin gave an “AMAZING/GREAT” speech as she accepted
her
nomination as the VP for the Republican Party; I personally felt it to
be just insulting and nothing else.

I could not believe all the hate, sarcasm and divisiveness she
delivered during her speech. Her mocking and bullying really got to me,
and as a mom of a 7 year old I could not believe that she was doing it
all in front of her kids and was being applauded for it. The chanting
of the delegates was even scarier. I teach my child that behavior like
this is not accepted and see a mom bullying on national television for
her kids to see and learn. Are those the values that the republicans
are so proud of (we definitely saw a lot of that attitude from the
republicans this week). Is that why Sarah Palin is now so popular with
them? What a scary way to energize anyone.

Sarah Palin: How Many Women is She?

PunditMom — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 22:26:44 -0500

Reformer? Maverick? Defender of motherhood? Independent-minded woman? Former beauty queen? Serious politico? Moose hunter?

As soon as John McCain announced that Alaska Governor Sarah Palin would be his running mate, the liberal vs. conservative online discussion was off to the races! Progressive bloggers are shocked at Palin's positions on reproductive choice, gun control and religion in schools, just to name a few.

Conservative bloggers have been put off by this reaction, wondering why women should have been expected to celebrate Hillary Clinton's run for the presidency, but not Sarah Palin's shot at moving into the vice-president's home at the Naval Observatory in January.

The diverse scuttlebutt in the blogopshere is fascinating.

As I read and think about Sarah Palin, I personally see someone who is WAY too conservative for me (now there's a surprise, right?). But I have to acknowledge that there are things about her story that are temptingly attractive -- she grew up in a small town (like me) where people probably didn't expect much, either of life or of her, how she went from a PTA mom to governor, how she has been able to figure out the work/life balance thing. When she says things like it's OK for her kids to eat macaroni and cheese instead of having a Governor's mansion chef prepare meals every night, I can relate to that kind of life.

I assume there are lots of other women who also find things appealing about Palin. Just as I assume there are many who have concerns about how she's being discussed and worries about what she's saying.

People are talking about Palin in a way we don't talk about men candidates because she is the mother of young children. And how we view her because of that is as diverse as we are.

Elissa's Illuminations, in wondering about the discussion on Palin's approach to motherhood, asks:

Why does talking about [putting] children first become reason to call people anti-feminist?

[Palin] is putting herself out there to be looked at, and I will not be afraid to say that moms are invaluable and we need to put our children first. There is nothing anti-feminist about that. And if there is, if I am going to be judged as living in the dark ages because I want to find a way to put my children first, then give me a boar and a club and send me into the cave...just make sure my kids are there too.

Many, including myself, have wondered whether in scrutinizing Palin through the lens of motherhood, we are igniting a new wave of Mommy Wars. Kate at Vice Squad weighs in on that, saying:

For most women, most mothers anyway, Sarah Palin's situation will seem both alien and familiar. Most of us have never run for high office but we've all had to justify our work lives to our families and vice versa. The question in her case is, just what does her family life tell us about how she'd do the job she's asking us to give her?

For others, in assessing Palin, it's not about her motherhood, but about her lack of exposure to things other than suburban Anchorage.Mocha Momma says:

[Palin] scoffed at Obama’s community organizing and pushed for her own small town agenda. You know what I heard in that thinly veiled line? Her lack of experience with people of color and the power of community organization. She doesn’t know cities or poverty that way or even what that does for education. She is keeping that dividing line bold and prominent by letting me see what she thinks about that: small town = hard-working white farming families vs. city/community = blacks and latinos and asians and other people she knows nothing about. She so wasn’t talking to me.

So where does that leave us with Sarah Palin? I don't think we'll know for a long time, whether she is elected to be the next Vice President or not. But it sure will keep providing us with a lot of good blog fodder.

Joanne Bamberger, a Contributing Editor for Politics & News, writes about politics at her place PunditMom. You can also find her at MOMocrats and The Huffington Post.