Am I "Off Message" on Sarah Palin?
Warning! This pundit isn't feeling the same way as most of my colleagues about Sarah Palin. She is being attacked for her lack of experience for the job and for whether she should be putting her family first instead of her career. This just isn't that unusual in my book. And the more it goes on, the more uncomfortable I feel with that message.
I am a woman who someone took a chance on several years ago and gave me a job that had only previously been done by old white guys. Experience? How do you get any if no one takes a chance on you? And the decision to take a chance can be instinctive, as John McCain said. Sure it was a gimmick. But would we feel better if it was Tim Pawlenty? What someone does on a small scale can be a good indicator of what they do on a large scale. So suggesting that she would do any worse than the host of guys who have auditioned for the job isn't that compelling an argument to me. And what about the argument that she is a negligent mother who will be distracted from her important role. I am a mother who constantly feels the pressure from others about whether I am fit to be a parent, whether I put my kids first often enough and whether my son with learning disabilities gets enough of my attention. Who has the right to to judge my family?
My grandmother always said "You can't tell time on someone else's clock". Judgments about people's personal lives are better left unsaid and unrealized.
So why then do I think that Sarah Palin would be a terrible vice president? Because I also think that John McCain would be a terrible president.
I don't care about how Sarah Palin or John McCain take care of their families. I care about how their policy choices affect my family and millions of other Americans.
-McCain and Palin get their health insurance paid for by the government (hers in Alaska and his in Washington). Yet they oppose giving the 42 million other Americans the same access to affordable healthcare.
-John McCain's kids don't have to worry about paying for college. Yet, he has opposed every single education support program to help others.
-McCain and Palin say they will stand up to oil companies. Yet the only energy policy they support gives millions of dollars in tax breaks to oil companies to do more drilling and he has opposed every piece of federal legislation to explore alternative fuel sources.
-McCain and Palin say they will revamp how Washington does business. Yet his campaign is filled with lobbyists and she has been in bed with Senator Ted Stevens funneling federal money for useless projects in Alaska for years.
-McCain and Palin have refused to answer very real questions about her potential abuse of power in Alaska when it came to her firing a State Trooper because she was on a revenge kick for her sister costing an officer his job. And McCain and Palin have no solutions for Americans worrying about their jobs in a fragile economy.
-McCain and Palin want us to leave their families alone. Yet they want make rules for our families by eliminating our right to make our own choices over abortion; eliminate our access to family planning education or domestic partner benefits; and our freedom from discrimination. They want to control what our kids learn in school about sex and about science. In short, through the policies they promote and the judges they support, they want the government to be more in control over our private lives than at any time in history.
-McCain and Palin now say their campaign is about change, too. Yet, the only real change they have proposed is a change from a suit to a skirt in the VP's office and one man fighting a misplaced war for another in the Oval Office. That seems to me to be the right reason to oppose them in November. It's not the process or the people, it's what they represent. This unconventional choice of VP by John McCain won't stand up to the hype and result in a win in November because they are the wrong choice for the country.
Follow Hilary Rosen on Twitter: www.twitter.com/hilaryr
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Political Mavericks don't hide behind cries of "sexism" when they've made a career out of a sexist voting record like John McCain, which is the only thing that has been sexist lately.
i wouldn't say that but these people are
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrG8w4bb3kg
I have to disagree about the experience issue... we're not talking about giving some kid fresh out of college a break with an entry-level position, we're talking about the President of the United States, arguably the most powerful person in the world. We're talking about millions of lives and billions of dollars here, so I think the bar should be set pretty high. There have been great presidents with relatively short legislative careers, but it's also a matter of credentials; in my opinion a BS in Journalism from a small state college does not compare with an advanced degree in Constitutional law from Harvard, Magna Cum Laude. The issue is particularly relevant given McCain's advanced age, and journalists should not feel guilty about bringing this issue up because the McCain campaign whines about it.
On the other hand, the family vs. work argument is irrelevant BS and sexist as well. It is her business how she balances work and family. This argument would never be made against a man. It's unfortunate, because this argument only strengthens the Republicans: it allows them to wrap the legitimate arguments together with the bogus ones under the sexist label. This is really going into overkill (who cares if her husband drove drunk 2
OMG. (I'm rolling my eyes.) Take a chance on Palin? Like Palin's a Hillary Clinton?
Good job Hillary, this is a great read . It is interesting the repubs want privacy for their own families but privacy is not good enough for the American public.
funny how mccain is playing up his "maverick" card even though this is what conservatives have disliked about him all along. i wanted to laugh at the convention yesterday because the things they were mentioning as "good" things that make mccain who he is were things that conservatives took/take issue with, such as immigration, his (formerly) being against bush's tax cuts, etc.
and i agree; everyone can go back and forth on the experience argument forever; it's a losing game because it's a matter of opinion and what kind of experience matters more and "experience" ignores knowledge and judgment. let's just stick to the policies; they have plenty of holes in them and they're what will matter when and if these people get into office.
It's one thing to be for health insurance and great education for everyone...who isn't for those things? It's another thing to find a way to pay for these programs withoult penalizing hard working people. It's so easy to announce on a convention stage that you have this largess towards everyone but where is the fairness when it comes to the price tag. If Obama is elected, he'll be financially set for life, so higher taxes won't alter his lifestyle. However the programs he's suggesting are very expensive and the Republicans are right to say, let's not put a heavy tax burden on Middle America in order to have a more socialist society. And if your reply is Obama said he will not be taxing 95% of Americans, the fact is taxing businesses (small ones and large ones) will make all of us poorer. The other thing that bothers me is so many of the rich people I know, some who blog on this site, are adament that we need to come up with the funds for these programs and yet no one is stopping them for donating a bigger part of their considerable paycheck to the government. Of course when I suggest that to them they change the subject.
After months of McCain AND Hillary attacking Obama's "lack of experience" - and don't forget the 3:00am phone call commercial which has already become a new colloquialism - how can anyone honestly say experience isn't an issue? VPs become POTUS if something happens to the head honcho, you know... McCain's camp is just reusing the old Rove argument - regardless the topic, it only counts when used against the democrat.
I will be so happy when the media wakes up & starts holding the repubs accountable for... anything. Starts thinking about the possible consequences of their policies. Example: the obvious consequences of abstinence-only sex education programs that give no info about contraception; don't give much info about sex at all. Palin's daughter is the picture perfect example of this, with her mother being the cheerleader for keeping kids in the dark about sex.
If it was Obama's teenage daughter who was pregnant out of wedlock, the republicans, the christian right, the media, and everyone else would have a heyday! The fuss about Palin would actually be worse if Palin were a man, because the media wouldn't be so afraid of attacking the first female VP candidate. After watching the media drag Obama through the coals with 24/7 broadcasts of 3 statements taken from 20 years of sermons of the former pastor of Obama's then-church, I can't believe anyone wouldn't laugh in McCain's face for saying the media is being unfair in their questioning of his VP choice.
WAKE UP AMERICA!!!
Hilary,
You're not "off message"--others are. You explained why you believe that her policies do not fit into your ideals. I wish more here would do the same.
Regardless of your personal beliefs, everyone, and especially women, should realize that she recently faced an extraordinarily difficult time in her life. Her unborn child was discovered to have Down's Syndrome--a situation which, from what I read, has changed more than a few previously pro-life women into at least closeted pro-choicers. Even as a Governor, I suspect the pregnancy could have been ended with complete privacy yet she chose to stand by her moral convictions.
While she may well desire to make hers the only legal outcome of such a situation--a position with which I cannot agree--I must applaud her. Like it or not, she made a choice--an extaordinarily difficult choice.
Thank you! I too am not interested in McCain or anyone he would pick as his running mate. I feel sorry for Sarah Palin, despite my complete disagreement with all of her political views and policy solutions. Let's keep on the issues, there are plenty of reasons to highlight why she and the old white guy are not best for leading our country right now. We do not need to focus on how she is raising her children.
It just highlights that women remain judged as parents in a way that men are not. HELLO! There is a father involved. Why are we assuming that he is not present in the lives of these kids? And for pete's sake, the woman has a crib in her office, has the luxury of being able to bring her infant to work with her. Just imagine what could happen for other women if they had that kind of supportive work environment!
I would be glad to only talk about the issues, however, Republicans don't talk about issues. They always bring up personal information about a candidate, and turn it against you. Dukakis, an elitist, Kerry, a cowardly intellectual, oh and Obama, a celebrity elitist. And people respond to these attacks. The difference in what people are saying about Palin's family choices, and experience are actually based on facts. It is not sexist to raise questions on her role as a parent. I question any parent that decides to have another baby, and then goes back to work 3 days later, she went back to work the next day after her 4th child. I assume she waiting 3 days on her 5th because she gave birth on a Friday. I question any parent that goes on a campaign when they have a 4 month old baby. I would question a man that was chosen as a VP with less than 2 years experience as a small state governor with absolutely no foreign policy experience. I would also bring up the fact that men that were better suited for this position were passed up, because they were men, and isn't that sexism?
"Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father".
-John McCain, 1998
Nice man. Fighting sexism all the way to the bank.
I am so surprised at the comments I have read. I am Pro Choice but the optimal word is Choice. I feel strongly that women should be shocked at the comments that condemn her for her choices, whether it is to keep her baby or the family has decided the 17 year old choose to also keep her baby. I worked her with marches for the ERA and Choice but I never felt that Choice was just for those who choose to terminate a pregnancy.
I share your sentiment on her personal life. I'm a Dem, but find it insulting to assume that a woman with ambition can't choose to pursue her dreams and juggle a family. A lot of us are doing it . And the pregnant daughter that is 17....we can all relate. Sorry even a stay at home Mom can't prevent thatl. And since when did a 17 year old care what career impact his/her hormones would have on their parents career? Give me a break.....Only her qualifications (or lack thereof) should matter. But then again where have all the career politicians gotten us. Maybe untainted fresh eyes is what we need. YOU GO GIRL!
The Vice Presidency of the U.S. is not an internship.
Very important point, and must be taken into serious consideration with regard to the issue Ms. Rosen has raised. I guess it comes down to what a person is comfortable with on a personal level.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
