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
The family melodrama is clearly the sideshow that the Republicans WANT us to focus on. Then they can shout sexism! hypocricy! liberalmedia! They are wagging the dog, folks.
The real issues:
1. Abuse of power scandal, eerily reminiscent of Bush. An executive who fires someone for refusing to break the law to enact revenge on a personal enemy will use the same approach on her political enemies.
2. Lying to the public about #1. 14 members of her administation and her husband contacted Monegan, trying to get brother-in-law fired. They all denied it until one was caught on tape. Then they say, yes, those people (including hubby) pressured Monegan, but Sarah had no knowledge of it. How credible is that?
3. Close ties to rightwing separtist group whose leader "renounced allegiance" to America and her "damn flag." Sorry, Republicans--karma is a bitch.
4. Hired a lobbyist to get earmarks. Her tiny town of 6000 made McCain's list of the worst earmark-offenders three times!
5. Lying to the public about #4, about bridge to nowhere, and about ties to Stevens--all in introduction speech!
6. Undeniable evidence that McCain picked Palin without vetting her and is now lying about it.
Don't let the right wing distract you with the babymama story. These issues relate directly to what sort of VP Palin would be. I defy anyone to find anything in that list that could possibly be considered "sexist" or unreasonable for the press to investigate.
Hillary,
I don't think this is a time to "give a chance" to someone like Palin to lead our country. We are fighting multiple wars, in a dragging recession, and dealing with terrorists that will not "give her a chance." We are dealing with human lives out there in Iraq, and she only recently got into it! If we don't keep asking the tough questions, we are doing a deservice to our troops and our people.
Sarah Palin did not inform her husband, her children, nor her own parents or grandparents that McCain had contacted her to be his VP. When she was introduced by McCain to the public, she said it, herself, that she hadn’t told her family members about the VP pick. She said, and it’s on tape, that she told her mother, her husband, and her eldest son to “simply” watch the news at a certain time—Her entire family didn’t find out about her being selected for VP until it was announced on the news. During her introduction by McCain in Ohio, she giggled and said that she only told her husband she had a big 20th Anniversary gift for him. She got a rather tepid applause from the Ohio audience. I find it strange that Palin would in effect perform a “black opt” on her own family about her VP selection. I figure, Palin didn’t tell her own mother, because her own mother would have reminded her that she has an infant to deal with along with a pregnant daughter. To avoid having her family talking her out of taking the VP slot, she simply sprung it on them as a “Pandora’s surprise”—once out of the box, you just can’t “nationally” put it back in. Obviously, Palin intentionally avoided her own family’s input and influence in her quest for political fame. Perhaps this family will ultimately suffer as a result of “mom’s” selfish quest for success.
Hillary- Shame on you for actually focusing on the issues, instead of a smoke and mirrors emo-culture war!
It's all been about diverting away from McCain's lackluster package of goods.
Yes Hilary, you are not only "off message" but you've taken a left turn away from any reasonable conclusion. The Vice Presidency of this country is not an appropriate office for fast-and-loose experimental affirmative action. There's plenty of evidence that Palin is wholely unfit for this job or God forbid for the Presidency. The stakes are just too high, and by the way there are dozens of qualified, experienced Republican women that meet the fundamental job requirements more closely than Palin, who would be a disaster.
I have to say as a woman and an Obama supporter that your brand of blind "feminism" in the Clinton camps is part of what really turned me off of her campaign. Women who ask to be or who are promoted for reasons other than merit make it harder for those of us who hope to be judged on our credentials alone in the work place.
Hillary,
THANK YOU for this entry. I agree with you 100%.
Todd Palin is not a a documented member of AIP: For those of you who don't know what AIP stands for; let me reprint this mission statement of the party's founder, Joe Volger:
"I'm an Alaskan, not an American..
This makes Michelle Obama look angelic.
"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.
It shows an icredible lack of judgement and disrespect for the office of the presidency to choose a running mate that has so much baggage (secessionism and indictment along with the teenage pregnancy.
Hillary, you're showing the way here, a path leading away from the culture wars. The other Hillary--HRC--needs to challenge Palin openly. I'd suggest a debate, framed along these lines: "you invoked me as your precursor, you've arrogated onto yourself the mantle of feminist leadership, so let's have a debate focused on women's issues. I was vetted on many issues & policies for 18 months, and if you want to be v.p. you should face a similar trail by fire to determine your policies and the principles they're based on, as well as on the role your religious beliefs play in your social and economic vision/agenda.
Part I
Hilary, you are a brilliant person but I think you don't understand why we, bloggers with funny names, wrote 5000+ post about Palin's family. One word: CYNICISM. This country has been going down the tubes for the average folk for years. Not for the upper class, but for the average worker. Wealth is relative, Hilary, and when the average family sees the upper class pulling away year after year what do you expect? Joy? People aren't stupid, Hilary, they see they work more hours every year for the same pay while their bills increase every month, college tuition is up, health care costs are waaay up, energy prices are up, credit card debt is up and food prices are up.
Thank you Hilary! Finally someone discussing issues instead of making sexist attacks on how much time she spends with her family or the mistakes of members of our family. I would love to have such an educated discussion, and this is coming from a hard-core republican woman!
How lovely that the media and the public should "leave Palin alone"...k
It wasn't so long ago that Obama was being berated for attending a church where a preacher had an opinion that the public didn't like.
If the roles were reversed and Obama's daughter (10 years older) was pregnant by a boy who referred to himself as an "f-ing redneck", do you think the public and the media would keep his family out of this. Or do you think the McCain camp would chew him up and spit him out on "family values".
I appreciate Obama's stance on the issue, but he is a better man than I (that is why he should be president). I say, you get into this game and you better be ready to play...and some of the players play dirty so buck up!! And if the family shouldn't be "up for critisim" then maybe they should stay home--keep them out of the spotlight constantly
I agree with part of this and disagree with some.
What is right is that the argument that someone with children, or small children, should not be running for such a position, is a bad one that liberals shouldn't be making. Although to date I have not seen any liberals make it, although I have seen a number of people criticize liberals for making it.
But the experience argument is wrong for precisely the reason Froomkin gives in his post. The problem is not that she has no experience in office so much as that she does not seem to have formed opinions on the major issues of the day. This is someone who said a year and a half ago that she was too busy too have a firm opinion on Iraq.
There is a real difference between someone like Obama, who is thoughtful about every issue that is put to him, and Palin (at least from what has come out so far) which goes far beyond the years in this or that office.
The issue of affirmative action was raised on this thread and it occurred to me that Barack Obama may or may not have benefitted from it. But one thing I can be certain of, affirmative action did not help him win the presidency of the Harvard Law Review.
So while the republicans have continued to beat the drums on how 'inexperienced' he is, I think the facts show just the opposite.
He's a solid candidate that shows class and credibility. I think Obama demonstrates genuine concern for those who cast their votes for him as well as those who don't. I wish I could say the same for the republicans.
I almost never agreed with you when you wrote about Clinton during the primaries but I almost always enjoyed your posts. In this instance I can say that I both agree with you and enjoy your writing.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
