Make Her Whine
Already the Democratic pundits are worrying about whether to attack Sarah Palin -- will it look like bullying? Will it make voters sympathize with her? Will it make voters identify with her and vote for her? Women are supposed to lay off her because -- she is a woman! The thinking goes that we can't question her choices because women's choices are sacrosanct. Nor can we investigate her life (beauty queen, Christian Dominionist, links to Ted Stevens, childbearing history) because those are private issues. But what Sarah Palin shows is that once again, the right wing is adept at turning the women's movement upside down and offering us a woman who reinforces patriarchal power rather than challenges it. Palin is another Margaret Thatcher or Ann Coulter, a woman who attaches herself to men in power and then does them one better. She uses the freedom that the women's movement has brought her quash the liberation of women with other views than hers. The bitch is in there, as it is with Coulter and Thatcher and Katherine Harris. The Democrats have to bring that bitch out and she has given us the right to do it.
Did she really accuse Hillary Clinton of "whining?" Then she's already told us that she won't mind any challenge -- that she can rise to any question. I want to see her do it. The personal is political, after all. Here are some issues she has to explain: What is her religion and who is her pastor? Is she a Christian Dominionist and how does she feel about the separation of church and state? How does she square her roles as mother and politican? Who is taking care of the kids while she is away, including the baby? If it's the husband, I'm glad. If it's a nanny and always has been, then I want to know how a wealthy woman with a nanny helps women in general -- wealthy women with nannies are nothing new. If she's into "family values," I want to know what they are, and how the nanny views Palin's "family values." If she produced a child at 44, I want to know if she believes in birth control, because birth control is a political issue. I also want to know her views on the government's obligations to the disabled. Do the disabled children of rich people get special treatments that their parents can afford, while the disabled children of poor people get nothing? Who is the boss in her family? If it's her, then I want to know how that squares with Christian notions of patriarchy. If it's the husband, then I want to know his values and beliefs about all the issues that face the nation, and I want to know who will actually be the vice president. I want to see her tax returns. I want to see his tax returns.
About the breastfeeding. Breastfeeding is a political issue because the baby formula companies have promoted baby formula all over the world, much to the detriment of babies. If she's a family values right winger, I would expect her to back those values up by breastfeeding for six months to a year, at least. If she's not breastfeeding, frankly, and she doesn't believe in birth control, then she's a hypocrite. She has to run as a right wing family values soccer mom or she has to run as a woman who has gained freedoms through the efforts of other women. She can't do both.
Is she really a gun-toting moose-killer, or is this a pose? What are her ties to the oil and gas industries -- and I don't mean her beliefs. I want to know who paid her and when and how much. She says she doesn't know what the vice president does, so I want to know what she thinks about Dick Cheney and the unitary executive. I want to know if she understands the Constitution and what the limits of the executive branch are. I want to know if she's ever been abroad, if she has ever written anything about the Iraq war, or if she's just a follower with a pretty smile, who goes along with the big boys in order to get a little something for herself. I want to know how she treats her children, what kind of mom she is, because I want to know about her personal morality. This is a valid issue, because in the last eight years we discovered with George Bush that once a bully, always a bully. I want those kids from her high school to come forward and tell me what she was like back then.
We had years to relate to HIllary Clinton. We saw her through good times and bad. We saw her do things we didn't agree with, and we saw her do things we did agree with. She was an open book in many ways. Sarah Palin accused her of "whining." I didn't agree with Clinton, and I didn't support her, but I never accused her of whining. That "whining" remark is the hallmark of a bitchy and and arrogant point of view -- a characteristic of all conservative women politicians. So, Sarah thinks she can take it. I say we give it to her good.
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
Someone please tell me why, just because a woman is pro-life, she can't be a feminist?
I'm confused how millions of women who are pro-life are viewed as being supportive of male sexual domination.
It doesn't make sense.
I am a single male but have a question(s): Why would a woman, who has such a strong "pro-life"-"anti-abortion" belief, have a amniocentesis on her unborn child? From what I understand this can be a very risky procedure for the unborn. Why have the test, and risk the life of the unborn, when, because of your belief, would not terminate the life regardless of any abnormalities?
Because when you are over 40, doctors routinely recommend them.
Well, since you didn't answer my question, but instead posed a question of your own, I will answer your question, then ask you to go back and answer mine.
Why? The procedure is pretty routine, and the risk of miscarriage during the procedure is extremely low, between 1 in 200 to 1 in 1600, depending on who you ask.
Reasons are (from the american pregnancy association):
1- Pursue potential interventions that may exist (i.e. fetal surgery for spina bifida)
2- Begin planning for a child with special needs
3- Start addressing anticipated lifestyle changes
4- Identify support groups and resources
5- Make a decision about carrying the child to term
ANy thoughts on my question?
Well, since you didn't answer my question, but instead posed a question of your own, I will answer your question, then ask you to go back and answer mine.
Why? The procedure is pretty routine, and the risk of miscarriage during the procedure is extremely low, between 1 in 200 to 1 in 1600, depending on who you ask.
Reasons are (from the american pregnancy association):
1- Pursue potential interventions that may exist (i.e. fetal surgery for spina bifida)
2- Begin planning for a child with special needs
3- Start addressing anticipated lifestyle changes
4- Identify support groups and resources
5- Make a decision about carrying the child to term
ANy thoughts on my question?
Let me make just one guess.
Is there ANY possibility there was a MEDICAL reason for it? Maybe? geeeezzz
Have you considered that Pro-Choice is not equal to Pro-Abortion? When it is illegal for a woman to choose what to do with her body, then she is living under a justice system consistent with patriarchal power. To then support this system of power over women is anti-feminist.
There are feminists who oppose the act of abortion and who may work to convince women to avoid getting an abortion, but the power of persuasion is very different than the power of the law, a law still waking from centuries of male domination.
Does that make sense?
Right on Jane - so very rational and true. I especially want to know about birth control, and how her career-first attitude squares with her "family values", Since it is women, in part, McCain is pandering, women's questions should get a high priority.
Who can we recruit to make this case loudly and repeatedly until we get these answers from her?
Arianna?
Hillary?
Nancy?
Barbara?
Katie?
Joy? (Ooooh do you think she'll go on the View???)
Dang I wish Ann Richards was still with us!
Seems like it should be a woman doing the questioning. If we hear of her doing a national sit-down, I hope this post makes it to the hands of the interviewer!
Palin isn't supposed to be a substitute for Hilary Clinton. She's the Republican Everywoman that the Republican base will instantly trust. If you or I imagined Palin trying to absorb a briefing on history, eoncomics, international oil wars, and uranium sales to Al Queda before neotiating nuclear peace with Putin, we'd be building bomb shelters and converting all our dollars to Swiss Francs. If the Republican Base imagined it, they'd just see Mother Mary perched on a leather chair, dazzling Putin with her peace and light.
McCain knows better. He's the ultimate anything-to-win cynic.
You should give her some credit. She has more executive experience than Obama. He has never so much as run a 99 cent store.
Ridiculous statement. Obama has run a huge national campaign with incredible competency. Nothing as well run in American history.
However, it's Palin's total lack of interest in, experience with or qualification for national public life that is so indicative of the Republicans complete disregard for what is best for America, and total devotion to what is good for the Republican party.
This is a political choice that does absolutely nothing for the best interests of the American people.
oh i'm sorry... just how many face the nation or meet the press appearances has this NATIONAL candidate made? curious I count.
January 22, 2006
October 26, 2006
November 11, 2007
December 30, 2007
May 4th 2008
July 27th 2008
That seems to be 6. hmm curious. how much do we really know about Gov. Palin?
Neither has McCain.
Obama has 7 years in the state senate of Illinois, and 3 years and 9 months as a United States Senator - I tally that at 10 years + in public office. On top that his years as a community organizer, professor of American Constitutional law, etc.
Obama has run a brilliant campaign financially.
He has taken every aim that both his Democratic opponents and the Republican ones have flung at him, including outright lies and swiftboating tactics, and survived.
So I do give him a lot of credit.
Palin has been Governor for 1.5 years, mayor of a town of population of a few thousand, has a bachelor in communications which she attended by winning a scholarship by coming in 2nd on the Miss Alaska beauty pagent and was briefly an anchor on a small tv station.
We will see how this Palin choice turns out.
She will not pick up the Hillary vote as she is pretty much the opposite of Hillary.
And she was FOR the so-called Bridge to nowhere before she was AGAINST it.
I doubt if she was properly vetted because I seriously doubt she was ever seriously in the running. I think this was a crap shoot for John.
Can you seriously imagine her as president? Maybe in a TV movie.
McCain has just thrown out the window what has previously been his most important argument against Obama.
Yes, but so did Bush, and that worked out how? McCain has never had a command position. Also, Obama has far more credits than Palin. I think his resume should count as much or more than her meager experience.
And who the hell does she think she is, wanting to outlaw birth control for married women? That is so Republican--government out of our lives, but totally into our bedrooms, dictating when and how we should have sexual relations with our legal husbands, and making us have more children than we can afford and can raise.
Love your article and only hope that all your questions will be answered. I'm sure people are also wanting the answers to alot of questions concerning Palin that don't even have anything to do with being a woman. I think McCain has clearly shown us that winning is more important to him than his country. With all the more qualified candidates, including women, why Palin?!!
Because Palin has the looks and charisma, which got Obama to where he is, equally inexperienced.
They just marched you guys right on out with the talking points.
"Already the Democratic pundits are worrying about whether to attack Sarah Palin -- will it look like bullying? "
Please! Obama's campaign hardly worried about attacking Hillary. And the lefty blogosphere has been going nonstop with its corrosive sexist crap, just as it did with Hillary. But if Obama and Biden are smart, they will simply ignore her and go after McCain.
Hillary could handle it.
Why is it "sexist" to criticize a woman's positions? Would you feel better if another woman was doing the criticizing?
Amen! Thank you! The MSM and sadly the left, too, is so sexist ... cluelessly so or not?
Note Bill Maher's show the other night, clips of his talking with Senators and Reps on the convention floor. He put his arm around USRep Maxine Waters and said, "that's my girl!" We're supposed to think that's just cute? Let's see him call one of the male Reps "my boy."
Meanwhile, read Susan Faludi's "Terror Dream."
Obama's campaign was mild on Hillary, compared to Rush Limbaugh and all his right-wing nut jobs who went at her full force. She was called every nasty name in the book, plus several that were made up.
The Dems will never be as abusive to Palin. And it isn't abuse to question her qualifications and where she stands on the issues.
I have read ON THIS SITE a story about Palin's newest child. I will not repeat it here but it was a terrible way to run an election. It WILL hurt the cause for Obama.
Just last week Michelle Obama gave a great speech about her interesting life. Obama has the same kind of nice story. SO DOES Palin. It deserves the SAME respect. You all really make it hard to win elections.
I guess this shows consistency with Phil Gramm's "nation of whiners" position.
Her whining about Hillary really turned me off.
I have a question or two about Gov Palin. She said she did not tell her children why they were going to Ohio on Friday, that they thought it was a surprise for her husband on their wedding anniversary. Did she not discuss this decision with them before she made it? This is a pretty big move for them, the press will be all over the entire family, not just her. Not too mention moving them to the other side of the country for the next four years. What kind of parent does that?
Also - if she's so busy running the state of Alaska, and dad is working full time, who is home schooling the children?
Just a litte courious........
I couldn't agree more. The media has looked into everything the Clintons have ever done or thought about doing and vetted Barack Obama from childhood through to where he is today. It is their duty to do the same for her so that the public can see who she is to make choices based on fact rather than spin.
Great piece except the questionabout who is looking after the children? I'm sure they are well taken care of, be it by her husband or a nanny. I can't remember the last male politician who was asked about this and it's unfair and demeaning to ask this of any woman.
Appropriately enough for a woman who wants to shove creationist claptrap into the schools, she is McBush's Hail Mary pass.
She says be open and teach both, if the people want both to be taught. Otherwise, tax dollars end up being taken out of the system when people decide to home school the children.
I think all theories or myths of origins should be explored in schools. That would include evolution, with most weight, but also alternative theories of intelligent design, dumb design, spontaneous creation, Norse myths, Navajo myths, even the great meatball theory of the spaghetti monster--my favorite.
Not in a science class. Maybe in Comparative Religion but creationism, dumb design, Norse myths, etc do not belong in a science classroom.
Evolution is not a theory of origin. Nowhere does it attempt to explain where life started, just how it changes. This misconception drives me nuts.
This is the best article on "this woman" that I've seen. Thanks, Jane.
Excellent group of starters questions. My guess is that the vetting process, done properly, probably includes an even more extensive grilling.
With more time to choose a running mate than Obama had, McCain's choice shows us two things... the lack of talent in today's GOP (the primaries showed that too) and his impatience with the decision making processes that a President must undergo. This does not show much change from an administration that felt Harriet Myers was the most qualified person out there to be a Supreme Court judge. It was Republicans who killed that one. Perhaps some will rebel about this choice.
Basically, what McCain has sais is that he will have no Vice President. He will have a running mate, but does anybody believe this person he barely knows will have actual duties as VP?
You're right, Biden needs to come at her hard, but he also must take her and the debate seriously. He can trounce her on every issue, but if she keeps her cool and scores with one sharp sound bite, that's all that will be remembered.
Sarah Palin needs to know that there are no separate rules for women in politics, ... not in the lower 48, at least. There are no "freethrow" in this game, and it's one on one until the game whistle sounds. She ought to catch an elbow for calling Hillary a "Whiner", and my guess is that she will.
In the end, McCain's "Northern Exposure" will cost him the votes of women who have earned their letters in political service and the work world, ... which is almost everyone I know!
Are you kidding?
There is no reason in the world not to go after her. The republicans led the way with feminazi.
The personal questions can be asked in the same context that John And Elizabeth Edwards were asked about her cancer impacting on the campaign and the presidency.
Her religion preferences have to be asked in the same context as Obama's.
And her experience and lack of experience should be highlighted and shouted from the roof tops.
My God, this women could be president some day and not by our choosing. If John McCain were to die in office, she would be fodder for all the ultra neo-conservatives and then GOD HELP US ALL!!!!!
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
