Contrary to what some political operatives are suggesting, this is not choice of a desperate candidate but the electrification and rejuvenation of the Republican base. Call it GOP Shock Treatment. The GOP race was deflated after the nomination race and the base demoralized. Most republicans were keeping a low profile and/or licking their wounds with the selection of John McCain as their candidate. More than a few republicans suggested they could only hold their nose and pull the level come Election Day – if they bothered to go out and vote at all.
All of which brings me to my two pet theories of American politics. Since republicans and democrats are more or less evenly divided in the US it is necessary that one party possess what I call the ‘pull-cull factor’. If no pull-cull factor exists, the best each candidate can hope for is that opposing party has so demoralize their base that it stays home in droves. The most vivid illustration of the pull-cull factor in action is the election of Jimmy Carter. Here was a man with little talent and few ideas beyond general malaise.
The American electorate in general was so totally demoralized by the Watergate-Nixon scandal that a candidate without seemingly wile and guile gave the appearance of ideal. Both democrats and republican voters were further outraged by President Ford’s pardoning of Nixon that the GOP base stayed home or switch sides rather than support Gerald Ford for another term despite Ford’s obvious decency and general competence.
But the sly old maverick lit a fire under the base and picked the perfect VP candidate to energize and unite the base while at the same stealing Obama’s campaign narrative of change and hope. In Sarah Palin’s narrative there is something for every American to relate to, hope and aspire for. Obama picked a VP candidate who represents the worse excesses of Washington old/boy insider politics while McCain, the old trooper, deliberately chose ‘new blood’ to lead and mentor so that the next generation to hold the torch - will not flounder or fall.
My second theory is that Americans prefer candidates who they would feel comfortable sitting down to beer and hot dogs with on the fourth of July. Given a choice between Barack Obama/Joe Biden or John McCain and Sarah Palin who do you really think American voters would feel more at home with? Hell, give Palin a gun or a rod and she will not only be able to go out and get dinner but cook it as well. Finally, a woman candidate for all seasons.
Sarah Palin is the modern feminist ideal in action which more women chose to pattern themselves after given the alternative of the Pelosi/Boxer/Clinton mode. And no - Kathy; Palin does not need a make-over. Her hair and glasses are perfect. She is gorgeous just the way she is. Generally conservative women do not find it desirable to resemble either Nancy Pelosi or Hillary Clinton. Nor do we all dream of looking like Pamela Anderson in Frederick’s of Hollywood. But I have a prediction. In the coming days more American women will be choosing to wear their hair in the Sarah Palin up-do manner. As for me, I have a jumpstart on you all as this is my normal work hairstyle and I already own the reading glasses.
I have a general criticism of the press, well the Liberal press, which is this; contrary to reports like this AP article that has been widely circulated (taken from the Globe and Mail)
Ms. Palin's name had not been on the short list of people heavily reported upon by the news media in recent days, and Mr. McCain's decision was a well-kept secret until just a couple hours before Friday's rally.
It is completely understandably that the Canadian Globe and Mail has zero feel for American politics but who the frack are the alleged politico journalists writing for the AP these days? She was clearly in the running and I wrote about her early last June.
I could add pilot, runner, fiscal & ethics reformer and as well as mother of many to her narrative, and before any of you groan, I would caution you of two pertinent facts about women who have raised multiple decent children to at least adolescence – mothers of many usually possess three skills in abundance – the ability to make quick judgments and the knowledge how to multi-task and delegate. This is what one needs in any executive officer.
But it takes a spokeswoman for the Democratic candidate for change to pull back to the old politics of diversion and division when a new day dawns, and I quote.
"Today, John McCain put the former mayor of a town of 9,000 with zero foreign policy experience a heartbeat away from the presidency," Adrianne Marsh, a spokeswoman for Mr. Obama, said in a written statement.Sarah Palin was the former mayor of a small town, just like the thousands of other mayors of towns which literally cover the American landscape and make up the heartland of America. This is a deliberate ploy to diminish her accomplishments by denying her rightful title of Governor, and seeks to paint her governorship as nothing more than small change. Misogyny thy name is Democrat.
As for her lack of foreign policy experience, well I think that depends on how you look at her term as governor of Alaska for the last 20 months. Already she has had to oversee and conduct due diligence on an application for a license for a Transcanada pipeline deal. And yes, we are foreigners, and given the strong ethos of anti-Americanism which runs through the Canadian psyche, I would say that already puts her foreign policy credentials way ahead of Barak Obama who is running for POTUS and not the second slot of an election ticket.
crossposted to Dust my Broom
14 comments:
"This is a deliberate ploy to diminish her accomplishments by denying her rightful title of Governor, and seeks to paint her governorship as nothing more than small change. Misogyny thy name is Democrat."
Heh. Well, I guess that was predictable. Any criticism of Palin's inexperience will be due to "misogyny" (whether her gender is referenced or not, of course).
Heh. Well, I guess that was predictable. Any criticism of Palin's inexperience will be due to "misogyny" (whether her gender is referenced or not, of course).
Oh pleaseeee. You know very well if she were a man no democrat would be referring to her as a ‘mayor’ rather than a governor. I am surprised I have to remind you that misogynists always downplay or degrade the accomplishments of women...and are you seriously suggesting there is not a pronounced element of misogyny in criticism of Palin?
Geeze, all those references from CNN talking heads yesterday referencing her newborn baby and suggesting her time was better spent at home taking care of her ‘baby’? Of course, there was no direct reference to her sex but it is still misogynistic.
Or we could just turn to the Huffington Post and demand she answer questions concerning her personal birth control methods/history or her breastfeeding habits/non-habits a la Jane Smiley.
The day Obama or Biden needs to justify and answer questions concerning their preferred method of birth control and/or whether or not their wives breastfeed or not, is the day the misogynistic label comes off the Democrats. Until then, if the shoe fits...
"are you seriously suggesting there is not a pronounced element of misogyny in criticism of Palin? "
I am seriously suggesting that in the excerpt you chose to quote, there isn't a whiff of misogyny.
Are some of her critics sexist? No doubt, just as some of Obaman's critics are racist and some of McCain's critics are ageist.
Balbulican, the deliberate choice of the Obama campaign to come right off the cuff and refer to her as a “mayor” rather than her rightful title of “governor” is decidedly misogynistic.
I can come up with a half-a dozen epithets for the Saracuda but to deny the woman her current elected title is nothing more than an exercise in framing her as the ‘little woman’.
Heh. Well, I guess that was predictable. Any criticism of Palin's inexperience will be due to "misogyny" (whether her gender is referenced or not, of course).
I would be remiss in my duties as host, if I did not suggest the "clue that we’re about to read something silly is your use of the phrase “of course”, a sure fire indicator of highly dubious assertions ahead."
‘Nuff said.
"Balbulican, the deliberate choice of the Obama campaign to come right off the cuff and refer to her as a “mayor” rather than her rightful title of “governor” is decidedly misogynistic."
Nonsense. The appellation "mayor" draws attention to the issue of her experience, not her gender.
"I would be remiss in my duties as host, if I did not suggest the "clue that we’re about to read something silly is your use of the phrase “of course”, a sure fire indicator of highly dubious assertions ahead.""
While I am certainly flattered by your citation, and the implicit recognition of expertise that underlies your selection of authorities in this matter, may I respectfully note that in this, the assertion which preceded (not followed) the phrase "of course" turns out, in fact, to have proven completely accurate, as a casual review of this thread will confirm?
Nonsense. The appellation "mayor" draws attention to the issue of her experience, not her gender.
Palin hasn’t been a mayor in the last six years. Since then, her resume includes a stint as the chairperson for the Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, a failed run for the Lt. Governor and an successful 20 month term as Governor - so why not frame her as experience issue using the ‘former Chairperson for the Oil & Gas Conservation Commission’, or a ‘failed Lt. Governor candidate’ or even new governor, instead the Obama campaign cherry picked her oldest political accomplishment to date. I suppose, to your credit, the phrase “little woman” does not ring any bells for you but it sure resonates for me.
I gave up watching the democratic leadership campaigns after cringing umpteen times to democrats and journalists using the phrase ‘junior senator from New York’ to describe or introduce Hillary Clinton. In all my viewing, I did not once here the phrase ‘junior senator from Illinois’ once to introduce/describe Barack Obama during the leadership campaign. I suppose that couldn’t be considered an exercise in misogyny either because Clinton’s sex was not directly referenced.
But this all reminds me of my experience at a blogfest which was held in Toronto a few years ago. It was a wide-open event and bloggers from all sides of the political spectrum attended as well as a number of non-political bloggers. The blogfest moved upstairs to a party room reserved on the third floor. I came from work and was dressed rather conservatively and typically as the feminine middle-aged woman I am (skirt, nylons, suit jacket, scarf, hair a la Palin bun) and immediately made a bee-line to the left where the chairs were located because my knees were killing me after the 3rd floor hike up the stairs – ode to ballet injuries.
I sat quietly listening to the conversation around me for a time, and then asked the gentlemen immediately in front of me what blogs their authored. Both men, one a staunch progressive and another a partisan liberal, gave me the hard up and down look and then quite emphatically suggested I would never have read or heard of their blogs as they were ‘political’ bloggers. The progressive suggested I would be far more at comfortable with the family/home bloggers who were located across the room and the uber-liberal concurred. I thanked them very politely for their kind suggestion, rose from my chair and went over to talk war with Andrew Coyne. But of course, there wasn’t the obligatory reference to my sex in their words either. And for the record, neither bloggers are on your blogroll but the same cannot be said for other liberals and/or progressives.
"so why not frame her as experience issue using the ‘former Chairperson for the Oil & Gas Conservation Commission’, or a ‘failed Lt. Governor candidate’ or even new governor, instead the Obama campaign cherry picked her oldest political accomplishment to date?"
Ummm....because this is a political campaign, and that dismissive characterization is meant to minimize her achievement and focus the reader's attention on the limited scale of political achievements. Was that a serious question?
"I suppose, to your credit, the phrase “little woman” does not ring any bells for you..."
Sorry...who used that phrase? Wasn't it you? (Or did I miss it in the article?)
The rest of your post seems determined to convince me that sexism exists (yup, thanks, I know that), and that it exists on the left as well as the right (yup, thanks, I knew that too.)
My point is that Sarah Palin's governance and international political experience are somewhat limited. She no doubt has many strengths, but those are not them. It IS legitimate to draw critical attention to that, and that, I submit, was the intent of the dismissive characterization. To say that represents a Hatred of Women is unjustified.
Balbulican, spin it whatever way cranks your chain but if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like duck, does not make it a moose in my world.
Got it.
All the criticism cited refers to her experience. None of the criticism refers to gender.
Therefore the critics hate women.
Who's spinning here?
(If you ever have me over for supper, don't serve duck - no-offense, but I now have some concerns about your domestic fowl identification skills.)
Yadda, yadda. Sure you can come for dinner but your far more than likely to get moose, elk or buffalo.
The Democratic statement is void of substance, but it's not misogynist. She is not attacked for being female and neither is she attacked because she is female. She is attacked because she is Republican.
In reality, we don't care what is the size of town she formally headed. She actually has experience of successfully leading a town AND a state. Obama was never in charge of anything, except for some obscure law society.
Her lack of foreign policy experience does not matter either. If she were to become Mrs President, she would need to find a bunch of people who know a lot about a whole range of subjects she has no expertise in.
President's job is to find the right advisors and to inspire the public.
Post a Comment