Next post
All because she doesn’t support “women’s issues”, meaning she doesn’t support abortion. Because, you know, all women care about is abortion. That’s it. Only abortion. Nothing else.
Sen. John McCain’s choice of Alaska governor Sarah Palin as his running mate is a cynical effort to appeal to disappointed Hillary Clinton voters and get them to vote, ultimately, against their own self-interest.
Gov. Palin may be the second woman vice-presidential candidate on a major party ticket, but she is not the right woman. Sadly, she is a woman who opposes women’s rights, just like John McCain.
The fact that Palin is a mother of five who has a 4-month-old baby, a woman who is juggling work and family responsibilities, will speak to many women. But will Palin speak FOR women? Based on her record and her stated positions, the answer is clearly No.
…
What McCain does not understand is that women supported Hillary Clinton not just because she was a woman, but because she was a champion on their issues. They will surely not find Sarah Palin to be an advocate for women.
OK, that’s not fair of me. In the press release, there’s other stuff in there that count as “women’s issues”. There’s domestic violence legislation, pay equity, and “advocacy”. Sorry. I guess that means other issues, like the economy, national security, and energy independence are men’s issues that women don’t care about.
Well, I guess that makes me a dude. Because you know what? I don’t have any clue what they mean by this mysterious advocacy for women. I don’t see the hype about domestic violence, and I’m a freaking survivor of domestic abuse. Isn’t domestic abuse already illegal? If it’s reported, then the abuser goes to jail. I’ve volunteered at domestic abuse shelters,. There’s a lot of avenues for an abused woman to explore when it comes to getting help and prosecuting abusers, and the only thing required of the victim is to seek help. If she doesn’t, then there’s nothing anyone can do. I know this from firsthand experience. So, does that mean the state should intervene? Do random relationship checks to make sure that no one is being abused? I mean, what is the government supposed to do to fix that? What am I missing?
Of course, the big “women’s issue” to feminists is abortion. This is apparently on the forefront of all women’s minds, and we’re all pro-choice. Those of us who are pro-life are either brainwashed or self-haters. But what feminists don’t seem to understand is that women actually — GASP!! — care about other stuff, too. What a concept: women care about big-boy issues like the economy and the War on Terror, too!
Also, if anyone wants to talk about condescension towards women, you can’t even begin to have that discussion without mentioning modern day feminism. They are sneeringly condescending to any woman who doesn’t agree with them. This NOW press release is dripping with condescension. It’s as if women can’t understand for themselves what they want. Thank God feminism came along to educate us ignorant women who can’t understand how important it is to be able to have an abortion! So you’re pro-life? It’s OK, honey, you just don’t know any better yet. Don’t worry, we’ll tell you what to think, because you clearly can’t decide for yourself.
Why do feminists get to decide what “women’s issues” are? As far as I’m concerned, there’s no such thing. There are no women’s issues. There are no men’s issues. There are just issues, and each person can individually decide for themselves what they think. I don’t need anyone, and especially not anyone representing NOW, telling me what issues are important to me.
Feminists seem to get the idea that they speak for all women. Well, they don’t. They speak for some women, and just because NOW doesn’t like Sarah Palin, it doesn’t mean that women — even Democratic women — won’t be willing to vote for her. The average American woman, Republican, Democrat, or Independent, is more than a single-issue voter. It’s part of the reason that feminism is no longer mainstream. Until they’re willing to accept different women with different ideas and different values, they won’t be endearing many women to them. Sarah Palin, however, will. Whether NOW likes it or not.
Hat Tip: Karin at the NeW blog (bookmark them if you haven’t already!)
Mat says: Actually, I’m not shocked at all, and I said as much to my parents when news came out Friday that Palin would be VP. I told them the feminists would never accept her because she’s not one of them, so fully expect them to move away from her. Hey, if the feminists would marginalize themselves to the fringe left, more power to them. They shouldn’t be surprised when no one really takes them seriously. I haven’t taken NOW seriously since they backed Bill Clinton after his nonsense. I believe that the Democrats (anf the left in general) are really underestimating Palin, to their peril. As I stated in a previous post,
McCain has the win now, the Democrats just don’t realize it. And trust me, they are much more worried about this development than they’ll admit. Their clumsy initial attacks speak volumes about their concern.
Where, in this entire blog-o-sphere, is the loyal conservative who’s grumbling and grousing away that “Now I Hafta Vote Fer A GUUURRRLL!!”?
It’s the left-winger’s nightmare. Political junkies of all stripes have had it figured out for a long time — conservatives care about principles, liberals don’t. But now, the proof is out there. Visible, for all to see. And every time some liberal advocacy group like NOW dispenses more instructions to people about what to do and what to think…which is all they can do…it’s proven even more.
Cas, would you care to split a big bucket o’popcorn with me as we watch the show? I’ll buy. And a cold beer for your boyfriend too.
qwerty says: Keeping my hands crossed for Ms.Palin’s reply to NOW. Somehow I gloat at NOW being taken to task by a mainstream powerful woman.
Andrew says: Haha, I could go one a long rant but really I got only one thing to say,
FUCK NOW!!!!!!!1
theneophyte says: I have been reading a lot of comments from both the left and right over the past few days regarding the nomination of Sarah Palin. Both sides have made some cogent points about her and her qualifications to be the possible “leader of the free world”. Personally I am a little surprised about the level of vitriol I have seen spouted from the left about the nomination. To some it was like John McCain had personally slapped them in the face. Of course he kind of did since he picked a woman to be his running mate when Obama could have picked one of the most powerful women in the country to be his and did not. Some of the things I have read there have been truly bizarre (her last kid was actually her daughter’s child?? come on people). Of course the right is not above being a little loony too in almost deifying her as a mother, hunter, wife, and mayor/governor. Rachel Lucas even has a ” purely platonic-but-I’d-have-her-babies-if-she-asked-me crush” because she likes her so much. Since Rachel has followed Sarah Palin as a possible nominee much longer than I have, I will of course defer to her judgement on this.
Which brings me to the salient point of this rather rambling post. What does qualify her to take on such an important position? Is she less qualified, as qualified, more qualified than McCain, Obama, or Biden? The left would have you think the country is one nut with a gun away from an hysterical soccer mom running the country. The right would have you think she has the guts to take on anyone who got in her way and would worry none about a heart attack in the Oval Office. My own take on the matter is this: Is she an experienced politico who can assume the duties of president without having to do more than brush a stray strand of hair out of her face? I doubt it. But what does prepare you for that job? Hell even Bill Clinton said nothing you have done before prepares you for taking on that office. What she does have in my considered opinion is character. What we need from a person in the Oval Office is not necessarily someone who has been on the Washington scene for years. We have had some pretty spectacular failures as President from people with long and distinguished careers in Washington (Hello LBJ and Gerald Ford) who couldn’t get done what they wanted to do. Does being a state executive prepare you for being the nation’s executive? Not necessarily (Hello Jimmy Carter). What we do need is someone who has the necessary judgement and cojones to make the decisions that office sometimes demands of you, even the unpopular decisions. Do I believe she can do that. Surprisingly I do. Especially when I compare her to Senators Obama and Biden. Obama to me will say anything to get elected and deny anything from his past that makes him look bad. Biden has said enough in the past to cost him the chance of being elected president. I wonder if he thinks he has the chance of getting there due to assassination?? Now thats taking an unfounded slap at him. Were I a senator and offered the position, I would jump on it with both feet too. There are 100 senators, but only 1 VPOTUS. Not to get all Reaganesque and quote from the movies, but in The American President, Andy Shephard says being president is “all about character.” Does Sarah Palin have character? Everything I have read leads me to believe she does, much more so than the people running against her and running her down online.
So yes Sarah Palin is inexperienced in being POTUS but the only people who have the necessary experience and eligibility for the job are Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, and George H W Bush. I don’t see any of them clamoring for their old jobs. What she does get if elected is the opportunity to learn the job from the inside and then if she wants to, the opportunity to make history as the first woman president. Wouldn’t that be funny? The party supposedly against women, against minorities, etc is the first to have a woman supreme court justice, a woman secretary of state, a black secretary of state, and a woman elected president?
btenney says: She apparently has a deleterious effect on Hurricanes and Blowhards.
ken in anchorage says: If they were truly pro-choice, wouldn’t choosing to keep your child also be speaking “FOR” women?
docjim505 says: Anybody really surprised? Palin is an accomplished and independent woman, but since she has an (R) after her name the NAG’s won’t support her. It’s part ‘n’ parcel of the Congressional Black Caucus not allowing J.C. Watts in their little club, the REAL name of which was the Congressional Black LIBERAL DEMOCRAT Caucus.
But here’s the thing: the MSM looooves the NAG’s. As far as they are concerned, the NAG’s speak for American women (other than the ones who enslave themselves in (gag) MARRIAGE). So, if the NAG’s come out and say that Sarah Palin won’t “represent women”, then that’s the official view of ALL American women (except those who prostitute themselves by marrying a (spit) MAN). Don’t hold your breath waiting for the MSM to interview women who are proud of Sarah Palin both for what she’s accomplished as a politician AND as a wife and mother. About all we’ll see is crabby dikes who can’t stand it that Palin seems to love her husband and children even while pursuing her political career and doesn’t look at children as a burden.*
——
(*) Full disclosure: I look at children as a burden (they are rats that make a lot of noise), but I don’t kid myself that I’m somehow “progressive” or “forward thinking” or “liberated”. I’m simply a crabby, bitter, selfish man.
Rob Farrington says: Oh, but won’t someone please think of the chiiildrennn?!??
Oh crap, she DOES. And so do the rest of the evil, imperialistic neocons, too.
Excuse me; I think that as a Progressive, I just used a popular slogan at a totally inappropriate time, and in the totally wrong place, too. Sorry…I meant to come to an anti-gun and anti-killing-polar-bears-with-chemtrails site, but the Jewish Lobby took control of my PC and redirected me. The Zionist bastards.
*Sidles towards the side exits, murmuring “sorry…oh wait, was that your toe…oops, sorry…please let me out before noticing that I’m a hypocrite. Sorry! Erm…yes, we can?!?”*
OK, sarcasm off, now. If I was American yet (there’s apparently this red tape thing where I have to get a green card and then become naturalized), I’d gladly have her speak for me. Not because she’s female, but because she’s a decent human being who I respect. My American fiance feels the same way.
metro1 says: Wow: Sarah Palin is about to become a grandma – but she’s still a bad ass
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yn7UzxXv8p4
Steve L. says: NOW against Palin? That is surely the strongest, positive endorsement she could ever get.
Ironwolf32 says: Some dimwit called into a radio show I was listening to in passing this weekend who claimed to be a “Republican who voted for Bush for the past 2 elections”. He was a fraud because this person had a problem with Sarah Palin choosing to go ahead with having her down syndrome child instead aborting. He actually had a problem with her having the child. Unreal.
I see NOW in the same light as the dimwit. I guess women can lose right of free speech, right to bear arms and right to vote but, don’t take away their abortion rights…
Sarah Palin is the perfect example of a modern day woman and the left is furious that she is a conservative.
Richard says: The thing that gets me about the feminists and these radicals, they are never happy. They won’t be happy until one of THEIR radicals is in office, or at least running for it. And as for Pro-life or Pro-choice, thats a personal matter… How many of these feminists are good looking enough to get pregnant anyway? Let alone consider having an abortion.
Jose Renato says: All I can say to these women who are against Sarah Palin and denegrading her as a soccer mom or anything else, they must be in love with this clown Obama. All I can say to them is,thank goodness you can’t get pregnant through your throat.
17 Comments