Several readers have asked me to weigh in on the selection of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as Senator John McCain’s vice presidential running mate. The way I see it, there are pros and cons to the Palin pick.
PRO – She’s a woman. Over 50% of voters are women, and we are seriously underrepresented in American government.
CON – She’s against women. Palin is part of the most extremist anti-woman platform the Republicans have put forth in years. These Republicans are on the warpath, trying to limit access to ordinary contraceptive methods like the birth control pill, which the majority of American women depend on at some point in their lives. Palin is right in with this crowd, going on record to state that she is against abortion even in the case of rape or incest.
PRO – The restoration of a female to this election could appeal to some voters who are disillusioned over Hillary’s primary loss.
CON – Palin is no Hillary Clinton. Palin’s resume is so thin, it actually includes her high school basketball “career.” She is a one-term governor of the 4th smallest state by population, and before that she was the mayor of a town smaller than Fort Oglethorpe. Most Americans only heard of her last week. She is best known as the bee-hived governor who was almost Miss Alaska. She has no experience outside the state, much less with foreign affairs. According to the New York Times, Palin only got her passport in July, 2007. Even then, she did not visit Iraq as she has claimed.
By contrast, Hillary Clinton is a serious, seasoned political leader known all around the world. It’s not just the age difference. Since her twenties, Clinton has been featured in publications like Life Magazine. She attracted attention not for beauty pageants but for historic accomplishments, like being the first Wellesley student to deliver the commencement address and using that opportunity to criticize the senator who spoke just before she did.
While Republicans hail Palin as a reformer, it is Clinton who is a true crusader. Hillary was a force to be reckoned with even before she teamed up with Bill. In the late sixties, she fought for civil rights, and in the seventies she helped impeach Richard Nixon. In the eighties, while Palin was strutting down the runway in a bikini, Clinton was fighting for education reform in Arkansas and being named Mother of the Year for the second time.
As First Lady for two terms in the nineties, Clinton was so active in domestic and foreign affairs that critics printed bumper stickers reading “Impeach the President and her husband, too.”
Clinton’s greatest obstacle is being ahead of her time. Consider her bid to reform healthcare. As First Lady she was unable to make it happen, but that plan is now integral to the Democratic platform. That’s what reformers do; they change the way we think about the world. Simply challenging an incumbent in your own party doesn’t make you a reformer.
The differences go beyond education and experience; Palin opposes everything Hillary Clinton stands for – health care, education, individual freedoms, and economic security for the middle class.
McCain must think women are stupid. He hopes to win Clinton supporters simply by adding a woman to his ticket. Some men may believe that all females are interchangeable; women know better.
PRO – Palin is a Washington outsider. After 8 years of Republican corruption, lies, and unjust war, many Americans are looking outside the Capitol for a fresh leader without ties, allegiances and debts.
CON – She is not just an outsider; she has absolutely no national experience. Republicans try to brush this away by pointing out that Obama has never been a governor and therefore has no “executive” experience – but the same can be said for McCain. If Palin is more qualified than Obama, then she is also more qualified than McCain. The Republicans need to reverse their ticket! The truth is, Sarah Palin is the least experienced candidate put forth in recent history. The presidency is far too important to risk on a loose cannon like McCain and a complete unknown like Palin.
PRO – A short resume means less baggage . . . right?
CON – For a politician with such a short history, Palin has been remarkably quick to immerse herself in scandalous abuses of power. Currently she is under investigation for trying to force the firing of her ex-brother-in-law as a favor to her sister.
As governor of Alaska (population comparable to Atlanta or Memphis), she has held her hand out for plenty of pork. Palin claims she opposed the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere.” Not true. Support for the bridge was part of her campaign platform. She only gave up on it after Washington turned against the project. Then she canceled the bridge, but kept most of the money for other projects. Although she claims she opposes earmarks, she has requested more per capita than any other governor.
While requesting federal dollars to study the mating habits of crabs, Palin used her line-item veto power to slash important funding for education and teen pregnancy prevention. She opposes teaching teens about condoms in spite of statistical and now personal evidence that “abstinence only” education has poor results.
Palin has an interesting strategy on changing Alaska’s status as the rape capital of America: Discourage victims from reporting. Under Mayor Palin, Wasilla women who reported rape had to pay for the cost of the forensic exam, reportedly a charge of $300-1,200. Charging women who report sex crimes is a sure way to reduce rape – well, rape reports, anyway.
PRO – Palin is an avid outdoorswoman, giving her a tough, not-afraid-to-get-her-hands-dirty image.
CON – Sarah Palin’s hands are a little too dirty. Palin wants to turn the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge into a private oil field for her corporate buddies.
Hunting does not always translate into caring about the environment or its inhabitants. Palin scoffs at global warming even as scientists document the shrinking of the ice caps and drowning of polar bears. Not that Palin cares about polar bears; she actually sued the Bush administration to have them taken off the endangered species list.
Wolves have fared no better under her watch. Until the program was stopped by a state judge, Palin was offering wolf hunters $150 for every hacked-off front foreleg they brought in.
PRO – The selection of a female vice presidential candidate is a historical first for the Republican Party. Finally, the Republicans have entered the 20th century. That’s not a typo. The press seems to have forgotten that Democrats met that milestone last century when Walter Mondale selected Geraldine Ferraro as his running mate in 1984. The Republicans are, finally, playing catch-up.
CON – In choosing Palin, John McCain passed over a long line of more qualified Republican leaders. If he wanted a female running mate, why not Kay Bailey Hutchison? Hutchison served as state treasurer of Texas before starting her fifteen years in the Senate. She is the most senior female Republican Senator, with a great deal of experience and responsibility.
Or how about Olympia Snowe? Snowe is the first woman who ever served in both houses, both in the state and nationally, and one of the first to serve on the Senate Armed Services Committee. She was named one of America’s top senators by Time Magazine, and holds a 79% approval rating in her home state of Maine. Snowe is as powerful as she is popular. She chairs the subcommittee that oversees the Navy and Marine Corps and also serves on the Finance Committee. In 35 years, Olympia Snowe has never lost an election.
With choices like Hutchison and Snowe (and Condoleeza Rice, and the list goes on), why did McCain choose a political newbie from the sticks? The answer is clear to hard-working women in all sorts of careers who have watched a younger, less qualified woman soar past them to assume positions at the top. It’s an old gimmick, really: Put a token female near the top to placate the other women in the organization. Just make sure it’s a woman who will fully support the good ol’ boys, without caring what happens to us other women, or our children, or our world.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Palin Pros and Cons
Labels:
Hillary Clinton,
McCain,
national politics,
Republican,
Sarah Palin,
women
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

13 comments:
I have been waiting with baited breath for this post from you. You are so right. There is no comparison with Hillary, and it is a shame that the Republicans had a chance to choose a well qualified female candidate and blew it. I'm not so sure that the token female is the only reason she was chosen. Her fundamentalist Christian views have taken that community by storm. They love her and probably had a hand in choosing her. Otherwise, she is an airhead, with a pretty face (forgive me for the sexist remark)...a token female to appeal to the good old boys as you say. As the days go by we learn more about her poor management, particularly in the fiscal arena, and her poor choices of administrators, but the right wing simply brushes it off with the "liberal" press label. In the meantime those voters, who are willing to be lead blindly to the polls, are getting in line.
I've been hearing that Palin represents mothers. But I know this is not true. She represents an upper class mom who can have her husband be the full-time caregiver. She can also afford to hire all the help she needs.
Palin's image is of a working mom who has it all. There is no such thing for the majority of mothers. There is always trade-off. I think her image is one that will damage the esteem of women who have found a balance in their work and home.
I want Palin to say something about mothers. Whether a working mother or a stay at home mother, we need things like flex time, maternity/paternity leave, fair wages, an end to discrimination in hiring, adequate health care--the list goes on.
Palin IS a token female. She is just a tool of the Republican establishment in this election. For women, it will be a harmful stereotype to overcome.
Well said, A. Lin. I think it's cool that she works full time w/ 5 children, one with Downs (which will make a big difference later but maybe not much difference in infancy???) but most women do not have the luxuries she has.... yet she wants to force all women to make the same choices she's made, only w/o the benefit of said caregiver-husband, maids, nannies, and such.
Ga Mtn Man, good point about her far-right views. They needed that to energize the base, since hardline GOPers were not excited about McCain.
I'm not sure it's sexist to say she's just a pretty face with no substance....Didn't we say the same about Mitt Romney?
Well said Jeannie. There is so much to be appalled at in the stances Palin takes. There is so much potential damage she can do against women, against creatures in danger of extinction, against the very earth, against good education, balancing the budget, providing medical for the elderly. Somehow I think she'd willingly shoot herself in the foot if it made the Good Ole Boys smile on her. And apparantly, her husband is smiling too. I wonder why we don't hear anything much about him, or have I missed it?
Are you sure the rape kit thing is accurate?
This article on "Huffington" seems to clear up the rape kit issue somewhat. It seems hard to say if she even knew about it, since she probably knew litte about what was actually going on in her city government. I would say that with her extreme views she would consider a rape kit "sinful."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-schmeltzer/palins-wasilla-to-rape-vi_b_125047.html
Well said, Jeannie! I'm amazed that any women would think that because Sarah Palin is a woman, she would actually care about helping women. What a travesty!
This is the first time I've visited your blog - I'll be back!
Ms. Taylor-- Palin is too right-wing for me in many areas, too-- but I wonder if you really intended to say that Palin is actually opposed to human values like education, individual liberty, economic security, etc, while Hillary "stands for" these things? Wouldn't it be fairer and more accurate to say that Sarah Palin is opposed to Hilary Clinton's position in every area Hilary considers most important, namely, education, individual liberty, etc.? The candidates have diffent ideas as to how these things are best achieved, but neither is actually evil enough to desire illiteracy, economic hardship, universal denial of heath care, and individual enslavement. You may feel that Sarah Palin's politics will lead that way-- but I'm sure she does not actually deliberately desire evil for our country. However, that is what your statement appears to me to be saying.
I am saying this out of a desire to help and increase the effectiveness of your message (you don't know me, so I can't convince you I am sincere and not just being patronizing-- but it's true). Your message is coming across to me as an angry accusation, not as a balanced assessment of pros and cons.
You also flat-out accuse McCain of not caring anything about what happens to women, our children or our world. You may disagree with McCain's politics, but I do think that as a person, he does not deserve that.
Kristen, McCain has embraced the policies of his right wing fundamentalist base in order to attain the presidency. That group seeks to put women back barefoot and pregnant in the home under the power of their husband. It will not allow women a choice in whether they have the child of a rapist or a seriously handicapped child. He left his sick wife for a rich bimbo and refers to the new wife in profane and sexist terms. He advocates the very least reform to the health care system to bring better healthcare to families. He has said that he will refuse to negotiate with our adversaries, using, instead, the threat of war to attempt to settle differences as has the Bush Regime. Thus, he will apparently embrace the failed Middle Eastern Policies of his friend, GW Bush. That about covers women, children and the world. I would say that Ms Babb is right on with her assessment.
Ms Babb Taylor, please excuse the incorrect name in the preceding comment. Senior moment, I guess. I have to blame it on something besides a lack of attention to detail.
I was so hoping McCain would pick Condi--but I did hear that she had already made it clear she did not want to be considered. This whole thing makes me so sad. I want to rejoice in it--and I just can't. I, once again, am going to head to the polls with a heavy heart.
Jeannie:
Good stuff.
Before I saw this I had linked you in my latest blog about Hixson, Tn native Michelle Cottle who is a Vandy grad and writes for the New Republic.
Cottle was raised Southern Baptist.
She takes Palin apart in her Sept 22 blog titled Reversed Snobbery.
It fascinates me the man who baptized Cindy McCain, lost the Presidency of the SBC to the same right wing forces that placed Palin on the GOP Ticket.
Here is hoping Johnny Pierce picks up some of our insight for Baps Today.
However you get there, through my blog or at tnr.com hope all of yall see Cottle's scathing piece on Palin.
Thanks, Fox. Excellent piece by Michelle Cottle. For anyone who missed it:
http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/09/22/spare-me-your-reverse-snobbery.aspx
Jeannie
Post a Comment