So, what do you think? You know, about Governor Sarah Palin?
Well, I'll tell you what I think. What I think is this:
Brilliant, just abso-f*cking-lutely brilliant move. I didn't think McCain had it in him. But damn! Let me count the ways:
- she's anti-choice and gives the evangelicals the warm fuzzies
- she's a fresh face - shows McCain is comfortable with youth, change
- she's an outsider - enhances McCain's maverick cred
- she's been a whistleblower - enhances McCain's independence cred
- she can talk about energy
- she's a woman - tells women voters - 'Obama may not care about your concerns, but McCain does"
- she's a woman - tells moderate voters McCain is not extreme conservative
This move sets a trap for the Dems (that they are already walking into) by giving them ample opportunity to spew misogynistic crap, which will further drive women away. Even as I type they are busily trying to reduce this woman to no more than the sum of her genitals (I have a sixth sense for that kind of thing.
Further, this gives the cable networks, particularly MSNBC, the opportunity to "make up" with women viewers by being nice to Palin (I bet they'll be pointing out sexism every 5 minutes now).
On top of all that - the announcement was hook-y enough to squash Obama's morning-after lovefest coverage. The sheer audacity of this move must be a shot in the arm for the demoralized GOP.
Governor Palin's back story is pretty interesting. Here's her bio on the wikipedia. On the issues, note especially:
Palin is pro-life, pro-contraception, and a prominent member of Feminists for life. While running for Governor of Alaska, Palin supported the open debate of creationism alongside evolution in schools; however, she noted that "creationism doesn't have to be part of the curriculum" and that she would not use "religion as a litmus test, or anybody's personal opinion on evolution or creationism" as criteria for selection to the school board.
She opposes same-sex marriage, but she has stated that she has gay friends and is receptive to gay and lesbian concerns about discrimination. Palin complied with an Alaskan state Supreme Court order and signed an implementation of same-sex benefits into law under protest, stating that legal options to avoid doing so had run out. She supported a non-binding referendum on whether there should be a constitutional amendment on the matter. Alaska was one of the first U.S. states to pass a constitutional ban on gay marriage in 1998, along with Hawaii. Palin has stated that she supported the 1998 Constitutional amendment.
Palin's first veto was used to block legislation that would have barred the state from granting benefits to the partners of gay state employees. In effect, her veto granted State of Alaska benefits to same-sex couples. The veto occurred after Palin consulted with Alaska's attorney general on the constitutionality of the legislation.
It sounds like her position on marriage equality is the same as Obama's. Help me out here, I don't remember.
My feelings, condensed:
Well, Dems, you made this bed, you lie in it. McCain made a bold move to appeal to independent women voters. Now what are *you* going to do for us?
If I had a dog in this fight, I'd be worried. But I don't, so I'm mostly entertained. No, make that very entertained. Now that's what I call strategy.
1 comment:
I'm completely with you (and I have to give myself a little bit of credit because I have been saying for more than a few weeks now that I thought she would be the best candidate he could pick and was telling my parents all about her a few weeks ago over dinner in NJ - they were shocked today when this announcement seemingly came out of nowhere, and I was the one who had told them to keep an eye on her as the dark horse candidate who would be McCain's smartest pick, though I was never sure if he would be gutsy enough to do it).
What I am amazed by, although I guess I shouldn't be, is how many Democrats, especially people who were early Obama supporters, think that this is a "joke" because she is so inexperienced, as if experience has mattered in this whole process. If experience mattered, Biden would probably be our presidential nominee right now (and I say that as a Clinton supporter). How on earth can you be an Obama supporter and make the experience argument with a straight face? And Bob Shrum, who I don't even tend to agree with, said on CNN today that the Democrats need to just stop with this experience argument - it clearly hasn't worked up to this point, or else Obama wouldn't be the nominee, so why do they think it's going to work now? And I know that people are going to say it's not true, but I can't help but wonder how much of this is about sexism - somehow what Obama did counts as experience but Palin's executive experience doesn't count? And she's done it while raising 5 children and not having a spouse who is the primary caretaker (which, of course, she is also getting criticized for how she is going to be vice president and a mom at the same time - but no one raises that about Obama...) The double standards abound, and we're going to keep seeing them, as we did during the primary, and how many of them are going to come from the supposedly "progressive" side of the debate is most likely going to be depressing indeed.
Yes, you can call it tokenism, and you can say that it's not enough to just have any woman on the ticket - you want a progressive, pro-choice woman on there. But I have to admit that I did feel a certain sense of pride to see a woman being nominated as VP. I vaguely remember Geraldine Ferraro, but I was rather young then, so I didn't get the full sense of how significant it was. Now that Hillary's chances are gone this time around, I think I felt some of the sense of pride and possibility that African-Americans talk about when they see Barack Obama up there. She's not the woman I would choose, and I won't be voting for her ticket, but I don't doubt that it will move other women - some of the more conservative Hillary voters, but also independent and Republican women who Obama may have wanted to win over. I give the Republicans credit, even if it is pandering, and remain disappointed in the Democrats. (Can we talk about how little they talked about choice at the convention? Gore was the most pro-choice speaker during prime time - all Obama could do was talk the need to find common ground and reduce unintended pregnancies, which is important and polls well, but didn't exactly leave me with the sense that he was going to fight hard to protect reproductive rights or anything. Did he even mention choice specifically in relation to the Supreme Court?)
There's more to say, but I'm still processing. But I do have to say, brilliant move, McCain. The Dems should be very worried...
Post a Comment