Technically, this is supposed to be a post about Mormon Lit. I even had a post ready to go on whether or not writing can be taught. (Well, almost ready to go. And yes, writing can be taught. Kind of.) But over the last few days I’ve been thinking and thinking about Sarah Palin and my gut-level reaction to her candidacy, and whether that reaction is justified, and why it’s so scary for me, as a woman, to admit to some of the feelings that have been roiling around inside me.
Then I thought, hey, you. Stop being such a chicken. If we women can’t talk about issues like this together—thoughtfully, kindly, with the intent of coming together in understanding—then we’re as good as silenced.
But, first, a caveat. This has nothing to do with party politics, Democrat or Republican, Blue State or Red State. I’m not trying to persuade anyone to vote (or not vote) for anyone else. I’m mainly interested in exploring the issues brought to the fore by Sarah Palin’s candidacy, and I want to know what a bunch of smart Mormon women think, because I like smart Mormon women, and trust them.
So, here goes.
Gut Level Reaction #1: Sarah Palin’s lack of significant qualifications for the job makes me feel pandered to. I firmly believe that a woman can—and should, and hopefully, someday, will—serve as Vice President (or President) of the United States and do a bang up job of it. But it seems to me that Palin’s “womanness” was the main quality that got her picked. Not her background. Not her experience in government. If the governor of Alaska had been a man with the same background and qualifications, would he *ever* have been considered for this post? My best guess is no. So to me, Palin’s nomination seems a like a backhanded attempt at appearing progressive, like the powers-that-be were looking for a woman who was pro-life (check), not bad to look at (check), and appealing to the middle-class (Moose burgers! Snowmobiling! check), instead of looking for whomever would be best for the country.
Gut Level Reaction #2 (and this is the really tricky one): I’m not sure if I can get behind the idea that Palin *should* be the Vice President (and possible President) of the United States given her current family situation. Now, intellectually, I know this is inherently sexist. The argument that a woman can’t raise a family and succeed in the “outside world” is one that we’re all familiar with, and one that (usually) makes me very uncomfortable. I am a mother of four, but I also write, and I also teach, and I am grateful to live in a time and place where such things are possible. But writing and teaching (or working as an accountant, or a small business owner, or even as a doctor or a lawyer) isn’t the same as being second-in-command to the Leader of the Free World, and one heart attack away from being the Leader herself.
When a parent has five children 18 and under—and one is going to Iraq, and one is 17 and pregnant, and one is a newborn with special challenges—it goes without saying that said parent has a lot on his or her plate. And if Palin were a man, the family situation would still give me pause. But as much as it (kinda?) troubles me to admit it . . . not as long a pause. Because, dang it, Sarah Palin is a mother, and I’m a mother, and I know how it *feels* to be a mother, and these feelings lead me to wonder two things. First, is it really possible for Palin to give her full time and attention to the monumental task of running the country when she has so much going on in her family life? And second (and this is the REALLY tricky one, and I’m not trying to offend anyone, I’m just trying to be honest with myself and, now, you): if she IS able to give her full time and attention to her job during a time in her life when her children need her so desperately, what does that say about her as a person? And do I want a person like that as my Vice President?
Ack!! Segullah is usually such a nice, safe, peaceful blog. I hope I haven’t spoiled it. But I’d love to know what you think.
Related posts:
Ang, because I’m a working mother and TIRED, all I can say is AMEN!!! You nailed it. I have every one of these same fears and reservations and strange guilts.
And pandered to is such the right word.
Wish I could bring something more to the conversation, but I’m hearing you loud and clear.
I agree. 100% agree.
i didn’t even get to the personal life concerns because i got stopped in my tracks at the professional qualifications part of the package. i think it’s great that there is a woman who is out there, involved in politics in her area, etc. but to go from her background to president does seem a mighty big leap. i admit i’m pretty uninformed about her though. if her qualifications were up to snuff, i honestly believe it would sit well with me, family situation aside. i think in some families having a “mr. mom” just works out best. who knows, they may be one of them. so that part is mute from where i sit. you’re spot on when you say if she were a man there’s no way she’d be on the ticket right now. so that rankles.
I agree, I feel pandered to in a way that feels a little icky.
Kind of how like Hollywood thinks that if they put Meg Ryan in something I’ll go watch it because I have ovaries.
Yes, yes, yes. I absolutely agree.
your first reaction was my reaction. i still feel that way. yuck.
I don’t have any answers to all your questions but I just wanted to echo the validation parade here and say that you are not alone in having these visceral reactions (again, regardless of political affiliation). It’s been a very surreal week for me and your post helped me put some of my conflicted feelings into words.
I mostly agree. I wish I was eloquent, or had the time this morning while getting my kids off to school, but you all are moms, you know how it goes.
I agree to feeling like this is a woman who should maybe be staying at home and dealing with her children. I have never been much of a feminist, and although I have no problem with women in the workplace, I feel like there is a time and a season for everything. If a woman decides to have children, raising them should be her main priority. I know this isn’t always possible, and sometimes there are reasons a woman has to work, but surely there are some issues in Mrs. Palin’s life that need to be addresses, rather than her trying to run on a presidential ticket.
That said, I would like to address the experience issue, because I feel that her experience is more than adequate when compared to Obama’s. Although she was mayor of a small town, and hasn’t serve as governor very long yet, her accomplishments in those capacities are fairly impressive, and I just don’t think Obama measures up when comparing the two.
So I guess what I am trying to say is, I have mixed feelings about her. Yes, she fits the checklist… I think the best thing to do will be to wait and see what kinds of speeches she gives, what she has to say, and from those it will be easier to determine how capable she is.
I have paid too little attention and didn’t even know what her qualifications were beyond being Alaska’s governor, let alone the personal info.
As soon as I heard she was a she, however, I knew it was a tactic (I had been waiting to hear some familiar political name). Considering the info you wrote above, “pandered to” is perfect.
I can NOT imagine taking on the role of VP with her family situation. So let me add my amen AND a Holy Cow.
Yup.
Yes, I had these same thoughts, but didn’t know what to do with them!
I feel exactly the same way.
As a mother I just can not fathom that she would put her family in this position at this time, and right or wrong, that makes me wonder about her character (and her ego). There are others qualified to be the Vice President, but her kids only have one mom.
I guess I’m a cynic because when I heard –and then researched –about Sarah Palin, I thought: “Good. I hope she becomes President.”
I figure, why not? Why not someone with little experience? The last 20 years have shown us nothing but crap (excuse my language) and it all came from “experienced” politicians. So, if that doesn’t work, why not go the other way? Find somebody totally unaffected and stubborn and see what happens.
Obama can’t get my vote because he makes promises he can’t keep and morally is the opposite camp of mine (morally in policy, not person). But Palin? We should have a mother running this country. And a mother with 5 kids? That’s the real “experience”.
So, I don’t know. As much as I agree with most of what’s been said (i.e. mothers putting their kids first, an obvious election tactic, etc.), I’m kind of thinking that she might be worth voting for anyway.
Isn’t that weird?
I understand these icky feelings. And I’d be more excited about Palin if she were, say, 15 years farther down the motherhood road. And I wouldn’t want her to be president at this point. But I think you’re trapping her here. You’re making harsh morality judgments (”a woman like that”) based on assumptions (she’s neglecting her family). Any “family” woman in this level of politics is going to be putting her family on the back burner to some extent. Again, I’d feel more comfortable if Palin didn’t have so many YOUNG children. But I also think that the sacrifices she’s making may be necessary to some degree if this country ever wants to see a mom-woman in a position of great political power. The question is, do we?
Think about it–for Palin to show up 15 years from now with no young children and lots of experience in big government, that would require her to have a strong focus outside the home for those 15 years.
Imho, the very things that make us think she’s not the “best for the country” may, in some ways, the things that make her best, in a totally nonconventional way. The risk factors are, when flipped around, are the very things that draw me to her. A mayor of a small town can speak for the population who live in small towns. A mother of a large family can speak for mothers of large families. A mother with a special-needs baby can speak for all mothers of children with disabilities, as well as disabled individuals themselves.
And a mother sending a son to war is in a prime position to make decisions about war. Talk about putting your money where your mouth is.
This is politics. Obama chose his VP to balance himself as an individual too–basically, he HAD to pick someone white. If McCain had chosen someone non-white, we’d be accusing him of pc pandering there as well. And we’d probably be doing the same if he picked a prominent political figure of any stripe. He’d be making a power play by adding some other person’s political clout to his own. That’s the whole point in choosing a VP. Palin’s political clout includes her gender and her brand of experience and her family situation.
Again again again, I understand the hesitations–I have them myself (although to a much milder agree than some of those who have commented). But I think there’s a compelling flip side to the issue.
I think an important question is, what kind of woman would we want to see as VP or POTUS? We’ve vilified Hillary. Palin is going to be vilified too, for opposite reasons. What kind of woman can stand up to the nation’s scrutiny? And is it possible for that kind of woman to exist? In other words, do we require a list of qualifications that are impossible for any real woman to acquire? You can’t have an experienced political powerhouse who’s also a family woman who’s being (or has been) the stereotypical SAHM, or anything even close. It’s just not possible. Therein lies the trap. And I say it’s not fair to trap Palin that way.
I had many of the same reactions. I wrote about it sort of at length on my blog if you’re interested: http://ginaandnephi.blogspot.com/2008/09/picture-that-i-cant-let-go.html
I think we’d really have to come to terms with the fact that if she’s elected she’s essentially opting out of mothering that baby in any real sense. Dads do it all the time. Are we ok with that?
Thanks for all of the comments so far. And no, Cheryl, that’s not weird, and that’s exactly why I wanted to have this conversation.
And I do want to say that I’ve heard very little from Palin’s own mouth. I can’t really judge how intelligent she is, or inspiring, or how well she commands a room (all qualities that I think are important in a President). It will be interesting to hear her speak tonight at the Republican convention.
And I’m interested, too, in what some of you think about the statement (not quoted directly above, but implied) that “Women *can* have it all, just not all at the same time.” I heard someone say this on a radio show yesterday in relation to Palin, but most of the political talking-heads jumped all over the woman, saying “We should be beyond this!” and “This is the essence of sexism!” and whatnot.
But I tend to agree with the statement to a certain extent. At least as it applies to me personally. I am willing to concede that other women might be able to juggle things better than I do (e.g. working part time and mothering 4 kids with a VERY involved father who works from home is just about doing me in some days).
And (another potential ticklish spot) . . . should the way we see this issue be particularly informed by the fact that we’re Mormon women??
Now go!
Ah, Kathryn and Gina, you posted while I was posting. But I have to get my 7th grader out the door. Ahhh! Motherhood getting in the way all the time! I’ll respond soon.
I think being Mormon women for sure puts a damper on any excitement one might have with a mother of 5 in a high political office. I think it’s because we are told constantly about the role of women and we tend to have a different perspective and view of why we are here on Earth in the first place. Knowledge is power and knowledge creates priorities. Now, what those priorities become obviously depends on each individual situation.
But holding Palin to the same standard that Mormon women place upon themselves really isn’t fair. She’s not Mormon, is she? And the fact that her husband has quit his job to stay home with the kidlets kind of alleviates fears that the children will be neglected by their parents.
Like I said, as much as this reeks of political chess-playing, I’m thinking this could actually be a gold mine.
Or a land mine.
Either way, I’m quite thrilled with the chance to find out!
I don’t have time to read all the other comments, so sorry if I repeat, etc. But, I absolutely agree, and I too was waiting for someone to write about this. I think the reasons she was chosen are obvious and I think it was *almost* a low blow to the intellect of women. I’ve heard some argue that the VP isn’t all that important anyway so it shouldn’t matter, AND, that if - God forbid - anything fatal were to happen to McCain during his presidency that she would only be a talking head anyway. I don’t know that I agree. I think there were MANY more qualified individuals to choose from… hello??? Romney!
Anyway, I agree with you and really do hope the best for her personally, and of course want what and who is best to lead our nation.
I can’t stand how Palin is being villified by the conservative evangelical community for being a non-Biblical leader and should be at home. I don’t think we should be so judgmental.
Have you seen the pictures of here with Trig in a baby sling signing bills in her office?
I personally don’t have reservations, because I’m so excited about having someone different, with a TRULY different perspective. Not just another politician with another slick phrase. She’s not a politician because it was her lifelong goal. I truly feel she’s been called to this position by God, and she’ll be great–whether or not it was a politically calculated move by McCain’s campaign, I think having someone with clear moral and family values will be wonderful for America.
And she’ll probably forego most of the SAHM tasks in order to focus on her top two priorities–VP and her kids. She won’t be taking her special needs baby all over the world to see specialists, they’ll probably come to him. She’ll have plenty of help in the non essentials for this time of her life. Which is fine by me.
I know I’ve bemoaned how no one can get to the top in politics without sacrificing their integrity in some respect or another. I’m not about to complain that someone without loads of political experience *cough* OBAMA *cough* would be VP under someone who has tons. It could be the perfect solution.
gold mine/land mine–cheryl, that’s perfect! I agree completely.
I think Mormon women are conditioned in a way that makes us take an extra-critical eye to any woman seeking power that’s traditionally been male.
I also think that sometimes even women who know what we know might be called (or simply choose of her own free will) to take a different path in order to be able to bring about positive change for millions and millions of other moms.
“I think there were MANY more qualified individuals to choose from… hello??? Romney!”
Please explain how Romney is more qualified than Palin. And at what point would you say Palin has enough experience. 4 years as governor? 8 years? What’s the line? What would she learn in two more years as governor that she doesn’t already know about leading a state?
Four years ago, Barack Obama was an Illinois state senator. Palin was a small town mayor. It’s not that big a difference.
I hope one day that most of you here get turned down for a job because your family life is deemed too difficult. I also hope you get offered a job simply because hiring you would be symbolic and only because the company is in need of a woman.
My first thought after reading your post was yes, her children will probably suffer some if she becomes the vice president. They certainly will not see much of her for at least four years, and how can that be a good thing? But then I thought, could it be that sometimes, for some people, the need for social change, leadership, etc., trumps the need to be at home? When I read President Hinckley’s biography, I was struck over and over again by how little time he was able to spend at home with his family. But the Lord needed him to do other things, and blessed him and his family that it would be enough. Of course that’s a divine calling, and not an elected position, but I do wonder if there are certain situations where the benefit to society of having a mother in a position to make decisions, be an example, influence policy, etc., may trump the benefits to her family of having her at home more. I’m not sure what I think, just a thought.
Whoa, Tim! We’re having a friendly argument here. Let’s keep it that way.
Sorry, I think I’m turning into “Right-Wing Dan”.
I find it curious that Obama, as a father of small children, gets a pass on this, but Palin doesn’t. Not sure what that says other than, perhaps, sexism. I also think that her experience compares favourably with Obama’s. All that said, I think it comes down to simple politics. Which ticket’s positions are more closely aligned with yours.
Let me try to flip the discussion a little:
Would a man with the exact same experience as Palin, say Jindal (elected Gov. in 2007) or Crist (2006), be an issue?
Also, if it were Biden in Palin’s family shoes would it be a problem? Should Biden have quit the senate after his wife and infant daughter were killed to care for his surviving two sons?
I guess I’m just scratching my head at some of the reactions here and elsewhere. Palin’s nod is more about pandering to the conservative base (who had serious reservations about McCain) than it is about women. If he had chosen anybody else (Pawlenty, Romeny, etc.) it would have been met with a big shrug of the shoulders and the base would not really care.
My initial gut reaction was, “I can’t believe he (McCain) thinks I’ll fall for that?!” I have to admit, I picture him looking over these potential vp candidates, their lists of qualifications and what they bring to the table as he considers who will help balance him and help him get elected. In that light, the choice makes sense. And, wow!, the media is hardly even talking about Obama at the moment except to say how Sarah compares. It’s a game. I don’t like it… but there it is.
And as I said, that was my initial reaction. I’m a little surprised that my feelings are changing as I get to know her. I would expect to agree with many who say her time should be devoted at home. And it’s not that I don’t see the need for there to be attention from both parents, I’m just not ready to say she hasn’t been giving her children attention based upon what we’ve read.
When a parent has to be out of the home for an extended period of time (for example, deployed) it is possible to find ways for the children to know they are loved. One parent has to take care of the other needs of the family at home on their own, problems at school, special needs of children (IEP meetings, OT Therapists, Speach Therapy), illnesses, doctor appts., broken down appliances, car problems, etc. It sounds to me as if they have decided on who will be the parent to hold down the fort at home. We aren’t privy to any of the measures they have put in place to help their children know both parents love them on a daily basis.
I actually like that she might know what it is like to face these struggles as a family.
Tim, those are good questions. I agree it’s interesting that nobody seems to care about Biden remaining in office even though he was the sole living parent of his young children. imo, that’s a lot more questionable than a woman running for VP who has a husband providing full-time parenting at home.
But I do think McCain is playing the gender card here, among others.
And yes, I absolutely think we judge men and women differently when it comes to the caring of young children in the home. (I don’t think that’s necessarily wrong, but it certainly can become an ugly discrimination factor.) For example–I wouldn’t bat an eye if Biden had the same current family situation as Palin. The fact that she’s the mom and not the dad makes me pause. But again, the very thing that makes me pause moves me forward again with greater vigor. I believe that generally speaking, mothers should raise young children, not fathers. But I believe in exceptions to the rule, and I believe this is a formidable exception.
Yeah, I wholeheartedly agree. Your questions about Palin were my thoughts exactly. I also agree with Maddison, I feel that McCain choosing Palin is kind of insulting to women. [Taking it out on a limb here], He’s banking on the fact that we will vote for her solely because she’s a woman. She’s not qualified. [I know, Obama lacks qualification too.] Anyway, so Palin is a woman and she is a mother of 5 and so we’re automatically supposed to relate to her. Does McCain really think that I don’t think about the issues or about her qualifications?
Anyway, one last funny thought. I’ve seen a lot of people justify Palin by saying that, if McCain dies, she would surround herself with qualified people to help her lead. But that’s not how it works. It’s been a few years since my AP US History class, but I believe that if the VP becomes the President, the next VP spot is automatically filled by the Speaker of the House– who currently is Nancy Pelosi. Ha! Wouldn’t that be a hilarious presidency and disastrous working relationship?
MidCityGal-
Ha! I never thought of that. Pelosi and Palin?! Ha!
I think McCain wanted to pick Lieberman (pandering to Jews? maybe not), but couldn’t pull the trigger. I think he decided instead to pick someone outside of Washington in order to be able to play the change/reform card. That left him with a few choices:
Pawlenty
Romney
Jindal
Crist
and Palin
Palin is the only one that would cause any stir whatsoever with a dormant base and her history as a reformer and one who has taken on the powerful Alaskan GOP fits McCain’s style. I’m not going to say being a woman didn’t matter, but I don’t think it’s merely a move to get the female vote.
Hey Right-Wing Dan! I’m sure you *really* weren’t wishing career calamity to rain down upon all the women here who are experiencing conflicting emotions about Palin’s candidacy. But I understand–it’s a passionate topic.
The truth of it is, most of us have experienced both gender-related prejudice and gender-related promotion. Men AND women. Then Kathy said this–
“What kind of woman can stand up to the nation’s scrutiny? And is it possible for that kind of woman to exist? In other words, do we require a list of qualifications that are impossible for any real woman to acquire? You can’t have an experienced political powerhouse who’s also a family woman who’s being (or has been) the stereotypical SAHM, or anything even close. It’s just not possible. Therein lies the trap. And I say it’s not fair to trap Palin that way.”
Kathy did made me stop and think. It’s true that women get punished for not being motherly enough (too manly, too pushy, to Hillary-in-a-pantsuit) then get whomped on the other side if they’re TOO motherly (I mean, five kids, egads!).
I disagree with Kathy, though, that it’s impossible for a woman to be both a mother and have the political experience necessary to become the President of the United States. To me, it’s an issue of timing. As I said before, if Palin had been a man, the family situation still would have me worried about his ability to focus on the nation’s concerns. And I admitted my (yes, probably sexist) gut reaction that it would be even harder for a mother to focus in such a situation.
The moment I really started worrying about Palin as a candidate was when I found out she had a new baby. And it’s not because the baby has Down syndrome (as a matter of fact, I didn’t even know that at first). But the first few years of any baby’s life are so important, and so hard . . . and then when you add in all the other family stuff I just wondered if it was possible for *anyone* to have her head all the way in the game under those circumstances. And as a US citizen, I want to have my Vice President’s entire head, as it were.
Sexist. Sexist? Ahhrgh. But I feel that while it might be possible for Palin to govern Alaska given her family’s needs (hard, but possible), being VP or even President under such circumstances is a whole nother kettle of fish, as they say. (Alaskan fish. That she caught and gutted herself. While wearing her Miss Alaska runner-up tiara. Kidding!) Five years from now, she would probably be in a better position family-wise to use her experience in state government and take it to a national level.
I think timing is a legitimate concern. The job she’s angling for is a very big one, and as citizens I think we’re allowed (even ought to be encouraged to) look at every possible pro and con our potential leaders bring to the table. And to me, Palin’s timing is a con.
25th Amendment: Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.
I also 100% agree. You expressed my exact thoughts!
It keeps taking me way too long to respond and I miss all the other comments. Sorry.
BJK brought up the question of Obama’s small children. To me, if Palin had two grade school kids, I wouldn’t be that concerned about it. It’s not that I don’t think ANY mother with young children should be VP. I just think that Palin’s family’s needs are exponentially more pressing.
And as far as the qualification thing goes: Yes, Obama doesn’t have much experience either. But he’s also spent the last few years of his life preparing for the Presidency, whereas I get the sense that for Palin had this sprung on her pretty recently and she’s playing some major catch-up. And even though I realize that Palin’s “real world” life experience as a sports caster and hockey mom and owner of a snowmobiling company could be appealing in that it seems refreshing, I wonder how practically all of it translates to running the country.
The truth of the matter is I (personally) just don’t think she’s ready yet, and I think this is a really difficult time in her life to face such a steep learning curve.
I might get hate mail for this and I will admit I’ve thought all of those things and I still have mixed feelings, but I’m not afraid to say this out loud:
I like her. She’s got spunk.
I crave someone who is not one of the good old boys.
I crave someone who works hard to put food on the table and make the mortgage and who has some understanding for blue collar and middle class. (I feel no more pandered to now than I do when a bunch of rich and elite people talk about tax cuts for the middle class.)
I crave someone who might have a clue about what’s going on in my head and might actually care about it.
Pandering? Sure. The veep pick is all about pandering–I think the entire presidential election is all about pandering. What’s new?
I’ve no love lost on McCain, but I do love that he shook things up a bit. Quite a bit.
I say bring it on.
Concerning the teenage daughter’s pregnancy, we do need to remember that the child will have another set of grandparents who could take part in the raising of the child, though admittedly we don’t really know anything about them.
Angela, I didn’t say it’s impossible for a mother to have the qualifications to be VP or POTUS!! I’m saying exactly the opposite.
You criticized Palin for not having experience, and you criticized her for neglecting her family. My point is this: she can’t gain the experience while being a typical SAHM. If she retained the devoted-homemaker role we so value for the next 10-20 years and then ran for VP, she’d still have little experience in big governmment. And if she DID show up with that experience, that would mean she’d had to abdicate the homemaker role. You can’t have it both ways.
Are you backing down on your first criticism (little experience)? Because 5 years as state governor isn’t going to change much as far as her qualifications for VP.
I agree timing is a concern. I agree this might not be the ideal time for her to run for VP. But imo, the risks are far outweighed by the benefits of having a woman with her family experience in office. The risks and the benefits are two sides of the same coin, and you haven’t addressed that other side at all.
To add what Tim J said, the only reason they had to announce her daughter’s pregnancy is because the Dem’s were screaming that the new DownSyn. baby was actually the daughter’s and Palin had been lying.
Dalene? Amen, girl. Amen. But no matter who wins this election, I’m just going to be so darn glad that it’s not a Clinton or a Bush!
Thanks Gina, you’re right. The 25th Amendment passed in 1967 supercedes the Presidential Succession Act of 1947.
“Because 5 years as state governor isn’t going to change much as far as her qualifications for VP.”
Exactly.
Kathy, I misspoke when I paraphrased you as saying it’s impossible for someone to be both a mother and VP. What I gathered you were saying is that it’s very difficult for someone to have both the qualifications of being a “stereotypical” SAHM and a political powerhouse, so it’s unfair of us to require both.
But I still disagree with that. I think that a woman could take ten, fifteen years to raise a family (if she *wanted to*) and still have plenty of time to build up a political resume and commensurate experience. I mean, heck, look how old McCain is! Life is long!
And I’m not backing down on my experience argument. As I said above, my main concern is that this all seems so precipitous. While I’ve had my concerns about Obama’s preparedness, too, there have been rumblings about the Presidency for him since he spoke at the Dem Convention in 2004 and he’s been readying himself ever since. Palin, on the other hand, has been running a small state for less than two years and hasn’t been preparing herself to run the nation. That’s the difference as I see it.
And Dalene, I hope you don’t get hate mail. Your take on Palin is just as valid as mine.
don’t think of it as pandering so much as that McCain had some problems and if he wanted to stay in the race with a chance of winning, he had to find someone who would work for the greatest number of voters. Lieberman, isn’t even a republican and would have alienated a bunch of rank and file. Romney, as much as WE might like him, is a problem for the Christian Right. these ar blocks of voters who, if alienated can drop McCain out of the running. Palin is a risk, but she mixes things up in a way, none of the others could. I heard a voter the other day on NPR say, that the thing that excited her now about this election was that EITHER way it goes, history will be made and she is actually excited for which ever way it turns out. This wouldn’t be the case without Palin.
just chiming in here that I think you are right on Dalene. I am a working mom of five (I work from home) and went to bed the night before thinking “I can’t possibly do all of this.” When I woke up to the news the next day I thought “WOW! this woman really understands!” I am a Republican who was not wild about McCain. I thought this was a a brilliant strategy and made me rethink his ability to work with a wide variety of people and choose wisely. Politics are “political!” As far as pandering- would we as Mormons felt pandered to if McCain had picked Romney? that might have been a play to keep the Western states from teetering to the Dems. Frankly, it’s like watching a chess game and I say McCain is a much better player than I gave him credit for.
Ang, she *did* take fifteen years to raise a family. Her oldest kid is a young adult. If we ever want a woman with a large family to be in office, and we don’t want her to spend a lot of time outside the home until her children are grown, AND we want her to have considerable experience in big government, we’re asking for the impossible.
It reminds me of a saying I saw once in a copy store: you can have it fast and good, or fast and cheap, or cheap and good, but you can’t have all three.
Yes, a woman could have a couple of kids when she’s thirty, and launch them into middle childhood a decade later, and launch her political career at the same time, and show up for a VP or POTUS nomination when she’s sixty. But if she has more than, say, 2 or three kids, some of them are going to be very small when she lauches that political career. And if she waits until those kids are tween-ish, she’ll be pushing seventy. And yeah, look what that’s doing to McCain–it’s making everyone flame his VP because they’re afraid he’s going to kick the bucket.
I think your ideal works very well as an ideal, but it breaks down on a practical level. I’m not saying it’s impossible, but it’s a heck of a lot harder for a woman than a man to achieve that ideal. And if we hold to that ideal, it makes it much, much less likely for a family woman to ever be in major office. That doesn’t necessarily mean we should chuck the ideal, but I think we should be aware of its ramifications. And personally, I’m willing to chuck it in Palin’s case.
Again, still waiting to hear what you think about the potential benefits of having her in office, Ang.
Angela, so Obama is qualified to be President merely because he has been campaigning to be President? Seems like a pretty low threshold to me. Running a state versus running for President has to, at the very least, be no more than a toss-up. That said, I find this election to be deliciously intriguing.
I realize that she took 15 years to raise her family. I suppose one of the problems I have is that she has a baby *right now*. And now I’m just speaking in hypotheticals, but in four years Palin’s youngest would be school-age, and she would have five more years of executive experience, and she could be boning up on national issues. And even then she’d only be, what, 49? I would feel much better about her in those circumstances.
And it’s true that it can be hard for women to achieve things in the same way, and on the same track, as men do when we choose to get pregnant and have babies. It’s not impossible, but it’s harder. I agree wholeheartedly.
I hear you, Ang. I agree, I’d feel better too. But I’m excited about her anyway.
And I think that’s what it boils down to. Either someone excites us, or they don’t. So to speak.
I think lots of people overlook Obama’s weaknesses because they’re so dang excited to see a guy like him in office. I think I have a touch of that with Palin. But, to be clear, I might lose that excitement based on how she presents over the next couple of months.
No, BJK, it’s not the campaigning. It’s the preparing. Anyone who’s considering such a run most likely spends a coupe of years gaining understanding regarding topics of national and international significance (at least I’d hope they would.) Even someone like, say, Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota has been having his name bandied about for a while and I would assume that he’s been studying. Learning. Getting ready. My impression of Palin’s candidacy, though, is that it was quite a surprise, even for her, so she hasn’t had the time to build up her understanding on a lot of important issues.
And now I’ve gotta run. I’ll check back on this great conversation later today. Thanks for all the interesting comments so far!
Kathryn pretty much summed up everything I wanted to say.
I’ll just add that I think it’s difficult as women not to project our own experience as mothers onto Palin. (For instance, I can’t imagine leaving a newborn child with special needs to go back to work just weeks after the birth.) But not every family is the same. Stay at home dads are becoming more and more common - just at my local playground there are several there with their kids every day. Evidently that’s how it works in the Palin household, and I have no problem with that. I believe men can be just as good at nurturing as women and I applaud dads who take such an active interest in their kids’ daily lives.
What Dalene said. I won’t vote for McCain/Palin, and don’t agree with very many of her views, but I kind of admire Palin herself, at least so far.
And of COURSE it’s a pandering pick, but that doesn’t mean she isn’t perfectly capable. Some of our worst presidents have been the ones with the most experience - Nixon, Carter, Buchanan, BUSH. Some of the presidents history looks upon most kindly have had very little experience - for example, Lincoln, Reagan, Jefferson, Kennedy, Washington.
All I can say is I am disappointed. I hoped I would come and see an article supporting Governor Palin and I was wrong. Thank goodness some of the readers seem to get it.
When she was announced and I read a bit of her history, the first thing I thought of was a Doctor I knew years ago. She was the fulltime worker in the home. I don’t remember how many children she had, but there were at least 2 maybe three. She was the one that worked fulltime, and her husband was the one that stayed home and took care of the kids. Now, maybe I am off my rocker, but is being a VP involve that many more hours in a day than what a DR. would put in on an average basis. I had worked when Dr.s worked more than 24 hours, but most of the time, the work was pretty average. I would expect the same in the Presidential offices. I figure if this woman has a family that supports her and works with her then more power too her and that family. Also figure that if this woman is elected, she will not be doing most of the mundane chores most women are responsible for, maids, cooks, and housekeepers. This leaves her with the ability to have that quaility time with her family when she can be home.
How does her experience differe from the democratic candidate for PRESIDENT? Don’t belittle her experience and more than the rest of us should belittle his.
Sorry if this seems a bit terse, and combative. I have just been reading some other sites, and I am rather angry, but not angry at you.
What are the issues for me that she supports that I am in favor, and why I like her.
1. Prolife
2. Pro 2nd ammendment
3. Member of the NRA
4. She understands energy issues
5. She as the Governor of Alaksa has had to have international talks with both RUSSIA and CANADA.
6. She is not afraid to take on members of her own party to decrease corruption.
7. She is smart and articulate
I know those are just a few things and I am sure I could come up with more given some time to think more clearly.
I haven’t read through all the comments yet so forgive if this is a repeat of someone else.
I wonder what the daily schedule looks like for the First Lady and other wives of higher-ranking government officials. Perhaps Michelle Obama’s possible position as First Lady would keep her from her home every bit as much as Sarah Palin’s possible nod to the VP role.
Just a thought.
I’m sorry, Angela, if all your guy has in the experience category is some studying to be the President and one trip across the pond while at the same time running for President, I think he’d be wise not to try to trump his experience over Palin’s. Yesterday, Obama compared his experience running his campaign to Palin’s as mayor but made no mention of her governorship. Obviously, I for one, do not find this line of attack particularly persuasive. What I find interesting is Obama talking about Palin at all. I don’t remember McCain spending much time on Biden. Perhaps, the Obama team has determined that Palin being on the ticket is a real threat and so must pull out all the stops to undermine her. I guess only time will tell if that works.
Yes, but Tanya, some people are Democrats, and despite Palin’s good points, they won’t vote for her simply because of her party affiliation. So, to support Palin because of her policies, one would have to be in align with her policies. I think Angie’s reactions weren’t because of her platform, but because of her situation, so this means a totally different discussion.
what about obama’s lack of experience? and he’s headed for the #1 spot, not #2. seems hypocritical to me to say she doesn’t have enough experience while ignoring his lack of experience.
“what about obama’s lack of experience? and he’s headed for the #1 spot, not #2. seems hypocritical to me to say she doesn’t have enough experience while ignoring his lack of experience.”
Oh you must not have heard, McCain is dying soon.
I’m sorry, but I just disagree with your concerns.
I think the question of experience is not relevant here because Obama lacks experience as well. Sarah Palin will be the VP, a place where there is a little room for error. Also, she is the only Governor (sorry, can’t spell today) running. I think a governor has a lot more experience applicable to being a president than does a senator. A governor essentially deals with a mini-nation.
We also keep forgetting that should McCain and Palin be elected, Sarah’s husband will most likely take over the majority of childcare. The baby will not be with his?? can’t remember the gender, mother every waking minute but will most likely spend a lot of that time with his father. I’ve known a lot of children raised by their fathers and I’ve only positive things to say about it.
Pahlin’s small experience as governor of Alaska is very helpful because she deals with energy issues that are critical for our country.
I also think it is hypocritical for every woman in this country, including LDS woman, to villify another woman who is working for her country and for her children. Yes, she has a special-needs baby. But she has a loving husband who is with her. She’s not a single mom. Her husband seems to work hard in her behalf. We don’t have to like her only because she is a woman. But I think that we ought to take an extra look at her, examine our prejudices about leadership and gender, and examine positions and then make an informed decision.
Sometimes other women are the worst enemies of women.
And the final question is, would you even ask these questions if the VP was a man? No. We don’t even examine their family lives as we do with women. It’s not a fair standard.
I think you hit it on the head when you said that a man with Palin’s professional resume would not have been considered for the position.
And, as I said over on my blog, if McCain was looking for a qualified candidate and not someone to pander to the Republican base, there are women in the Republican party who have that experience. No, he was looking for a figurehead, a cheerleader, someone who looks good as opposed to someone who is qualified to be vice-president, and possibly president.
Elaine, could the same thing be said about the Dem party as a whole and their pick of Obama, the inexperienced black man, over other more experienced candidates? Just asking.
One last comment. I have to say that for the first time in years, there is a candidate on the ballot who actually speaks for me. Can you say that about your senator or president? I can’t. But here is a woman who is a mother, politician and is not used to an easy life. I feel like she’ll be looking out for my interests in a way that has been completely overlooked in the past.
“I think you hit it on the head when you said that a man with Palin’s professional resume would not have been considered for the position.”
Wrong. Jindal and Crist were both on the list for potential VP’s.
“if McCain was looking for a qualified candidate and not someone to pander to the Republican base, there are women in the Republican party who have that experience.”
Only two come to mind, Hutchinson and Dole. Neither were ever mentioned as possibilities, and neither would be considered “outsiders” giving McCain the opportunity to make “change” his message.
There were a couple other women being looked at that would have been equally interesting though, Whitman (eBay CEO) and Fiorina (HP CEO). Would that have been pandering had they been chosen.
Also, after Biden was selected, the talk was that this helps him with older, white, working-class Americans. Pandering once more.
“No, he was looking for a figurehead, a cheerleader, someone who looks good as opposed to someone who is qualified to be vice-president”
Looks mentioned again. A good-looking woman is obviously not qualified I guess.
Angela, Elaine, and others who feel that Gov. Palin was chosen for her “womanness,” I feel that you are being unfairly critical and willfully ignorant regarding her qualifications. Her political history is like a McCain fairy tale with a “maverick” taking on the unethical within and without her own party and defeating the firmly entrenched establishment.
Prior to her gubernatorial run, she was the chair of the Oil and Gas Conservation Commission in Alaska, where she took on her own party leader for ethics violations.
Her name has been on the list of possible VP’s for about a year. And no other Governor, male or otherwise, has the maverick personality that would appeal to McCain.
I agree with Tiffany, and this thread demonstrates it succinctly: “Sometimes other women are the worst enemies of women.”
Okay, popping back in for a sec. First of all, I don’t want this to devolve into an Obama vs. Palin thing (or a Democrat vs. Republican thing.) Obama is lacking experience, too. I concede that. And there are plenty of people who’ve hammered him for his lack of experience in the same way that Palin’s getting hammered now. I’ve explained why I, personally, feel there’s a difference between Obama and Palin’s level of experience, but those of you who disagree with me have some good points as well.
I guess what I’m saying is that comparing Palin to Obama isn’t the heart of the matter for me. I’m more interested in Palin herself, and the complex and difficult and often conflicting issues that her candidacy has stirred up in me and in a lot of other people.
And while I agree that there are passionate feelings about this issue, I would hope we could avoid using demonizing language in our discussion. Is it possible to concede that thinking, caring people can have differing opinions on an issue like this without assuming that they’re vilifying Palin? Or working women in general? We’ve got to be able to talk about issues like this, woman to woman, without striking our battle stances. I’ve got to be able to express my reservations about Palin without being accused of being an enemy to womankind. In my opinion, language like that just forces us into silence, which does nobody any good.
This is a passionate issue. I understand. But especially here at Segullah, I’d like to maintain a tone that reaches for common ground.
Very interesting discussion. After reading all the comments as a sympathetic outside observer, I have a growing suspicion which is based on some overt statements in the comments as well as some more subtle turns of phrase. I know Angela said this is not about politics, but do I correctly divine a trend in which political leanings are playing a big part in the reactions here? Both sides of the Sarah Palin coin are represented well in the thread, but I get the sense that conservatives naturally make the case for Palin and liberals naturally have a negative reaction to her.
I agree with Dalene. What I love about Palin is that she is not the kind of Mom who shoves her kids into the background. She’s still pumping bottles for Trig (bet that will stop soon!) and got rid of the cook at the governors mansion because she wanted to cook for her family. Her kids are in her life and they come with the deal. She’s not trying to be a man. She says very loud and clear “I’m a mom and proud of it.” And that’s a huge deal to me.
I think being a mom of many keeps a person incredibly grounded. It will keep her political perspective real.
As far as her being a working mom, this isn’t some crappy clerical job we’re talking about. Her husband will be Mr. Mom, and yes, the kids will definitely miss out on some prime Mommy moments, but it’s a sacrifice for a great cause.
She’s also got that sexy schoolmarm thing going on. I’m totally jealous!
Jacob, I think you’re right. I’m an Independent (although I voted for Bush twice, once pretty enthusiastically, once holding my nose) but I must admit that this go round I do like Obama. At least right now. I’m trying my best to keep an open mind, but I think that political affiliation *can* affect the way you see a candidate. And it’s probably impossible to divorce that from a situation as fraught and as complicated as this one.
And Jennie, she does look really good in those glasses. (Can I say that? :-)).
I’ve scanned through all the posts and no one has brought up the Proclamation on the Family. Do we have an obligation as members of the church to uphold the Proclamation by not voting for a woman who has small children at home and multi-family crises? It’s just a question that I don’t have an answer to, I really don’t know. Maybe being a family oriented woman she’d do more to defend the ideals in the Proclamation if she were in a position of power.
And before you jump down my throat, re-read the proclamation in light of what has been discussed.
And also remember what Elder Oaks said: “Tolerance obviously requires a non-contentious manner of relating toward one another’s differences. But tolerance does not require abandoning one’s standards or one’s opinions on political or public policy choices. Tolerance is a way of reacting to diversity, not a command to insulate it from examination.”
Sarah Palin’s lack of real qualifications for the job makes me feel pandered to
Stopped reading there.
Sarah has more experience than Barack Obama. BO is running for top spot, Sarah is running for second.
Sarah has more foreign policy experience than Barack Obama. If you think a Governor of State doesn’t deal with negotiations with foreign nations you’re mistaken. Governors deal with foreign trade constantly. Alaska more so than many other States with their oil, and commercial fisheries used by other nations besides just the United States. Than there is the issue of Russian jets skirting Alaska airspace on occasion.
Sarah Palin has more executive experience than Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and John McCain….COMBINED. Need I remind you that Alaska is the largest State, and it’s not the least populous either.
If you think Palin was chosen simply because she is a woman you could not possibly be more wrong.
The more I read about other mothers judging Palin, the more I want to defend her right to run for the VP spot. She’s not competing for the “Mother of the Year” award. I realize a lot of mothers may say that they wouldn’t want someone in the White House who fails to put her children first, but I don’t see the relevance in that argument. What does that even mean? One could easily argue that because she believes she can make a difference, that because she believes she can make this country a better place, that SHE IS putting her children first.
To scrutinize her choices as a mother is completely off base from the topic of whether or not she can do the job or not.
Heavenly Father put us on this earth to be many things. We are not here solely for the purpose of baby-making. As women we are given many talents, and I understand a lot of women believe that we are to hold off on other talents while we raise our children, unless of course, under the category of “talents” you find scrapbooking, blogging, and water-skiing. You know, the stuff that REALLY matters in life.
Others, like myself, don’t see it that way. We live in a day where our roles must cross. This is not a time to procrastinate.
But here’s the thing, it is villifying a woman when we, as women, question every choice she has made about her family. We wonder how she can do certain things but we continually refuse to even ask these questions about the male candidates. If you want to have this discussion, great. But be prepared to ask the hard questions about each candidate. Ask how being president will impact the families of the candidates. Then I will be happy to discuss them in a calm, collected manner. Because then it seems less of an indictment on a woman and more of a balanced concern about the candidates. And finally, is it really our business? I want to know how Palin will conduct herself as a VP. I think her previous experiences show that she will be strong and interesting.
Kathryn Soper makes me think……and I LOVE that!
Tiffany, just to clarify. First, I hope I made it clear that I’m conflicted about the way I feel. I’m speaking to my “gut level” reactions upon first hearing about Palin’s candidacy and I want to explore what those reactions might mean. And I realize that I’m sticking my neck out in daring to voice those concerns in a public way. But speaking for myself, I in no way have “questioned every choice she has made about her family.” I’m questioning this ONE choice, at this one particular time.
And as to the question “is it really our business?” Well . . . yeah. I’ve never understood the argument that we should completely divorce political candidates’ private choices and circumstances from their public desire to serve. When people said Clinton should get a pass because the Monica thing was “private,” I disagreed. And now I think I’m also justified in considering the ways that Palin’s family circumstances at the specific point in her life (*not* all her past choices, but what her life looks like right now) might affect her ability to be VP.
Here’s the beauty of it. Some people will look at Palin’s family circumstances and see them as a plus (as many on this thread have done). Some people will look at those same circumstances and see them as a minus. Both sides are justified in considering those circumstances, are they not?
Now hold it, Jendoop. How do we know that the family is in crisis?
Palin’s teenage daughter has been pregnant for a few months and the family has been aware of it. I imagine that it has been discussed and it is now rather more in the lines of following through with the plan that has been established. That is not a crisis.
Palin knew before her baby was born that there were problems. She accepted those problems. The baby is 4 months old and this is not a crisis situation. It is one where things are being taken care of. Palin frequently takes her baby to work.
I think Palin is a family-oriented woman. You don’t have five children if you aren’t focused on your family. Her approach is being scrutinized in such an intense fashion because she is basically in the running for one of the highest positions of power in this country.
And finally, I don’t see the Procalmation on the Family as material for how we are to judge others and their families or how we are to vote at an election. I see it as a direct guide for my own family and how I am to conduct myself. I see it as a model for governments to follow when implementing policy about family.
I consider this whole “But how will she care for her children?” a non-issue. I wish, as women, we could support what an AWESOME thing this is that a 40-something mother of five could potentially be in office and not judge how she will care for her kids. Clearly, she has managed her family as mayor and governor up to this point. I’m sure proper arrangements will be made for her children if she ends up in office. Living in DC and interacting with national and world leaders? I can’t think of a better education and experience for her children.
How many other vps and presidents have come into office with kids? The position as First Lady doesn’t exactly produce a schedule or lifestyle for a traditional SAHM…
“Living in DC and interacting with national and world leaders? I can’t think of a better education and experience for her children.”
That’s a really good point.
I voted for Palin as an Alaskan woman. I like that she is less “experienced” in politics in a way that I dislike how “experienced” the other scandal-ridden officials of Alaska are. She’s positive, intelligent, capable, and sincere. She has worked very hard in Alaska, thinks outside the box to get things done that have been on the to-do list for years.
During that time I have no doubt the home front has paid the price. Enter the pregnant teenage daughter. Who has ever heard of a politician, male or female, who neglects home and family for the good of their office? Yeah, everyone has. There is a lot you can assume about one’s priorities from this. And you’re probably right.
She has been snatched up in this campaign as a token. But then again, isn’t that the role of the VP during elections? Pandered to? Of course.
The fact that so many women are not swallowing it whole tells how intelligent and cautious we are. This election should be scrutinized.
Sarah Palin is not running for my nanny or my daughter in law. Consequently, how she parents her kids or who is the primary caregiver is between her and her husband. As long as they aren’t locking them in a closet and starving them, I’m pretty much fine letting that part of her private life remain private. She may be a great politician and a horrible mother. Who knows? If she’s a great politician who can force real reform (not Obama’s ambigious feel-good Oprah-fied change mantra–he’s my least favorite Democrat), I want her in Washington kicking insider butt.
Anyone who wants to start jumping to conclusions about whether a working mom’s busy schedule has contributed to her teenage daughter’s pregnancy needs to start looking long and hard at how many wonderful families with SAHMs that end up with kids in trouble. Kids get in trouble and there are many factors that contribute to that. For me personally, using this logically flawed line of thinking to justify a case against Sarah Palin is insulting–and I’m a SAHM.
I don’t expect male politicians to account for their paternal choices to the electorate; it would be hypocritical of me to expect female politicians to account for their maternal choices to the electorate. I didn’t judge Hillary Clinton by how Chelsea turned out. I judged her on her record.
Whether or not Sarah Palin would be a great “First Mother,” or rises to my standards of what I think a mother should be and do, doesn’t figure into my decision of who to vote for. The fact that Obama, McCain and Biden are slick politican operative Washington insiders is more relevant and disturbing to me than whether or not Sarah Palin can adequately care for her Down’s Syndrome child if she’s VP.
I wish I could say I’m glad to see this kind of discussion at Segullah, but I’m not. It’s topical and interesting, but not particularly uplifting–and that’s why I come here–for spiritual food or enlightenment. Oh well. I guess the best refuges are overrun eventually.
Although I personally agree that a candidate’s personal life can and should have a bearing on how I view a candidate and even whether I vote for them, I don’t think the Monica Lewinsky comparison is a good one, because in that case, the issues were not just of an immoral personal life, but of *professional* misconduct (abuse of power by having sex with an underling; lying under oath.) (I’m biting my tongue to not go further on that issue — well I guess I’m not a very effective tongue-biter: it’s always been a huge proof to me of feminist hypocrisy (I’m talking about the radical feminists at the top of the feminist food chain — the NOW types) that they so completely embraced one of the worst womanizers our national leadership has ever seen, because he was so completely in their pocket, policy-wise.) Anyway, Sarah Palin leaving her baby at home with daddy so she can be veep doesn’t seem in the same category as the Lewinsky affair at all. But, as I said, I think we’re all smart to try to do all we can to make good judgments about the character of our chosen candidates, and their personal lives do factor into that.
I share your hesitations about Palin’s being veep while her baby’s young, because I share the Mormon view that it’s best for a woman to be the primary caregiver for her children whenever possible. But at the same time, I’m also willing to look at her as coming from a different paradigm from mine, and within *that* paradigm, I think she’s (ironically enough) excelling both from a liberal feminist point of view AND from a conservative family-values point of view. (This means she’s opening herself up for the ire of both groups, if we think those two types of success are incompatible.) I also agree with whoever said (I think it was Kathryn?) that sometimes a woman has a vocation or calling that goes beyond what most of us can achieve or are called to achieve. That’s tricky territory, (and extremely personal/individual,) but I’m at least willing to consider that, while I *really* don’t believe I could succeed at a high-powered job of any sort while caring for young children, some women can, and do, and even are meant to.
I think the comparisons to Obama’s lack of experience are very valid, since he’s the other choice, so if we’re criticizing her based on a lack of experience, it should matter whether he has more or less experience than she does. I’d rather both candidates had more experience, but that’s not the reality we’re faced with. (And personally I agree with those who say that Palin has more executive experience than Obama. For that matter, some of Obama’s experience is opposite to what I would want — 20 years in a black supremacist church, with one of its most outspoken leaders as a mentor? Would we give the nod to anyone who’d spent 20 years being mentored by the leader of a WHITE supremacist church?)
I think I’ve gone far more political than you’d prefer with this response — but I don’t see how not to, since it’s really a political issue. And I also agree with the person who said that all or our perceptions of the candidates, and how quick we are to forgive or defend their foibles, will be strongly colored by our political preferences.
(Now I’m wondering how many comments will have made mine redundant while I took so long to write this.)
Aw, shucks. Thanks, b.
And everyone, remember not to kill the messenger. Angela’s points are valid ones to consider. Remove Obama from the picture, and we’d still wonder “is this woman really ready to be VP?” We may decide yes, we may decide no. But it’s a valid question.
Ditto for how personal life may affect political office. It’s wise to ask questions. It’s not wise to draw hasty conclusions, though–and that goes for everyone, perhaps especially those who thought there should be no questions to begin with.
I was excited to see Angela’s post, and I think she’s sparked a valuable discussion. It’s risky to speak up on such volatile issues. I’m glad she took the risk.
As for division along party lines, I will say that for me, Palin was the tip-the-scales factor in favor of McCain.
This is a really worthwhile discussion.
FWIW, Jacob J., while I a moderate conservative, I am one who has some of these concerns.
But I think Kathy and others have brought up interesting points that I am grateful to mull over as well.
FWIW, it’s not just Mormon women concerned about this. I happened to see this yesterday.
I’m torn on this one. I think on one hand, having a fresh, family-oriented perspective could be really good. I, too, am weary of the good ol’ boy stuff of politics. And I do like that this has shaken things up a bit, even if I’m conflicted about the shake-up.
But I agree that private life in public office isn’t so private anymore, and can and should be considered. I also wonder about role modeling here, and wonder if this is the kind of woman I want as a role model for girls in general. At some point, I don’t care if that sounds sexist, because I think girls are often confused by the idea that they can have it all, and it really isn’t true. Men can’t either, frankly, but that is why traditional roles can be important. I’m not saying there can’t be exceptions, such as Palin’s hubby staying at home, (which isn’t insignificant in this situation, imo). I’m still conflicted. I do think there is something to upholding what we believe in re: The Proclamation. But how much that should influence my voting is still something I’m mulling over. That is why I appreciate this post.
I don’t think we should be afraid of being labeled ’sexist’ in considering these concerns, because I think they are legimate to at least consider and to be able to discuss without someone trying to shut down the discussion by labeling it sexist.
I’m glad you were brave, Angela, in bringing this up, and I have really appreciated those who have been able to discuss this thoughtfully and respectfully.
Newsweek has chimed in on this issue. A good read.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/156923
I guess I should have said Obama’s ticket is the other choice — obviously if we’re doing straight-across comparisons, Biden has much more experience than Palin — and Obama has MUCH less experience than McCain.
I wish I could say I’m glad to see this kind of discussion at Segullah, but I’m not. It’s topical and interesting, but not particularly uplifting–and that’s why I come here–for spiritual food or enlightenment. Oh well. I guess the best refuges are overrun eventually.
Of all the comments I’ve read, this one surprised me the most. One of the purposes of Segullah, per our mission statement, is to “provoke thought.” That’s exactly the purpose of this post.
Angela has not overstepped any boundaries. The topic of a female VP candidate is of huge importance and interest to many, if not most, LDS women.
The trouble I have with the word pandering is that when we are taking aggressive steps to thwart something, say racism, we actively seek out minorities to balance out the imbalance. If McCain chose Palin in part because of her sex, does that make it inherently pandering? Or just part of the equation? Tim J is right that many of the short list VP names had very little experience on the national stage.
Palin is actually the only one of the four candidates that has ANY executive experience at all. I don’t even know who I’m voting for yet, but I think that she’s just as likely to do well as anyone else is.
Zina, you’ve made a good point that the Clinton/Lewinski thing and Palin’s candidacy are not really the same. They’re not. I was just using that a as quick example of my own belief that personal choices do affect the way I see a person. Clinton’s past infidelity before Monica colored my feelings about him, too.
And due to many of your comments, I’m rethinking my final (and probably most inflammatory) statement in my initial post about what it means about Palin as a person if she chooses to become Vice President during such a crucial time in her children’s lives. That was the gut-reaction about which I was most ashamed, but I wanted to be honest about feeling it. So after much mulling today (I mulled and mulled while I pushed my cart through Target, feeding my toddler BBQ potato chips from an open bag to keep him quiet) I think I can come around to the fact that some women might be “called” to do certain things that put a strain on the family, but that the greater good might be in accepting that call. Men *and* women are put in this situation. I see that. And I also see that I was probably conflating my own sense of what *I* would do and wouldn’t do with my sense of what Palin should and shouldn’t do. And that’s not really fair.
Does this mean that Palin’s been “called”? Dunno. Truly, I hardly know a thing about Palin. So few of us do, besides (maybe) the woman from Alaska who posted above. (And I appreciated your insight).
I still feel strongly, though, that I should be able to take into consideration the toll her family situation will take on her ability to do her job. I still think that’s fair.
And Kathy, thanks for the backup. I know that this isn’t the type of post one often sees on Segullah, but I too believe that discussions like this can be beneficial and are important, especially if they are conducted in the right spirit.
My hesitations about her are similar to yours, Angela. It seems clear to me that choosing her was a strategic move: they chose her because of her gender and family status, because they thought she might “speak for mothers of large families,” as Kathy said.
And I can see that she just might do that–speak for mothers of large families . . . who also have careers, and who believe in furthering their careers sometimes at the cost of family life.
I think that society is moving in a direction that is frightening: more support for women who choose to work, less support for women who feel they should be home with their kids. Because of the choices she has made, we can see a little bit about what she values, what she’ll work for, what she cares about. From what I can tell about her choices, I can see that she won’t speak for me. So their strategy didn’t work for me.
I, like Angela, would like to see someone (male or female) who wants to work to change our society to make it easier for people to put family first. I’m not sure Palin would have that as a priority, based on what I see.
To distil my tangential rantings to something shorter and clearer: I share some of your concerns about Sarah Palin’s choice to run for VP when she’s got a young baby and other children to care for, but, unless other greater concerns arise between now and November, my concerns are not great enough to keep me from voting for my preferred platform.
I also noted with some amusement that, while you have referred to this as a “woman to woman” conversation, this thread brought more male commenters than any I remember noticing around here before.
(I wrote this offline while waiting for this site to come back — maybe it was having trouble with heavy traffic? And I should also say that I’ve enjoyed how respectful and thoughtful this whole thread has been.)
And, responding to Darlene’s comment — I agree that she’s not likely to specifically promote the cause of families, which I also see as a negative. (I just have other reasons to vote for her — barring some future more-shocking revelation.)
Darlene, you’ve described perfectly the hasty conclusions and the trap for high-ranking women I’ve been referring to. I’m not going to dig in to your argument, but I couldn’t disagree more with the logic you’ve presented here, or your conclusion.
You know, Justine, as far as the pandering thing goes, I think in a perfect world I’d love to have a really qualified, ready, kick-butt candidate who *happens* to be a woman. What makes me feel pandered to is the sense that her being a woman was the first and most important quality. I don’t like that. I wish that as women there wasn’t the whiff of gender-based affirmative action following us around, and if one of the candidates had chosen a woman with a really strong track record, instead of one that needs so much defending, that whiff wouldn’t be as strong. So I guess that’s what makes me feel a little deflated.
I realize that some of you do think she’s already qualified, ready, and kick-butt as she is, and you’re entitled to that opinion. But I’m still not so sure. I guess I just want the whomever is going to be the first female VP (and possible President, even) to be rock solid.
Who knows? Maybe when I hear her speak tonight, my opinion of her readiness will change. I’ve never said I’m not open to change.
Now Kathy, I don’t think that Darlene’s comment was particularly hasty. I think that if a person feels Palin speaks for her (or doesn’t speak for her), it’s a valid condition to consider re: whether or not you’ll vote for her. Now that might mean that some people will never be able to vote for a mother who currently has a lot of small children at home, much as other people will never be able to vote for someone who’s never been married, or for someone who did drugs once upon a time, or someone who doesn’t believe in God.
For me, the question isn’t so much whether Palin will be able to speak to family issues, though. It’s her readiness and ability to stay focused in the midst of everything else going on in her life.
Angela, I don’t think the problem you have is with her lack of experience. I think it’s that the choice came suddenly and it seemed sort of random, even though Palin was mentioned on the short list several months ago, though nobody really gave her much thought.
The difference, though, is that she was out sight, out of mind. She wasn’t actively campaigning for McCain like Romney. She never really made the talk-show rounds like Crist and Pawlenty. She was unknown to the average observer. Then when the choice was made, people felt broadsided and the initial reaction was, “Who? Oh, a woman. Of course.” Had she been front and center the whole time, even with her experience, I don’t think you would have felt this way. Of course, I’m only guessing.
It’s kind of the same reaction that the Harriet Miers reaction received, though that was more a problem with cronyism than sexism.
I think it’s unrealistic to expect any man or woman in the office of P or VP to be able to spend the type of time with their families that we all see as being ideal. When we consider the role for men, we see them making sacrifices for the greater good. Now a woman wants to make these sacrifices and we criticize her. I admit that I look at her story and know that I wouldn’t do the same thing if I were in her position, but I’m glad that some people are willing to make these sacrifices for our country. The church regularly asks members to make sacrifices (take callings) that pull them away from precious family time. Even when their families are struggling, we see them fulfilling callings and call it noble. I would hope that anyone running for President or VP would feel a sense of being called to help the country, and be willing to make sacrifices for it.
Now, am I going to vote for her? I doubt it. I’ve been on the fence between the two candidates, and her nomination doesn’t particularly reach out to me. I see her as being further to the right than McCain. Being a woman does not make her more moderate.
What an intelligent conversation. Upon McCain’s announcement of his VP pick, I reacted exactly the same way that Angela did. Who? What? Is this a gimmick?
Palin’s qualifications as small-town mayer and governor of Republican heavy Alaska did not impress me at all. Being a sling-wearing mother does not convince me that she can “do it all” and do it all well. I don’t really understand what the exact job of VP entails, and maybe there is loads of free-time each day that will allow her to continue her home cooked meals. I doubt it. Not that it matters. I’m just kind of impressed that home cooking has even entered the discussion. It certainly never did with Hillary Clinton.
I feel a bit like McCain is playing politics when his entire campaign revolves around the fact that McCain doesn’t play politics. I have no reason to believe that he truly thought Palin was a qualified VP choice, but rather think that he did it for a jolt of media attention and to pandering to female voters who felt angry about Hillary Clinton not getting the nomination. Not great reasoning, but I’ve never been convinced that John McCain is a thinker. Again, it felt very, very pander-esque.
But, many of your comments have given me great food for thought. Kathryn Soper - you are a great debater. I’ve read through these comments much like watching a tennis match, not knowing how the volley is going to end. I still don’t, but appreciate the discussion. I think it’s entirely appropriate for Segullah. This kind of thinking, among peers, is exactly why I come here.
And, fwiw, I don’t believe Palin has been “called,” or that she needs to be called in order to be justified in her choices. Sometimes opportunities present themselves, and you feel it’s for the greater good to take that opportunity, even in light of its cost.
The tricky thing is, NONE of us know what the cost is for Palin and her family. We can interpret her choices in completely opposite ways. We could cast her as a hero or a villain based on the same set of facts.
Tim, good point. I will admit that my first reaction was along the lines of “What???” “Who???” That’s why I open to reconsider the readiness question, once I have more information.
Angela, you’re right–I don’t know how much time Darlene spent formulating her argument.
Sorry, Darlene. In your comment I don’t see evidence of your examining the other side of the equation with much depth, but that doesn’t mean you haven’t. And I know you’re a careful thinker, so you deserve the benefit of the doubt.
Is it possible for women in public office to exemplify strong family values with young chicks still in the nest? I can’t make the leap from “she has little kids at home” to “she isn’t an advocate for the family.”
And yeah, Kathy, “called” is kind of a loaded word, especially given the context of Segullah. But I also think that sometimes people take opportunities when they shouldn’t–that the family suffers too much in relation to the amount of good that can be done. But sometimes the scales tip the other way. I’m not Sarah Palin, so I can’t say which way the scales are tipping for her. I realize that.
Two comments:
As far as the Proclamation on the Family, I think don’t think that any of the candidates on either side exemplify all of the values espoused in the Proclamation. For some, it may be their personal choices for their families. For others, it may be platforms they espouse. I just don’t think that the Proclamation can separate the sheep from the wolves in this situation, because none of the four candidates completely fits the bill. In the case of elections, we will almost never have a perfect candidate; we just have to go with whomever we feel is best. (And that answer may be different for each person. For me, personally, Palin’s being a working mother fits better than Obama’s support of same-sex marriage and abortion.)
2nd, the teenage pregnancy thing. A member of my family strongly criticized Palin for having a pregnant daughter, saying that if she couldn’t manage her own family, how could she manage the nation. I was appalled! These things happen in the best of families–this could happen to any one of our daughters. Children make their own choices, regardless of what they’re taught. I’m more interested in how the Palin family is handling the situation than how it happened in the first place.
I really like Sarah Palin so far. But I’m feeling cautious. I wish some of these things weren’t part of the deal, but they are. I remind myself that no candidate is going to have the absolute perfect situation.
I had more to say, but I’m out of time.
I admit only finding out about Palin about a month or two ago when her name appeared on the VP list. I didn’t know anything about her other than her being the governor of Alaska. But the more I read about her the more intrigued I became and the more hopeful I was that McCain would choose her. I just didn’t think McCain would do it. But I was thrilled when it happened.
My wife and I haven’t voted for a president in twelve years, only local offices. That’s going to change this time around. I’m glad a politician did something different instead of the status quo (nominating a long time Senator). It’s a gamble, sure, but Washington needs someone who thinks differently. I was hoping Obama might choose Hagel to do something similar, but I understand why he didn’t.
DMI Dave had this to say on his blog:
“What factors generally govern a nominee’s selection of a VP candidate? To give balance to the ticket or to give strength in a key state or two or to compensate for a nominee’s perceived weakness. Getting elected is a political process, so these political factors dominate the real decision process.
Of course, the rhetoric is always directed away from the real factors governing the selection, with the nominating party talking about how capable and qualified is the nominee and the opposing party saying just the opposite.
If being best prepared to step into the Presidency was the only factor, Obama should have named Bill Clinton as his VP.
Note that both candidates chose balance: Obama, an exciting young African-American candidate, picks an old, experienced white guy. McCain, an old, experienced white guy, picks an exciting young female governor.”
Ang, you’re right–it’s possible Palin’s family will suffer as a result, and that for them, the benefits of Palin in office are swamped by the cost. But I’m not figuring that into my voting decision. It’s not my job to protect Palin’s family. And I’m opting to give her the benefit of the doubt.
Of course–and this is important–I’m speculating about the benefits of Palin in office just as much as others are speculating about the risks. I’m thinking best-case scenario, while others might be thinking the opposite.
If you think she’s incompetent you are sexist. Just sayin’.
PS Tim you have always been right-wing Dan. You’re just seeing that now?
PS - the real Dan just quit blogging. What are you telling us, Tim?
It discourages me how women will not give each other a break. I don’t know if I agree with Sarah Palin on her politics, but I have no problem believing she can nurture/bond her child and do something incredible with the opportunity that has come her way.
And I do say child. The next youngest is 7–his bonding requirements are different. The others are teens. One’s off to Iraq and the other’s getting married.
What have all the First Lady schedules looked like? Were any of them mothers?
I’m old enough to remember Phylis Schafly (though not to spell her name apparently.) She got to be a mom of 5 and a lawyer and fly all around the country and who complained about whether she was being a good mom?
What about all the moms who have ever run the temperance movement, written a book, been a Relief Society President, participated in local politics, been PTA president, did fundraising. What are moms allowed to do?
Haven’t any of you ever been criticized–how can you nurture three children under the age of 5? How can you nurture 6 children under the age of 10? Usually by some busybody who’s never seen you with your kids?
I’m in my 40s too. I love being a mother, but that’s not everything I am. I’m a little worried we can only “excuse” Palin if we can recast her role as a “high calling.” though VP does look a little like a high calling, and perhaps I’m grateful there’s some metaphor that will get more women to give her a chance.
I like the idea that she is different. I hope that she can have an influence that will lead in a new direction instead of the crap that has been spoon fed to us for years. I don’t want tons of empty promises, I would rather have a few solutions instead. I have hope that she will be real and not what she thinks we want. Although her personal choices would not be mine they do not deserve to be ridiculed. With a supportive family I beleive anything is posible.
I finally see a spot of light in a very dark tunnel, maybe someday it will lead us out!
Well, after thoroughly vanquishing Dan I’m moving on to each blog one-by-one to spread capitalism and conservatism wherever I go.
Consider this a warning for your puny little communist blog over there.
First of all, let me say I love how you explore the topic. It is non threatening and yet you bring up some very valid points. I love this type of discussion.
Second, I agree. I think she was picked to try to sway what ever image McCain is trying to fix. I also have great concern about her having such a young family and being in office. If for no other reason than selfish… what is that going to do to us mom’s at home when we can’t cope… we are going to have an image of our peer in the WHITE HOUSE handling so much more. I can’t compete with that!
Finally, even though I know women can do exceptional jobs at such jobs, I really am more comfortable with someone not experiencing PMS or menapause being in office. Seriously — do I need to elaborate?
Choosing Palin because she speaks for large families is stretching it, statistically speaking as most American families are rather small compared to Palin’s 5 children.
I am excited, no thrilled, with the nomination of Sarah Palin. She has more leadership background than Obama. She is an acting Governor in a huge state, both size wise and energy importance in our economy.
She does have a husband who I am sure is committed to raising their children as well. I am sure that if elected He and all of their children will move to DC and he can provide the main stability and care for their children. Does this make her a bad mother? NO! Does this make her a bad women? NO! Different families have different challenges. Will she be the only women who works full time and her spouse stays at home? I think not! I am conservative to the core, but frankly I think it will be refreshing to see a women who has values help shape the future of this country! We are better off having her than having Hillery!
The trouble with finding someone who represents and understands my needs as a stay at home mother of five is that the person that would represent me would have to leave home to do so. I think Palin can certainly appreciate and represent the values of family in America. Any woman who we would want to stand in that position would have to eschew the traditional stay-at-home role anyway.
and btw, Lincoln came to the Oval office with almost no national experience AT ALL. I don’t think this fact automatically disqualifies her.
I heard her speak last week, and she’s much more charismatic than McCain. She should do great tonight. Even if he did pick her to even himself out. Jacob Weisberg just wrote in Slate magazine that we should all vote for Obama just because he’s black, otherwise it just proves we’re a bunch of racists. So while national publications are still suggesting that, I don’t think we’re quite ready as a nation to say we’re going to vote based on skill alone. Until then, we’ve got to hobble along the best we can.
I think I like Palin so far. But I still like Obama, too. Curious position to be in…
“and btw, Lincoln came to the Oval office with almost no national experience AT ALL. I don’t think this fact automatically disqualifies her.”
It’s funny, Obama supporters were all about the Lincoln comparison before the Palin pick. Haven’t heard it since.
Whoa, I have to take issue with the issue of preferring people who are supposedly not hormonal in high office (my opinion is not limited to the discussion here–I’ve heard this argument elsewhere).
Although I’ll admit I’ve experienced the ravages of estrogen and it can be pretty intense, there are two sides to that coin. Can we talk about testosterone? I’ve been in rooms and on conference calls where you could cut it with a knife. Without sharing too much detail I have also witnessed firsthand how a couple of executives locked in a testosterone battle can undermine and erode the efforts of a company’s entire work force.
And let’s not forget about the blue dress.
Hormones will not be an issue when I step up to the ballot box.
Justine!
The trouble with finding someone who represents and understands my needs as a stay at home mother of five is that the person that would represent me would have to leave home to do so.
You just nailed it.
Whew! I can sleep now knowing someone has stated that point clearly and succinctly! I’ve been trying, and failing, to do it all day.
Anon-Amen! I’d rather have estrogen than testosterone in the White House any day.
I’m willing to bet that most of the people arguing Pro-Palin here on this blog (you know who you are) were probably going to vote for McCain anyway. Just sayin’.
I heard it said somewhere that in election year, Democrats fall in love and Republicans fall in line.
Republicans are going to line up behind their man (or woman) no matter what. McCain could have picked Lieberman and they will still be voting Republican in November. Republicans are true to their party, regardless of whose name is on the ticket. (For example, McCain only got 5% of the Utah primary vote in February, and he’ll probably get closer to 85% of the vote in November because he is the Republican on the ticket now and not Romney.)
It’s just that Palin is new and unknown, and now Republicans have a reason to be excited about this campaign. Which is fine by me, I’m not going to worry about convincing them otherwise– I think time will tell the depth of her character.
I am less likely to vote R with Pallin on the ticket. Since reading all this I tried really hard (for a minute or two at least) to feel guilty about that, but I just don’t. I don’t see it as a matter of not being fair to her, or not liking her, or any of that. I don’t even see it as judging her personally. She can work and have young children if that’s what she wants to do. But asking to be elected to high public office takes in more variables. I don’t feel comfortable setting her circumstances as a pattern for our nation to look up to, ( and just because other public officials have made mistakes doesn’t change that. I was concerned about Bill Clinton too) I don’t know how the job might impact her family, and it isn’t really any of my business anyway. But I do care whether we are selecting a figurehead whose example is most likely to benefit those who are watching her. I also question her ability to serve effectively as VP and potentially as President with an infant. And I agree with Darlene. I was disappointed to see you label her ideas rather than presenting a counterpoint, Kathy.
Angie, I’d been presenting the counterpoint in all my other comments up until Darlene’s. I didn’t want to repeat myself. If Darlene was disappointed that I didn’t refute her points one by one, I’ll gladly do that, but I think my previous comments already capture what I would say. I asked a direct question that pinpointed what I saw as one of the main flaws in her argument, but there was no response. Here’s the question again:
Is it possible for women in public office to exemplify strong family values with young chicks still in the nest? I can’t make the leap from “she has little kids at home” to “she isn’t an advocate for the family.”
And likewise, I disagree completely with your point that she’s a poor role model for the nation. If you’d like me to say more, I will, but I think this particular point is a line in the sand that few, if any, would be willing to cross after hearing the other side’s argument (which, again, I’ve already presented).
But heck, my mother told me she chose my name in part because it would be a fitting name for the first female POTUS. So that’s the foundation for my viewpoints about women’s place in the world.
I just thought it was worth noting that this post has gotten the most comments ever on this blog. Modesty is no longer the hottest topic on Segullah.
Well said! As a woman I am insulted that the Republican Party thinks I am so stupid I would vote for them simply because I am a woman and they have chosen a another woman to add to the ballot. I believe in equality…absolutely…I am a wife, mother, grandmother, and small busines owner. But there is no way Sarah Palan can raise a handicapped child and traverse the univerise as vice-president. My question, who will really raise her child? Wasn’t there a very wise man who once said, “No success can compensate for failure in the home”? Yep, I thought so. And I believe him!
And one more thing…I resent all the talk about the Palin’s being a “typical” American family facing “typical family problems”. They are not typical, teenage pregnancy is not typical. And I won’t let them make me think it is! And don’t even get me started on the “At least she (Bristol Palin) didn’t get an abortion.”
Why are we all dismissing the fact that Todd Palin might very well be a fantastic dad that is completely capable of taking care of all his children including Trig? That, to me, seems sexist. I happen to be married to a man who is at least as good a parent as me, if not better.
Even the Proclamation on the Family says there may be “other circumstances” where the typical mom-at-home scenario can be changed. Isn’t being VP a decent “other circumstance”?
Why are we all dismissing the fact that Todd Palin might very well be a fantastic dad
I haven’t seen this totally being dismissed. I know I pointed out that this isn’t insignificant in the discussion — that dad is there and plugged in and (it appears) ready to be there full-time. I think others have as well.
But still, at least for me, there is more on the table to consider than just the nuts and bolts of how they run their family, and that is what I see people discussing…trying to sort out if she’s an asset to the party and to McCain, if her experience is sufficient (or if Obama’s is, for that matter), if she will be free enough and able enough with her family life to meet the rigors of the job (hard to judge, imo, seeing as we have no direct experience with that — if she can be governor, that isn’t insignificant, and if she has a hubby there full time, maybe she really could pull it off).
I worry a bit about international issues, diplomacy and the like. Can she handle that kind of stuff? I also worry about hard-core economic and budget issues. And what about working within the limitations and annoyances of the system (since they are awfully hard to actually change in government). I haven’t looked into how she has managed Alaska, but again, I think there is a lot to consider here, as there always is, imo.
Okay, a few comments about your comments. As far as hormones go, estrogen OR testosterone isn’t a deciding factor for me regarding whom I think should run the country. We should be looking at people as individuals–their backgrounds, policy positions, leadership abilities, life circumstances. Hormones? For me, not so much.
I also don’t necessarily hold it against Palin that her daughter got pregnant. All sorts of wonderful parents have children who get pregnant. What I *do* consider, though, is the ramifications of supporting that daughter through her pregnancy and young motherhood. I can’t ignore the fact that those responsibilities are going to take a toll on Palin.
And yes, Todd Palin might be a great father. But (selfishly?) my concern isn’t really for Palin’s children, per se. My concern is for ME, for MY country, and the fact that I want to elect someone who won’t be unduly distracted. It seems to me that even if the bulk of the childrearing tasks fall to Todd, Sarah is still a parent, too–and hopefully a concerned and active one–and that her kids’ needs and welfare will weigh heavily in her thoughts and take up some of her attention.
I think wondering about the effect her parenting responsibilities might have on her ability to govern shouldn’t be the only factor, and for me it won’t be the deciding factor. But it will be *a* factor. And isn’t that at least somewhat justified?
Um. . . so now we automtically assume that Palin is going to fail as a parent to her handicapped child? Isn’t she already the parent to four children? Oh wait. . . mothers who have daughters that get pregnant while teenagers are failures. I forgot.
And as for teenage pregnancy not being a typical problem, ever looked at the stats for teenage pregnancy in Utah? Teenage pregnancy is a common problem in the U.S. and its refreshing to see someone who doesn’t hide the problem but addresses it. I wish more parents would have that courage.
I love this conversation and the counter arguments. It’s going to take me a while to read through them and think through my own thoughts on a deeper level. After posting my brief “amen” this morning, I spoke with three thinking people I know (spouse, mother, bf)and all of them disagreed with me. I’m curious to hear more about her, for certain!
As a mother of a child with disablities, I’m a little offended at the assumptions being made here. There are a number of people involved in my son’s - my family’s life and all of them are important. I am not a one-woman band. I wish I were as well-spoken as Zina and Kathryn, they have presented some great points.
I have to say it’s rare (and refreshing) to see a woman running for high political office who isn’t portrayed as shrewish.
Mrs. Organic, for what it’s worth, my reservations have little to do with the fact that her son has disabilities. And I’m the first person to agree that it takes LOTS of people to raise a child. It’s not just a mom’s job, by any means.
And now she’s on the TV. Gotta go watch!
Wow. That was good.
I’ll admit it. That was a really good speech. She seemed smart and articulate and confident and definitely has the ability to command a room. And I’m a sucker for a good orater, it’s true. That’s part of the reason I like Obama.
I still have some reservations, but my opinion of her has been strengthened by listening to her speak.
I like what Dalene posted, and I like Johnna’s point asking about just what are moms allowed to do? Where would we be in this country without strong women? Not able to vote, for starters.
Loved her speech. There is something in me that loves the idea of someone not in the “in” crowd in Washington. Let’s shake things up a bit.
I’m in my forties too and I would love to be able to tell the “good ol’ boys” a thing or two.
Still not sure who gets my vote, but I do like her.
Angela, so glad to hear that. I was surprised you, and so many others, felt she was picked mainly because she’s a woman. Conservative commentators and bloggers have had their eye on her for at least a year. Anyone who did what she did in Alaska deserved a good look, regardless of gender. And, man, can she speak! I thought several times: “I’m looking at the first woman president of the United States.” I’m not kidding. She nailed it, with so many great lines, and with such a strong, real personality. You can tell when you look at her, she believes it. And what a family! What good, real, honest faces. Back to the speech–how amazing that she created such a strong, concrete character sketch of McCain, stood up for her own viability, and zinged her opponent, all with a twinkle in her eye. She also had just the right moments of deep sincerity, especially when paying tribute to McCain and his fellow prisoner of war. Wow. As a Republican, I’m thrilled to finally have hope for a really great presidential ticket, the first since Reagan.
At this point, I have to agree with Peggy Noonan: Anyone who gets far-right Republicans to fret about sexism, and far-left Democrats to advocate in favor of raising children and laying your career aside, can’t be all that bad.
So did her speech tonight change anyone’s opinions or mostly just support the ones you already had?
I’ll admit that I only had knee-jerk reactions, based on my own political prejudices and the little bit of reading I’ve done, before watching tonight. I think she’s very well-spoken and made some convincing arguments about the energy problems. But my nagging doubts are still there…
Cheri, there’s a good chance I don’t listen to enough conservative commentators and bloggers :-).
But, you’re right. She sure can speak. Isn’t it funny how Obama and Palin seem to have some of the identical qualities? (Of course, their politics are very dissimilar. I’m talking personal qualities here.) New, fresh, represent an underrepresented segment of the population, seem to believe what they’re saying, inspiring.
And . . . not a lot of qualifications on paper. Both of them. It took me a while to get convinced that Obama was qualified enough. And I still have some reservations w/ Palin’s qualifications, despite her excellent oratory skills, and it might take me a little more time yet to really decide if she’s up to the task.
It is kind of thrilling, though, to think that SOMEBODY is going to be elected that’s fun to listen to when they talk. After eight years of Bush, that will be a refreshing change. (Low blow? Ahh, I’m saying it with a Sarah Palin-like twinkle in my eye . . .)
That’s the fascinating thing about this election, Palin and Obama mirror each other, while McCain and Biden do the same. I would honestly be interested in a Palin-Obama debate and a McCain-Biden debate.
“It took me a while to get convinced that Obama was qualified enough.”
Can I ask what convinced you? I honestly can’t find anything. People are scoffing at Palin’s lasck of experience, and perhaps rightfully so, but for the life of me, I can’t see anything in Obama’s past that would lead me to believe that he is ready either.
I’ll add, I haven’t really had anyone make the case to me for Obama. The only argument is change. That’s fine and all, but that’s not really a reason to vote for someone, but rather against someone. I have been given many reasons to vote against McCain, but not many to vote FOR Obama.
As a mother of seven including one child with Down Syndrome, I had a lot of mixed feelings until tonight. If the glass ceiling is going to be broken then let it be done by a mother who shares my values. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, another mother of seven, fought for the rights I enjoy today. Hopefully, my daughters can be thankful for the courage of Sarah Palin for the rights they will have tomorrow.
I thought several times: “I’m looking at the first woman president of the United States.”
Cheri, I thought the same thing, and I hope it happens.
I admit, I was biased in her favor before her nomination. She’s greatly admired in the Down syndrome community for the way she became an instant advocate for kids with special needs after Trig was born (of course, letting him be born was the strongest act of advocacy she could make, but she didn’t stop there.) Obviously if that were the only thing I admired about her it wouldn’t be nearly enough to want her as VP. But that’s where I started from. And tonight, for me, she skyrocketed from there.
After watching her speak at the convention tonight, I don’t see how anyone can think she doesn’t have what it takes to be in the #2 spot or even the #1 spot. She is clearly a driven, intelligent, capable person who has walked her talk and accomplished a lot in her home state. This is EXACTLY the type of person I want to see in Washington. She will not be going with the status quo. Obama has practically ZERO experience. As she pointed out in her speech, he’s authored two books, but not a single law or bill of legislation–even in the STATE SENATE!! To think people would vote for him just because he speaks well is SCARY! Obviously motherhood is very important, but at the same time we have mothers that hold very high callings in our church (general RS pres, YW pres, Primary pres, etc.). I’m sure it takes a lot of time from their family, but they make it work for a great cause. To say she can’t/shouldn’t be in this position simply because she is a mother seems very backwoods to me.
Shelah, I thought she hit it out of the park — but I was already in her camp. (I guess I got a taste of how Obama fans feel during his speeches.) She definitely is more solidly right than McCain, and should appeal to the base, which I do think was one of the main reasons for her selection. And, talk about a camera-ready candidate. A couple seasons ago there was a short-lived TV show about a smart, beautiful, strong-willed female VP who becomes president when the president dies in office, and of course she’s a very liberal Democrat, and I made fun of the show as a Hollywood liberal fantasy. It’s weird to me that the Republicans are close to that possible scenario, now — I wonder if it causes any cognitive dissonance to the
writers of that defunct show. (But, as we’ve discussed at length here, I guess it also causes some cognitive dissonance to some branches of conservatives or moderates.)
Just as a tangent — Trig is SO cute! Did you all catch the clip of Palin’s daughter, holding Trig, licking her hand and then slicking his hair down with her spit? So funny and cute.
Oh, also, did anyone catch Palin using the word “calling” to describe the VP job, right at the beginning of her speech? Interesting word choice. I’m not saying I necessarily think she’s called to be VP — I don’t know — but I think it’s interesting (and pertinent to our discussion) that she would describe the office that way.
I also was swayed by her speech tonight. I had done my homework, but didn’t really know what to think..I like her. Another mamma of a child with Down Syndrome here..and don’t for a second think that she is going to get less time with that baby than the three other women in my group (all our babies are the same age–and also the same age at little Trig). Two are illegal and all three work several jobs. Getting enough time with her kids and getting her children the help she needs might be a challenge, but it is one that she will share with MANY MANY mothers out here.
I also loved the shots of her little girl licking her hand and smoothing his hair. That was priceless. I saw that little boys’ face on his mamma’s shoulder at the end and thought to myself that this woman is the first person I have seen on that stage that is similar to me. I liked that… anyway, love the discussion.
Yeah, I loved the daughter and the spit. Perfect.
Gina, though, I’m confused. It seems to me that you’re condemning people for supporting Obama for the very same reasons you’re championing Palen. Now, I can see condemning him for his politics . . . but in a strange kind of way, the “good speaker” “inspirational” “smart enough to overcome the relative lack of experience” thing applies to Obama AND Palin and undercuts either party’s ability to use those arguments very effectively against each other. Which is actually kind of cool.
And to answer your question about Obama, Tim, I’ve listened to Obama enough (in debates and in speeches and in extemporaneous settings) that I do think he’s smart enough to compensate for his inexperience. Intelligence is really important to me in a Presidential candidate, and I think he displays a lot of it. So far, I’ve only heard Palin give one speech, so I’m not quite ready to make a decision on whether her intelligence is compensatory, too, based on just one experience. But we have while yet until Nov and as I’ve said all along, I’m willing to have an open mind. This speech bodes well for her. Oh, and I’m not ashamed to say that I’ve been weary of the Republican old guard of the last few years, so Obama’s promise of change is compelling for me.
But, again, I don’t really want this to be about Obama . . .
Sorry for the diversion (Obama), just wondering.
Thanks.
No problem. Happy to clear things up.
does it bum anyone else out that our candidates don’t even write their own speeches? not that palin didn’t “knock it out of the park” (though, in fact, i do think community organizers do amazing things), but it would have resonated with me a lot more if they were actually her words, her lines…
Brittney,
I would like to believe, perhaps naively, that it’s more of a collaboration than someone handing a candidate a paper to read.
And Obama without a telestrator has proved a little detrimental for him.
Tim J, found this at the HuffPo, which I know, casts a shadow on it already. strangely, it actually confirms both of our suspicions (yours that it’s collaborative, and mine that they hand it whole cloth)
“Sitting around a dining room table, the McCain team has talked to her about Iraq, energy and the economy, but has focused on what she should say in her speech, struggling almost as hard as she has to prepare for what will be, along with a debate in October, her main opportunity to shape the way she is viewed by voters. Not anticipating that McCain would choose a woman as his running mate, the speech that was prepared in advance was “very masculine,” according to campaign manager Rick Davis, and “we had to start from scratch.”
is that weird? cause i kind of think it is. anyway, my point is that i think it’s a pretty disingenuous system, red, blue, or green.
It is what it is….I hope she is on the winning ticket because if she isn’t look at the alternative…
Brittney, I guess it would be great if all candidates were great speechwriters (like Lincoln,) but I’m satisfied in that I think she really believed in what she was saying, even if she didn’t come up with all of it. Some of the cleverer sound bites didn’t necessarily sound like she could have come up with them, (although that’s hard to determine without knowing her personally,) but when she gave personal anecdotes they did sound personal. And I guess I enjoy good writing, so I don’t mind the candidates’ having some help if writing’s not their forte.
As a “born-n-raised” Alaskan mother of 3 young children, I am so thrilled to have the opportunity to vote for Sarah in this election.
I’ve struggled with the issues discussed here in coming to the decision.
My experiences with Palin, however, have led me to believe that mothers (and, by extension, families) have never had a stronger advocate in the White House than Sarah will be.
She has made different decisions than I have in my life, but we come from different backgrounds.
I know, however, that she will continue to be the strong voice of reason that she has been during her years here.
The full title of the Proclamation, so often abbreviated on blogs to ‘The Proclamamtion on the Family’, is
The Family: A Proclamation to the World.
imho, that does not make Sarah Palin exempt from it’s words.It is not purely for LDS.
Any woman who feels her ‘call to serve America’ is more important than her infant disabled child, and her other children, suggests that priorities are ruled by ego.
And the speech was written by advisors prior to the appointment. The speechwriters spent days feminisiing it, apparently, as they were taken on the hop by the appointment of a woman.
Love the speech tonight! I found it refreshing!
rebecca said…
“this woman is the first person I have seen on that stage that is similar to me. I liked that…”
Me, too! Some one like me. Some one who knows what it is like to work and be a mom! Some one who has the same ideals and values and is not going to take anyone’s crap. I don’t care why they choose her, I am just so glad that they did!
Anne said…
“Any woman who feels her ‘call to serve America’ is more important than her infant disabled child, and her other children, suggests that priorities are ruled by ego.”
Totally disagree! How can you say that she is putting the ‘call to serve’ above her child (any of them)! A woman (LDS or not) has the right to work and still be a good mom. Some of us actually WANT to work out side of the home and that helps us to feel like we are better moms! We want to provide the best possible life for our children. I think that her children are proud of what she is doing and so is her husband! I don’t think that she is “ruled by her ego”!
I was just thinking that everyone seems to be jumping on Sarah Palin for not being a good enough mom because she works. Well, even if she wasn’t on the VP track, she would still have a very busy job as Governor of Alaska. Maybe we are forgetting that she has obviously been a working mother for a while, and seems to have figured out how to make it work.
Kudos to her for thinking that maybe she can make a difference.
Compare and contrast:
How is being the Relief Society President of a large ward different than serving your community or country in a political position?
As far as time required away from your family goes, to be specific.
if a RS President is called with young children (mine were pre schoolers I think when I was called, certainly infant school) one has the reassurance of knowing a call has been extended through priesthood authority in the name of God to serve. He knows our needs and meets those needs by challenging us to serve, for which we are blessed.
if anyone tries to tell me Sarah Palin is called of God by priesthood authority to run as VP Barbie,(as the most right wing British paper labelled her, which is surprising for them) then I will know the world has gone mad. It is so bizarre to see Republican men I have known for years, all “home schooling stay at home mothers should be in the home,the world has a huge enough influence on our children without leaving anything to chance” types going gaga over Palin’s appointment. It’s most extraordinary.
Anne, I get what you are saying, but I still think it is unfair because the same standards are not applied to men and their families. If this important to you, then please, please apply the same standard to all the candidates.
Some have said that she was called. But I don’t agree with that.
And the label of VP barbie is offensive, sexist, critical and blatantly unfair. It appears the cruelest stereotypes and barriers against women are still in force. While you quoted the label from a British paper, it is still appalling to hear it quoted in this forum.
One more thought, one common idea I see running through this thread is that it is quite all right for a man to pursue his interests as long as he has a good woman behind him (so to speak) raising the family because she is the one to nurture the family. Personally, I find this dangerous and detrimental thinking.
No success outside the home can compensate for failure in it also refers to men, not solely to women.
I haven’t had the time to read all 161 comments here so undoubtedly this has come up in someone’s comment but…I’ll just add that, man or woman, I have to wonder about ANY parent who would choose to expose their child to the spotlight at this particular moment. Right or wrong, these folks had to know the media would declare open season on them and this was going to come up.
Anne–
Consider the fact that Palin is, of all the candidates on either ballot, the one person most likely to champion all the causes in the proclamation. Of course Palin isn’t called by priesthood authority to do that. But I’m dang glad she’s doing it anyway.
I don’t find it at all extraordinary that supporters of women staying at home are excited about Palin. Like Justine said, a SAHM has to leave the home to champion the cause of SAHMs. I ask you, how else can a woman like me make a difference at the highest level of government? Or do you believe mothers don’t belong in the White House?
I can understand someone who sees strengths as well as weaknesses in both party platforms weighing pros and cons, and seeing Palin’s decision to take on the VP with small children at home as one of several cons on the Republican ticket. Yes, her appointment comes at a price to her family. Yes, it sends the message that sometimes moms leave home to do important things. I believe the causes Palin is fighting for make her a fabulous role model for my daughters, and that the strain on her family is none of my business as a voter. But I can respect others who are uncomfortable with these factors deciding that they want to vote Democrat because of the overall shake-down of issues.
But Proclamation-loving conservatives boycotting their party just because of Palin being a working mother? And instead voting Democrat, which means voting for atrocities like partial-birth abortion and controversial policies like same-sex marriage, both of which are in stark contradiction to the Proclamation? That’s ludicrous, imo.
I’m wondering what would make Palin appear like more of an advocate for families–having fewer children, perhaps, so that she could fight for families with less strain on the home front? The very things that prove her family values are being used against her. Yes, the timing of her candidacy is controversial, and I can’t call it ideal, but opportunity has just knocked. Do you really believe Trig is a victim who will suffer greatly in the arms of his father, and that Palin having less time with him is an evil that nixes all the potential benefits of her being in office, advocating for that very same baby in ways she couldn’t otherwise?
And anyone calling her a Barbie after seeing what she’s done in Alaska and hearing that strong, intelligent speech last night is simply mudslinging. If she were ugly, she’d be mocked. Since she’s not, she’ll be mocked as well. It’s disgusting.
Kathryn– you hit it out of the park with that last comment!
Many of my misgivings about Palin were cleared up by reading this discussion. I loved the comparisons to Lincoln, Pres. Hinckley and most especially to all of us!
I too worry about the stress on Sarah’s family(esp. the spotlight on her 17 yo daughter and her darling boyfriend) BUT I see a woman who clearly has incredible God-given talents to lead. And who are we to say this call to VP wasn’t inspired? I’m betting Sarah prayed long and hard before accepting it.
I was ready to give Obama a chance until I learned he has THE most liberal voting record in Washington. I don’t want to elect any candidate who falls too far on one side of political ideology.
Now where can I buy my I heart Sarah bumper sticker?
It seems to me that a lot of good has been done in this discussion. For the most part, we have been a respectful, interested, curious bunch, which is what I was after when I closed my eyes and pressed send on the initial post.
Here is my takeaway from the whole thing: if you’re a thinking, involved, interested American, politics (and the choosing of our political leaders) OUTGHT to be a complicated process with lots of variables. One of the things that discourages me most about politics in general is when people march in lockstep with one particular party or ideology and refuse to look at the whole package of any given candidate. (For example, those people who say George Bush is Satan infuriate me, and those who think Hillary Clinton is Satan infuriate me too. And NO this is not an invitation to explain why either of these people is, in fact, the devil :-)).
My experience during this election cycle has been uncommonly complicated and strangely invigorating. There have been candidates on both sides of the isle that I’m attracted to but also harbor serious reservations over. Sarah Palin has been one of those candidates (as have Obama, and Clinton, and Romney, and McCain). It’s been a political season full of mental wrestling. And that’s satisfying, in its own way.
I will continue to wrestle with Palin. My opinion of her has been buoyed by her speech last night, and I did feel a sense of her conviction and intelligence come through the television screen. (Although I, too, wish candidates could write their own speeches, Brittney, but that applies to all of them.) I still wonder if she’ll have the time and energy she needs given her family situation, even with the help of her seemingly devoted husband. And yes, Kathy, having a large family factors into my reservations. I know it makes her particularly qualified to address the issues facing larger families in America, but I know that a mother with fewer children can also be a great advocate for families (a mom of two isn’t any less a mom than a mom of five). We all know that each individual child we add to our families brings with him or her another set of challenges and needs and complications, so having five kids means she has a lot on her plate. It just does. Especially since most of them, besides her oldest son, are still technically minors. Does it disqualify her? Of course not. Is it a complicating factor? For me, yes, because I can’t overlook how much dang work it is to have all those kids to worry about.
But it’s not the only factor I’ll consider. It’s *a* factor. I already said that, though, so now I’ll stop. (I promise).
And I agree, calling her a Barbie is patently ridiculous. I know I made a little joke about her tiara (and it was a joke!) but in strange way, it’s probably easiest be be an average looking woman in politics. Janet Reno got hammered for being too unattractive, Palin gets hammered for her beauty. Condoleeza Rice, though–perfect. Not so beautiful that we’re suspicious of her intellect, but nice enough to look at that we’re not suspicious of her femininity. It’s too bad. Although I suppose even Mitt Romney got hammered for his “perfect” appearance, too.
Anyway, I just wanted to thank all of you for helping me traverse such treacherous terrain. I think the issues Palin’s candidacy has brought up are complex and important, and I appreciate the intelligent insight of so many thoughtful people.
Kathryn, you might like this:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YWJmMTk2MzlhYWI1OTU1MmUzMGEyZGFmMzY0OGE3NDU=
(It’s a sarcastic article about the complete lack of sexism in the media’s response to Palin’s selection.)
Michelle, I’ve meant all along to say that, although I wasn’t likely to vote for a Democrat president in the first place, and there are many things I find unsavory about Obama, (such as this — that’s a link to an article about Obama’s misrepresenting his opposition, while a state senator, to a bill that protected aborted babies who are born alive,) it was his Senate voting record (the MOST liberal voting record in the senate) that first and foremost made me certain I’d never be in the Obama camp.
I voted for Hillary in my state’s primary in March. I told my husband there was no way I was voting for that silly gnome, John McCain. But I have never been a huge fan of Obama, either, so I was thinking I might just have to sit out this election. Now it turns out that I love and adore Sarah Palin. I love that she is a stunning, brilliant brunette with lots of kids. We’re practically identical! (kidding!)
So it looks like I will be voting for McCain after all.
Kathryn-
Can I use your comment over at my blog in the future? I loved it. Loved it, loved it, loved it.
Ang, final comment (I think)–
I understand your distraction worries (although I don’t share them), and understand that the number of children exacerbate that. And certainly, a mom of two is just as much a mom as a mom of five. I do think women who have chosen to have many children tend to be more sympathetic to the struggles faced by other women who do the same, but of course, that’s a generalization.
What I don’t understand is how some people are using Palin’s large family size against her in the “family values” argument. Would naysayers like it better if Palin had limited her family size purposefully so she could more easily pursue her career? That’s my point.
Thanks for hosting a great discussion!
[and thanks, Michelle and Lucy. and Cheryl, yes, of course. You all flatter me. At least I won't feel like spending a whole day blogging was a total waste. ;)]
I’m just a habitual guy lurker (in the best sense of the word) at Segullah. I’ve enjoyed the conversation and would like to ask a question.
If Palin had the same family situation but was the Democratic VP nominee with all the attendant ideology, and if one of the more conservative male voices in the LDS blogging world had written this same post, would you:
1. Drop by and repeat your same comments as here, shouting amen, I agree, and right on?
2. Drop by and tear him apart as an ignorant sexist pig who has the gall to suggest what a woman/mother should do with her life?
Thanks Kathryn!
As Sarah Palin stood to give what would be one of the most important speech of her life all I could think was “Quick, go say a prayer for this woman.” Perhaps, instead of wondering if she is following the “Proclamation on the Family,” we should all be praying that she will be blessed with the strength and stamina to continue to stand strong for those values that we all share as mothers on this discussion board, whether she wins or loses. And while we are at it we can ask God to bless her sweet, young daughter, who is going to be a young mother, that she will have the strength to face the challenges that lie ahead in her life.
( I learned this one day from my Pentacostal friend who called and said, “Quick, pray for Elizabeth.” She was referring to Elizabeth on “The View” who was once again defending the values I hold dear against hostile opposition.)
“The prayers of the righteous availeth much”
With 170 comments, I don’t know that this will even be read. But, after watching Sarah Palin’s speech, I have to resind my comments I made back when the posts were in the 140s… HOLY COW!!!! Love her! In the words of a good friend of mine, “I think that a crazy mom of 5 kids might be just what this country needs.” Way to go, Sarah Palin!!! I am on board!
Kathryn:
amen. and you are awesome.
I’ll echo recent comments made and say thanks as well. This was probably the best thread about Palin I’ve participated in. In fact, another thread just opened somewhat echoing the issues raised here, and it quickly devolved into what Angela feared would happen.
Thanks again, and I again apologize for how I came into this with my first comment.
Tim J, that is exactly why I love Segullah so much. Adult conversation. Glad you were a part of it, too!
Yeah, Kathy, I guess I have absolutely no issue with her as a family values candidate, myself. I think she’d do a kickin’ job representing mothers, and that’s one of the things I like about her. And although I realize some have issues with the example she sets for women as a working mother, I don’t have any issues with the example she sets, either. As I laid out in the beginning, my initial concerns always were experience and preparedness (esp. regarding international issues) and her ability to do such a tough job amidst her pressing family needs. That’s all it ever was.
And KLC, I think both of the above statements–the “amening” and the “ignorant sexist pigging”–DID happen to me, although mine was couched in the terms of being an “enemy to all womankind” :-). I will say, though, that if Palin was on the Democratic ticket I think I would have had the exact same thoughts and feelings. Political party has never been particularly important to me. And I think we would have had a wide range of opinions on the topic here no matter who posted and no matter Palin’s political affiliation.
And Tim, I’ve appreciated your comments and participation here. And don’t worry about your first one–I’ve been known to type hastily and press send and then think “aahh, crap!” myself. Your input has been good for the discussion.
What can I say. You have been able to put into words, what has been jossling around in my head, (especially all the aside comments in parethesis) thanks for making me realize I’m not crazy for going there too.
“But Proclamation-loving conservatives boycotting their party just because of Palin being a working mother? And instead voting Democrat, which means voting for atrocities like partial-birth abortion and controversial policies like same-sex marriage, both of which are in stark contradiction to the Proclamation? That’s ludicrous, imo.” Right on Kathryn Soper–I couldn’t agree with you more. Obama is in favor of EVERY type of abortion there is, including the heinous ‘partial birth’ and ‘infants born alive and then left to die on their own’.
And in response to Angela’s question waaayyy back there: “It seems to me that you’re condemning people for supporting Obama for the very same reasons you’re championing Palen.” Ummm, NO. In her speech, Palin outlined things she has ALREADY done. Barak is unable to do that. Add to it that she’s a great speaker, and I was BLOWN AWAY. We need people in the White House that will make good decisions and not be swayed by special interests. We need people that are not afraid to walk their talk, and not just be a pretty speech giver. She has all that. While Obama can speak well, he has never had the executive experiences Palin has had…and he thinks he’s ready for the #1 spot. He was in the senate for about 145 days before he started exploring the options of a presidency. She has FAR more experience than he has–at any level….in addition, it’s a bonus that she can deliver her message well.
I haven’t read all the posts (am at work) but I’ve read some and, I have to admit, I’m really annoyed with many of the posters who say should be at home with her kids. Good heavens– she has a stay at home dad. These kids are not being raised by a jillion nannies. I think it is refreshing and empowering to have a strong female role model for me and for my two young daughters. She is smart, witty, an amazing public speaker. She’s ambitious and strong. She can play ball in a traditionally man’s world and succeed. My hat is off to her. I hope my daughters can look to someone like Palin and realize that they can do whatever they want– that traditional gender roles can be flopped upside down and still work for families. That women have far more options than staying home– that they can have it all, yes, even at the same time! I hope they realize that there are men out there who are so comfortable in their manhood and supportive of their wives that they would consider staying home with the kids while their wife went out and slayed dragons. I’m not saying that this is the role I want them to have. It’s about THEIR choices and knowing that they have SO VERY MANY TO CHOOSE FROM.
I’m a working mom and I think she is incredible. Go Sarah!! I was considering voting for Obama but now I think that the McCain ticket is where I’m heading.
A woman’s place is where she chooses. Yeah!
Angela, Maybe I missed it, but I don’t recall anyone calling you specifically an enemy to womankind.
My own remarks in that matter were not directly personally, to Angela, the author of this piece. They were a comment on the fact that often women seem to be harshest critics of other women.
Angela, I disagreed with your concerns but did not call you sexist or an enemy to womankind. I am sorry that you took it as a personal attack. I have gained a deep respect for you over the past months as I have read your posts. You are very articulate, intelligent and eloquent and I respect you. It took courage to voice your opinions. But I think it took courage for all those who spoke out to express their thoughts as well.
I still felt this thread was a bit lopsided in that most people in this thread weren’t willing to apply their own concerns about Palin to the other candidates. That is why I considered it villifying to women. I don’t care if you want to look at her home life and question it. But do the same for every male candidate.
I don’t have time to catch up where I left off last night, but I wanted to say she was pretty impressive last night. I didn’t agree with all of what she said, per se, but I found myself very excited about the possibilities during parts of her speech. I think it was refreshing to have a beautiful AND intelligent AND strong woman at the mic.
I read through some of these comments. I was honestly waiting to comment until I read through the transcript of her speech. I did and I liked her speech. A lot.
I feel that it would great to have a woman in Washington. How can I not? My sentiments leave me feeling that if I want certain perspectives represented (whether that be small town interests, business interests, domestic energy production, special needs children, serviceman serving in Iraq, or mothers raising children today or whatever) then SOMEONE in that position must be there to stand up for these issues.
I will not cut her down because she is not a full-time stay at home mom. That is not my judgement call to make.
I was not overly happy with Obama nor McCain. Palin makes it far more interesting for me.
Pandered to? Yes, but only somewhat. It just all keep adding to this rollercoaster campaign.
Are we being pandered to? For sure.
Is experience required to be a great president/vice president etc. No.
Stay with me here. Experience helps, without a doubt. But come on, people - mothers - how much experience did you have with your first real job? Did you learn more in the first year than you ever thought possible? Even putting that aside, lets look at the structure of our government that was put in place long ago.
Our country was not set up to be run by ‘career politicians’. It is my opinion that the Founding Fathers would be outraged at how long some of the men and women running our country have been in office. Representatives were supposed to spend a limited amount of time in politics and then go back home to their families. Why? To keep them in touch with what it really means to be a citizen of this country. Somewhere along the line this idea of ‘experience’ being all important took over. Just because you have never ridden a bike before doesn’t mean you can’t.
As for Mrs. Palin needing to focus on her family, I imagine that she had a discussion with her husband about just what kind of help she’d be needing - aka he’d have to step it up a little. And I’m sure she has nannies available (not a perfect solution but there are lots of normal kids out there with nannies and stay at home dads). The VP is busy, and if she became president it would be even worse, but that is actually something that might be good - a leader who has real life on her mind.
What is really interesting to me here is her stand on issues. I have no idea what her official opinions are outside of abortion and the bridge to nowhere. I’d like to hear more about what she wants to do to help our country.
I don’t like McCain very much and throwing a woman in my face hasn’t changed that. For now, I’m going to stay firmly undecided on my vote and Mrs. Palin.
I have been very conflicted about this election. But I absolutely do NOT feel pandered-to - at least about Gov. Palin. I think that’s because I knew about her before her VP nomination.
If you didn’t know she was such a rockin’ woman, you *could* feel pandered-to. But it kills me that instead of just withholding judgment due to lack of knowledge, people’s knee-jerk reaction is a call of “pandering!!!”
I LOVE Gov. Palin and her stands, which - although some see as “pandering” - actually represent what she thinks, what I feel is best for the country, and what a whole lot of people think. If she were a man, “he” would be exactly what we need, IMHO.
That she is being portrayed as some out-of-touch hick (have you seen the snark about her hair?!?!) and a neglectful parent is a reflection of resentful media elitism and hypocritical sexism, not real American culture. You know, the media elitism that encourages us to “be ourselves” and “not judge” - the same media elitism that tells women to postpone their families or do all that they can for their careers, because hey, the state can take over raising the kids ;-). “Oh… but she and her hubby are still raising them, themselves??? Must be religious freaks!!!”
While I do wish her kids were all grown, I think the fact that she’s welcomed children and integrated all aspects of her life shows that she’s managing quite well, thankyouverymuch. In fact, I have the distinct impression that, if she felt politics was great and didn’t need her deep cleaning (I might say, “disinfecting”), she would be home. She quit under corruption and then cleaned it up in Alaska. To me, that says she’s determined to fight the bad guys (literal and metaphorical) until the bad guys are gone. And in the interest of protecting our own families, that’s something that must be integrated into our lives - however we do it.
I’m a fan because of who she really is. Her spunk and plain-spoken ways while actually walking the walk that she talks, are exactly what politicians aren’t. I am confident that she is a genuine person, and a powerhouse of integrity. And integrity, together with what I think is best, is a to-die-for combination - whether it comes in pants or a skirt and (I must say adorable) high heels.
And I like her hair.
Speaking of Palin as an example to daughters, my kids heard the TV on and got out of bed so I let them watch Palin’s speech with me. (It meant I had to do lots of explaining — my four-year-old wanted to know why everyone in the crowd had “word flags” and when Palin talked about Obama and the crowd booed, all my kids thought it was Palin they were booing.) My 8-year-old daughter seemed to identify with Palin, making comments like “That would be so embarrassing” (to stand in front of so many people,) and that it would be hard to have to keep stopping and waiting for applause to die back down. My daughter is a lot more likely than I ever was to be the kind of person who could raise a family and help lead the free world simultaneously (if anyone can,) and I enjoyed her getting the opportunity to see Palin take the national stage.
Zina,
Seriously… my daughter is the same way. I see her as the type who’ll conqueor (sp?) the corporate world, marry some super cool guy who supports her, speak her very opinionated mind, have a few kids, travel the world, climb Mt Everest, and then dab on some faulous perfume and stilletos and host a great dinner party. If she doesn’t and wants to shuttle kids to soccer in a mini van, GREAT! If she ends up doing the above, GREAT! I am just so happy that she has choices and, in women like Sarah, has great role models in whatever she decides to do. I just cannot understand why, for the life of me, in 2008, we’re wondering why she’s not home with the kids when her husband is home with them. What is so wrong with that? There are far worse scenarios, that’s for sure.
Zina, I just read the article you linked to. I liked it so much I put it on our sidebar. Thank you!
I think I disagree and after watching her speech last night I’ve got to write a post for tomorrow about why.
I admit I haven’t read every word of all the above comments, so I may or may not be repeating.
I have to say that Sarah Palin’s experience is much more impressive than Obama’s. The fact that she is a woman and a mother raises eyebrows because for hundreds of years, people have wondered how a wife and mother can take care of things outside of the home. I say it is possible, especially since she’s been juggling these demands to some degree already, and this woman’s perspective is exactly what we need on a national level. I am surprised anyone would feel pandered to by McCain more than by Obama, who presents his message depending on his audience and cares a little too much about his reputation. I think we have been blessed with a woman who may be able to do it all. No one said a mother’s place is 100% in the home.
Tiffany, I apologize if it seemed like I was singling you out in my comment. Please know that I wasn’t. I was generalizing from a handful of comments that seemed to say if you questioned Palin’s ability to function optimally as Vice President given her family’s needs at this time that you’re somehow anti-woman. I understand your point, though, that the same kind of scrutiny isn’t usually applied to male candidates. (Although some have brought up the example of Biden and the car crash. If that was happening right now instead of decades ago, I would *definitely* have concerns about his ability to serve.)
Maybe I bristle at it a little because, perhaps to the surprise of some of you, I consider myself something of a feminist. I am deeply proud to be a woman, and deeply grateful that I live in a time where there are options available to me that weren’t there for my grandmother, or even my mother. I think women can and should have the power to do anything they want to in this life. I worked full time as a high school teacher after my first child was born, and I work part time now. I know what it’s like to be a working mom. I *like* working, I look forward to it, and I’ve been fortunate enough to figure out a work/life balance that keeps me satisfied. And fortunate enough to have a very involved husband who helps keep our family life running, too.
That satisfaction comes at a price, though. I sometimes find myself and my family teetering on the razor’s edge of chaos. Sometimes I get so involved in writing, or planning a syllabus, or (ahem) blogging, that I completely forget my son’s soccer practice, or find my toddler has stuffed the toilet with newspapers, or realize (and this is the hardest one) that I haven’t sat down and looked a specific child in the eye and had a true conversation for days.
And my work suffers, too. Between choir auditions and Enrichment committee meeting and poopy diaper changes, the two hours I’d carved out for work suddenly shrink to 30 minutes, and I have to rush, rush, rush to get through it. I don’t have the space or the quiet to dig into my novel in the way I’d like. And on and on and on.
I also know how much adding my (glorious, wonderful, absolutely adorable) 19-month-old son has complicated things for me, workwise. My other three children are all grade school age, so I had some quiet time. I wasn’t constantly scanning the floor for loose chokables and watching my bookshelf get slowly disassembled, book by book, while I tried to finish grading some papers. Because of my own personal experience, then, when I heard Palin had a brand new baby I thought, man–that’s a tough time to be asked to lead a nation. Not an impossible time. But a tough time.
I know that she’s not me. I’m sure she’s much more put together than I am, an amazing multi-tasker, competent in all sorts of ways. I know that her baby probably won’t be in the Vice Presidential office pulling National Security Briefings out of her filing cabinet. But my own personal experience as a woman who is trying to do a lot of things at once gives me at least a little insight into what it’s like, and I think I have the right to think, “Whoa, Nellie. This is gonna be tough.”
So I guess my point (my loooong point) is that I hope that as women we can have conversations like this without being accused of betraying one another. (And Tiffany, this isn’t aimed at you personally at all. I’m speaking in general here.) Today I read this paragraph in an OpEd by Maureen Dowd. She said:
“Hillary cried sexism to cover up her incompetent management of her campaign, and now Republicans have picked up that trick. But when you use sexism as an across-the-board shield for any legitimate question, you only hurt women.”
Although I don’t always agree with Maureen Dowd, I agree with this. And overall, I think the conversation here has done a very good job of allowing women to explain their concerns and opinions without painting any of us with too broad a brush.
A few words from a Biden interview today:
“‘It is off-limits to talk about her family,’ he said in an interview with Fox News Channel. ‘Every family has difficulty as they’re raising their children. I think the way she’s handled it has been absolutely exemplary.’”
Asked whether some of the criticism aimed at Palin has been sexist, Biden said, ‘Yes, by you guys in the media.’”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26543568/
“But when you use sexism as an across-the-board shield for any legitimate question, you only hurt women.”
I tend to agree with Dowd’s assessment, however, I’m not sure a lot of the questions are legitimate.
I agree, Tim. Many of the questions have been out of bounds. “Legitimate” is important.
Check out this clip from Jon Stewart, concerning GOP hypocrisy regarding Palin’s experience, pregnant daughter, and gender.
I’m sorry, Karl Rove, Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, and Dick Morris do not represent me nor my beliefs and I don’t even consider them Media.
And there is a HUGE difference between the criticism Hillary faced and what is being thrown at Palin. If you cannot see this, I’m sorry.
I disagree with your premise that, if it had been Governor Todd Palin who had done all of the same things politically, McCain never would’ve even considered him for VP. That statement speaks to your ignorance about John McCain. I’m no fan of Senator “Maverick” McCain (speaking as a conservative republican), but having gotten to know him over the past few election cycles, I believe that he has been absolutely honest about why he chose Palin for VP. To paraphrase Bill Clinton, “It’s her deeds, stupid!”
For McCain, it was all about finding a kindred “maverick” spirit with a conservative bent. That she was a woman was a historic bonus, not the reason for his choice.
…and as for the electricity and excitement generated by her speech last night, I doubt that even McCain fully anticipated her ability to energize the base of the republican party!
“…and as for the electricity and excitement generated by her speech last night, I doubt that even McCain fully anticipated her ability to energize the base of the republican party!”
Truly. Unbelievably, 37 Million people watched last night, just short of Obama’s 38MM and on fewer networks as well.
The reality is that Sarah Palin and John McCain represent the last best hope at this point to preserve the conservative viewpoint. In all likelihood the next President may appoint up to 3 Supreme Court justices which makes it absolutely vital that we choose a leader who will preserve Rowe V Wade as well as other significant laws.
If we consider an individual and take out gender, race, economic status out of the equation, we need to choose someone who represents us well. Sarah Palin is absolutely proving that she is ready right now!
Jon Stewart is way funny. Calling Palin a trophy, a skirt, or the “vice in go-go boots” is not.
After talking things over with my esteemed Segullah colleagues, we’ve decided that now is the time to wrap up this incredible conversation. I have truly appreciated everyone’s candor and insight.
One of the things I love about Segullah is it gives us the opportunity discuss all sorts of things in a way that is nourishing to our intelligence and to our spirits. I hope that this conversation stayed within those bounds. I know that I learned a lot from it, and from all of you.
This will be a very interesting election season, no?
Thanks, Angela.
Oops I meant OVERTURN Rowe V Wade.
Leslie, I think you meant “overturn Roe v Wade.”
Tim J,
I’m not sure if you’re aiming this comment at me, but I never suggested any of what you are saying. But you can take this up with me on my blog if you want.
And oops, we were posting at the same time!
Angela, hats off to you for sticking your neck out on this issue. The thread has provided great food for thought. What say we all meet back here in a month after the VP debates?
Of course, you can’t answer that–the comments are now closed.