What do you think of the presumptive 2008 Republican candidate for Vice President, Sarah Palin? Is this is a good choice? Does this advance women in politics? Share your thoughts!
Skip to Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12
How is Alaska's burial of domestic violence and rape information within its website any different from most other states. Please show me several states that do have this information on their homepage.
I have been battling for the rights of women for decades. I'm thrilled to see a woman as a Vice Presidential candidate. The fact that she is a woman, however, should not be mistaken with being a good choice for women.
Senator Biden was the one who led the Anita Hill hearings and voted against Thomas as a choice for the Supreme Court. Mr. Biden spearheaded several efforts on behalf of women. What has Ms. Palin done for women? Shouldn't we be discussing wether the presidential candidates are good choices? Should we consider how they will advance or hinder the advancement and empowerment of women?
I read a report conducted by Stanford University released today about some of the reasons why the polls don't suggest a bigger lead for Senator Obama. Many of the answers seem to still lead to racism. I posted a question days ago to discuss racism in the upcoming elections. I got one response. I have to admit I was disappointed.
Shouldn't enlightenment about issues of injustice and inequality cut accross all spectrums. Is it okay for women to be concerned with discimination against women and not be concerned about all discrimination?
I would like to think that we are better than that.
PBS has a poll that asks: Is Sarah Palin qualified to be VP?
The Right Wing has organized a yes vote, and it is piling up and will be quoted, we can be sure. Let's turn this around..... You don't have to give your name or email address in order to vote. It's very simple.
Frankly, I'm shocked that US [white] women are being hoodwinked into supporting McCain now that folksy Palin is gracing his arm.
Palin is riding the coattails of Hillary Clinton's historic campaign, but she hasn't earned the right to be on a presidential ticket herself. I'm all for electing women to positions of power--when they're earned. There are hundreds of women profiled in your "Women, Power and Politics" exhibition that put Sarah Palin to shame.
I'm looking forward to the Biden-Palin debate on Oct 2. If there is any depth to her after all we'll see it then. But so far she's revealing herself to be inexperienced, if not dangerous--lending her pretty face to an old--and dramatically failing-- political platform.
I feel sorry for Palin's poor daughter who has to marry at 17 and be burdened with the myriad responsibilities of motherhood. She should be picking out colleges, not baby names. What mother would force that on her child? Well, I guess the same mother who wants to ban books from the public library, supports teaching evolution in schools and would deny rights to gay couples; one who is a member of the NRA and denies the science behind global warming....
Thanks for letting me rant.
The status of women and children is a barometer of society's humanity. Governor Sarah Palin's campaign for U.S. Vice-President is making headline news of long-ignored working mothers' issues. Women across the country understand what it means to juggle managing a job with raising children. They also know that Palin's solutions are outmoded and impossible without a nuclear family of wife, husband and children living under one roof, with help from relatives nearby. The majority of women are underpaid workers without such support. Many raise children alone. Most need paid maternity and family leave and childcare to keep their jobs and sanity.
As Wall Street collapses, tens of thousands lose jobs, and living costs soar under the watch of the Bush regime with complicity of the Democrats, women carry the heaviest burden. In response to the crises of war, environmental destruction and lack of funds for housing, healthcare, childcare and education, the Republican leadership offers the Palin candidacy. In an interview with People Magazine, Governor Palin reported that she signed government bills within two hours of giving birth to her latest child, and was back in the governor's office after two days of maternity leave. Big business and the state love her "super mom" credentials—because women's free labor in the home means corporations and the government can sidestep paying their share of raising the next generation of workers. A system that says the individual can and must "do it all" without societal support is anti-woman and anti-human liberation.
In the absence of political leaders willing to fight for humane policies that benefit working people, all the pressures of parenthood and survival in an economy which super-exploits women, immigrants and people of color remain intact. We require anti-capitalist alternatives to the brutal for-profit, war-driven capitalist system that benefits just a few and fails to support the majority of people. Women don't need Sarah Palin and more "free market" chaos to save the day. We must have a rational, planned, egalitarian, socialist society that distributes wealth based on need, not greed.
The parade of female elected officials at Democratic and Republican party conventions illustrate that both need the votes of women to win. Yet, both parties topped their agendas with women who ignored issues such as affordable quality childcare, healthcare including full reproductive rights, public education, affirmative action and living wage jobs without forced overtime. It was all about gender and personality before politics. Follow this fuzzy logic to its natural conclusion and you get a right-wing female candidate touted as a victory for women.
Palin's anti-abortion stance alone, necessary to her GOP nomination, turns women's rights on its head. What rights do women have if they can't control their own bodies? What rights do teenage girls have if they are denied accurate sex education and steered into marriage and having children before they are ready?
Under the guise of breaking the class ceiling for women, Palin is erroneously paraded as someone who embodies a broader definition of female rights and the feminist movement. There is no such thing as a monolithic movement for social and political change, and this is true of the feminist movement as well. Why not advocate for the working class and those at the bottom of the economic ladder instead of movement leaders who promote the interests of the owning class in an attempt to get a piece of the pie? Deal with the issues of these women, and all will benefit.
I think the choice of Sarah Palin was to consolidate support from Christian right based of the Republican party, which was tepid on McCain. In that sense, it seems to be working. Feminists need to be careful to distinguish between a biological affinity with a woman candidate and real interests she represents. Sarah Palin's candidacy does real harm to the interests of the vast majority of women in the United States!
Here is a video clip that thoroughly evaluates Palin's experience and qualifications for the job--in comparison with vice presidents through history.
The basic conclusion is that she has less experience than any other past US VP.
I watched Katie Couric's interview with Sarah Palin on cbs.com. I encourage everyone to watch it. It was so sadly apparent that Palin was unprepared and unable to go "off script" for even the most basic questions. For the 'tough" questions" she had nothing.
Katha Pollitt had some interesting things to say about Palin on Wednesday in The Nation. The most unbelievable thing to me is that they will modify the VP debate to mitigate Palin's inexperience. Ironically, her party is historically opposed to "level playing fields."
This is a cheap attempt on the part of McCain to boost his failing ratings. Not only does she lack the experience needed for such a high office (I shudder to think of her in the role of President), her views are so anti-woman, and so sophomoric, that I cannot imagine a self-respecting feminist, or intelligent woman for that matter, voting for her simply because of her gender.
I wish to correct a serious mistake. Sarah Palin did not win the beauty contest. She was the runner-up
Wangui--I agree with most of what you write, but am skeptical of Obama's conviction that women should have equal rights. His campaign was so sexist; he condescended to Hillary to such a degree as to suggest that an equal rights platform (his own wife excepted) is a convenient means to an end. I know--you can point to the two daughters, and what he wants for them, yet I cannot shake this distrubing feeling that in his heart he believes in male superiority.
Renee--women squabling? That is not what it looks like to me. They are very serious about attacking her values, her issues and her ability lead. What an appalling prospect for the country. When asked about Putin, this savvy (?) women referred to the view of Russia from her back door. What a fine representative this "cheerleader" governor would make. And what a wonderful affirmation of the male argument that women are inherently unfor for leadership.
A Ukrainian politician recently remarked: "Women cannot cook soup with one hand and lead the country with the other." Another "sage" offered the following advice for women aspiring to political influence: "Elect a good man to advocate on your behalf!"
Yes Sara--we are between the proverbial "rock and a hard place" when it comes to choice. We do not have a viable candidate for president. What can the next four years bring. The thought frightens me. I cannot decide whether the country would be worse off with the two candidates for president, or, in the even of some tragedy overtaking them, the two even more frightening VP candidates.
Thank you all for your comments on Sarah Palin! Read what bloggers around the world are saying about Sarah Palin in our October focus of the Women, Power and Politics exhibition.