This Had to be Said!

Thank you Judith Warner:

September 4, 2008, 8:41 pm
The Mirrored Ceiling
Tags: Politics, sarah palin, women
It turns out there was something more nauseating than the nomination of Sarah Palin as John McCain’s running mate this past week. It was the tone of the acclaim that followed her acceptance speech.
“Drill, baby, drill,” clapped John Dickerson, marveling at Palin’s ability to speak and smile at the same time as an indication of her unexpected depths and unsuspected strengths. “It was clear Palin was having fun, and it’s hard to have fun if you’re scared or a lightweight,” he wrote in Slate.
The Politico praised her charm and polish as antidotes to her lack of foreign policy experience: “Palin’s poised and flawless performance evoked roars of applause from delegates who earlier this week might have worried that the surprise pick and newcomer to the national stage may not be up to the job.”
“She had a great night. I thought she had a very skillfully written, and very skillfully delivered speech,” Joe Biden said, shades of “articulate and bright and clean” threatening a reappearance. (For a full roundup of these comments go here.)
Thus began the official public launch of our country’s now most-prominent female politician. The condescension – damning with faint praise – was reminiscent of the more overt misogyny of Samuel Johnson.
“A woman’s preaching is like a dog’s walking on his hinder legs,” the wit once observed. “It is not done well; but you are surprized to find it done at all.”
Palin sounded, at times, like she was speaking a foreign language as she gave voice to the beautifully crafted words that had been prepared for her on Wednesday night.
But that wasn’t held against her. Thanks to the level of general esteem that greeted her ascent to the podium, it seems we’ve all got to celebrate the fact that America’s Hottest Governor (Princess of the Fur Rendezvous 1983, Miss Wasilla 1984) could speak at all.
Could there be a more thoroughgoing humiliation for America’s women?
You are not, I think, supposed now to say this. Just as, I am sure, you are certainly not supposed to feel that having Sarah Palin put forth as the Republicans’ first female vice presidential candidate is just about as respectful a gesture toward women as was John McCain’s suggestion, last month, that his wife participate in a topless beauty contest.
Such thoughts, we are told, are sexist. And elitist. After all, via Palin, we now hear without cease, the People are speaking. The “real” “authentic,” small-town “Everyday People,” of Hockey Moms and Blue Collar Dads whom even Rudolph Giuliani now invokes as an antidote to the cosmopolite Obamas and their backers in the liberal media. (Remind me please, once again, what was the name of the small town where Rudy grew up?)
Why does this woman – who to some of us seems as fake as they can come, with her delicate infant son hauled out night after night under the klieg lights and her pregnant teenage daughter shamelessly instrumentalized for political purposes — deserve, to a unique extent among political women, to rank as so “real”?
Because the Republicans, very clearly, believe that real people are idiots. This disdain for their smarts shows up in the whole way they’ve cast this race now, turning a contest over economic and foreign policy into a culture war of the Real vs. the Elites. It’s a smoke and mirrors game aimed at diverting attention from the fact that the party’s tax policies have helped create an elite that’s more distant from “the people” than ever before. And from the fact that the party’s dogged allegiance to up-by-your-bootstraps individualism — an individualism exemplified by Palin, the frontierswoman who somehow has managed to “balance” five children and her political career with no need for support — is leading to a culture-wide crack-up.
Real people, the kind of people who will like and identify with Palin, they clearly believe, are smart, but not too smart, and don’t talk too well, dropping their “g”s, for example, and putting tough concepts like “vice president” in quotation marks.
“As for that ‘V.P.’ talk all the time … I tell ya, I still can’t answer that question until somebody answers for me, What is it exactly that the ‘VP’ does every day?” Palin asked host Lawrence Kudlow on CNBC sometime before her nomination. “I’m used to bein’ very productive and workin’ real hard in an administration and we want to make sure that that ‘V.P.’ slot would be a fruitful type of position.”
And, I think, they find her acceptably “real,” because Palin’s not intimidating, and makes it clear that she’s subordinate to a great man.
That’s the worst thing a woman can be in this world, isn’t it? Intimidating, which appears to be synonymous with competent. It’s the kiss of death, personally and politically.
But shouldn’t a woman who is prepared to be commander in chief be intimidating? Because of the intelligence, experience, talent and drive that got her there? If she isn’t, at least on some level, off-putting, if her presence inspires national commentary on breast-pumping and babysitting rather than health care reform and social security, then something is seriously wrong. If she doesn’t elicit at least some degree of awe, then something is missing.
One of the worst poisons of the American political climate right now, the thing that time and again in recent years has led us to disaster, is the need people feel for leaders they can “relate” to. This need isn’t limited to women; it brought us after all, two terms of George W. Bush. And it isn’t new; Americans have always needed to feel that their leaders were, on some level, people like them.
But in the past, it was possible to fill that need through empathetic connection. Few Depression-era voters could “relate” to Franklin Roosevelt’s patrician background, notes historian Doris Kearns Goodwin. “It was his ability to connect to them that made them feel they could connect to him,” she told me in a phone interview.
The age of television, Goodwin believes, has made the demand for connection more immediate and intense. But never before George W. Bush did it quite reach the beer-drinking level of familiarity. “Now it’s all about being able to see your life story in the candidate, rather than the candidate, with empathy, being able to relate to you.”
There’s a fine line between likability and demagoguery. Both thrive upon manipulation and least-common-denominator politics. These days, I fear, this need for direct mirroring — and thus this susceptibility to all sorts of low-level tripe — is particularly acute among women, who are perhaps reaching historic lows in their comfort levels with themselves and their choices.
Just look at how quickly the reaction to Palin devolved into what The Times this week called the “Mommy Wars: Special Campaign Edition.” Much of the talk about Palin (like the emoting about Hillary Clinton before her) ultimately came down to this: is she like me or not like me? If she’s not like me, can I like her? And what kind of child care does she have?
“This election is not about issues,” Rick Davis, John McCain’s campaign manager said this week. “This election is about a composite view of what people take away from these candidates.” That’s a scary thought. For the takeaway is so often base, a reflection more of people’s fears and insecurities than of our hopes and dreams.
We’re not likely to get a worthy female president anytime soon.
Comments (129)
E-mail this
Share
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Newsvine
Permalink
-->
129 comments so far...
1.
September 4th,20089:26 pm
Judith- I knew we’d tackle the mommy wars this week!
There are so many ceilings to be aware of these days–glass, stained-glass and now your mirrored one as well. And all three types have played a critical role in this election process. Hopefully the democrats’ need to see themselves in their primary candidate has evolved into something a little less self-promoting in the general election.
Rick Davis is woefully out of touch when he says this election is not about issues. The years of fear-based or moral-imperative voting have given way to financial relief-based voting. Americans are a different kind of scared this time around.
A female president/veep may well be in our distant future but this year’s republican ticket is fatally flawed. Ultimately their base, a mixture of evangelicals and the rural poor have a visceral aversion to placing a woman that close to the commander in chief. Oh, the delegates at the convention are putting on a good show and the party elders are securely entrenched but I suspect they’ve lost just as many of their most conservative voters as they have their moderates.
What I hope we explore more in the coming months is the seemingly counter-intuitive republican defense of a mother/candidate and the democratic concern for the children and the job performance.
Interesting times, interesting times…
— Posted by E. Eileen
2.
September 4th,200810:05 pm
What I find repulsive are the sexist allegations that her supporters start screaming when anyone questions her experience. Jeez, it’s not a beauty pageant!! We have the RIGHT to know that she is qualified to take over in case Sen. McCain cannot finish his term(s). Crying sexism kills discussion, which, of course, is the strategy when the emperor wears no clothes.
I am so outraged to even think that the women who supported Sen. Clinton would vote for Sen. McCain only because now he has a woman for vice. If they do so, they are as unsophisticated voters as the ones who will not vote for Sen. Obama because he is black or those who vote for Sen. McCain because he’s a veteran. And that would be incredibly sad!
— Posted by AGN
3.
September 4th,200810:15 pm
Thank you for this post. You’ve said what I have been trying to articulate for the past few days, better than I could ever hope to have said it.
Thank you, again.
— Posted by Geoff in CT
4.
September 4th,200810:19 pm
Amen.
— Posted by Pamela
5.
September 4th,200810:22 pm
I wept for women and their daughters across this country while watching Governor Palin on Wednesday. I had listened to her speech given at and Assembly of God Church this past June and was appalled by her lack of dignity, but was willing to cut her some slack because that speech was delivered off-the-cuff. However, watching her deliver this “well-crafted” speech with such relish just underlined the fact that dignity and erudition are not high priorities for her– in her own words, “a pit bull with lipstick.” Delivering mean-spirited, misleading zingers at such an auspicious occasion is not really a great example to set for young women.
I also wept a little for myself, because I feel so out-of-step in wanting a leader who is well-educated, dignified, and is someone I can look up to and trust to deal with world leaders with intelligence, tact and diplomacy.
The “Mommy Wars” aspect of this is way off the mark. Many have said that if Governor Palin were a man, none of the family issues would have been raised. That is simply not true. When John Edwards decided to run for the presidency, there was a great deal of criticism directed at him for campaigning at a time when his wife and family needed him. I lived in Delaware when Joe Biden’s wife and daughter were killed and remember vividly the discussion of whether or not he would or should take the seat he had just won, given the circumstances. I’ve heard any number of pundits during this election cycle say all candidates have to weigh their goals and ambitions against the cost to their families. We can’t help thinking about a candidate’s personal life–man or woman– or, in this case, about the privacy a pregnant teenager might need (whether she realizes it now or not) or about a mother leaving a special needs child five days after his birth. It’s very difficult not to make judgments, as unfair as that may seem. But taking a hard-line position based on those judgments, engaging in “warfare” with those whose judgments are different, just divides us and distracts us from the real issues at hand.
It is surreal to hear the praise heaped upon Governor Palin. I feel as if I’m living in a parallel universe–as if I haven’t seen what others have. Listening to people say on NPR that they hadn’t planned on voting for McCain because he was too old, but would now because Governor Palin has “spunk” and will get things done, made me despair for the future of democracy–and even for the future of civility.
I half expected your column to be a defense of Governor Palin on feminist grounds, a diatribe about the unfair treatment of her which you needed to object to even though you did not personally respect her. Instead you wrote an insightful column about why her candidacy can be seen as condescension. You will no doubt be sharply criticized for pulling no punches, but there was real thought behind your comments–thought which gave me hope that with young women like you in the world we may get a worthy female president sooner than anyone of us might imagine.
— Posted by Elizabeth Fuller
6.
September 4th,200810:34 pm
I think the nomination of Palin to the VP slot is perhaps one of the most offensive things that John McCain could have done. As someone who liked Hillary a lot, I can’t believe that anyone who looks at the issues would compare Clinton and Palin in the same breath. There are oddities about her (keeping her last pregnancy a secret until she was seven months along, agreeing to putting herself in the spotlight–even though she has a teenage daughter who is pregnant and would obviously undergo media scrutiny to a degree not seen before) that I just find odd. It strikes me as ridiculous that someone could label themselves as for family values and try to come across as compassionate, but doesn’t agree that rape victims should have access to abortion. I could go on and on, but I’m sure the media and the NYTimes op-ed board will handle most of that for me.
I just hope that the Obama campaign will let the issues speak for themselves and that the McCain ticket will hang themselves by admitting something that we have yet to see from this convention: they have no real practical long-term solution to any of the problems that have been festering since Bush has taken office.
— Posted by Carolyn
7.
September 4th,200810:37 pm
Sara Palin’s histronics make us the laughingstock of he world. I love Hillary and todayI am sending money to Obama. Vote democrat,save the United States of America.
— Posted by Alice Ropchan
8.
September 4th,200810:37 pm
Spot on, Ms. Warner!
Let’s hope the American public is a bit smarter than the Republicans give us credit for.
— Posted by Shelley
9.
September 4th,200810:38 pm
What worries me about the Palin/McCain ticket most is their energy policies (especially in regard to drilling in the ANWR). Given the current state of our environment, I think it is important for us, as consumers, to support ‘green business.’ For example, http://www.simplestop.net/ stops your postal junk mail and benefits the environment.
— Posted by Clark
10.
September 4th,200810:38 pm
I agree with all of this except the reference to Biden–he was being deliberately sarcastic, pointing out that she had nothing to do with the content of the speech.
— Posted by Daniel Rosenblatt
11.
September 4th,200810:39 pm
It’s so refreshing to have an intelligent, articulate feminist response to the disgusting VP choice that is Sarah Palin.
— Posted by IZ
12.
September 4th,200810:40 pm
Judith,We can hope the country will focus on the issues, as you suggest. And if and when that becomes the case, let the best man or woman win based on how they would help heal this horribly divided country with deeds not words.
— Posted by Harry
13.
September 4th,200810:40 pm
Very nicely put. This helps make sense of some of the discomfort I’ve felt in recent days about the frenzy around Palin. It’s been difficult to parse the different elements with the many issues involved. The first night of the RNC, the McCain’s adopted daughter from Bangladesh, Bridget, was seen prominently behind Cindy McCain. Last night, she was nowhere to be seen. Where was John McCain’s “beautiful family”?
— Posted by Miguel Luna
14.
September 4th,200810:41 pm
Well said, Judith. I guess the old phrase “success breeds contempt” still holds true. Maybe this explains their hateful manner toward Mr. Obama.
— Posted by Rick R in Chicago
15.
September 4th,200810:42 pm
Another jarring factor vis a vis the selection of Palin would be how she’s being made out to be some kind of a primary female icon, for heavens sake she was handpicked by a Mccain for political expedience in order to recapture some of Obama’s youthful narrative. The comparison to Hillary Clinton is bizarre as she was out there in the trenches, earned every single vote,sat down with people, addressed their concerns,has been a life long [if sometimes misguided] warrior for the most vulnerable in society. The most Palin has done for Alaska is to attract earmarks that Mccain so vehemently opposes.
— Posted by Nigar
16.
September 4th,200810:44 pm
I am actually reading Ms. Warner’s book now (I picked it up at the library not even realizing she was my favorite NYT columnist!). I think Judith may be one of the most compelling women’s voices of our time. As a working mother of two young children I am conflicted by the same issues she confronts here and in her book and inspired by her insights and challenges to the mainstream “Mommy Wars”. Thank you to the Times for giving Ms. Warner such a platform to reach America and keep up the good work Judith!
— Posted by Michelle
17.
September 4th,200810:45 pm
Excellent! And thank you.
— Posted by Ed
18.
September 4th,200810:45 pm
Fantastic commentary. Say it out loud, Judith!
— Posted by Leslie Reed
19.
September 4th,200810:46 pm
I agree with a lot of what you are saying, but I would point out that I think you are not giving Joe Biden enough credit. Rather than finding him patronizing (as he has been in the past, to be sure), I got the impression that he was deliberately building her up as a very serious contender (wink, wink) so that he can rip her to shreds in the coming months. Both parties seem to employ that method.Otherwise, spot on! She’s the gender-equivalent of the Clarence Thomas nomination as far as I’m concerned.
— Posted by Aimee
20.
September 4th,200810:46 pm
Brava!
— Posted by Alana
21.
September 4th,200810:48 pm
Fear not, Elizabeth Fuller (10:22pm), you are not in a parallel universe. We are here with you, millions of us out here in the hinterlands who do not make a living out of punditry, and who still have some semblance of respect for our country. My only hope is that we will not be too ground down by this illegitima to speak out with our votes.
— Posted by aeneas
22.
September 4th,200810:48 pm
Is there any argument hidden between these lines or have I missed something? If not, why do you expect anyone with some intelligence to read it (I mean, except for those “Democrats” who just don’t like Republicans)? And to the NYT: is that the best you can come up with: a BA level articles on the Republican convention?
— Posted by Tom
23.
September 4th,200810:49 pm
You have put into words my thoughts. I want to thank you and hope millions of others read this. You have spoken the truth.
— Posted by wanda
24.
September 4th,200810:49 pm
I’m glad she’s been nominated. It shows that a person, man or woman can take an unorthodox path to power. When was the last time someone ran without an Ivy League Degree ran for president on the ticket? It shows that you don’t need to carpetbag to Chicago to get into politics, you don’t need to go to Harvard or Yale. You don’t need to be a millionaire or a lawyer.
You can live in your small town and start making a difference on the small scale and some day you may become governor of Alaska, or a vice presidential candidate, and may be even more. Sarah Palin is a natural politician. She’s likable and charismatic, so is Obama. They both have a natural talent and a desire to pursue politics. The difference between them, is that she came to her desire later in life and chose a different route to get there.
Perhaps the fact that Sarah Palin, “cut in line” offends people who have spent their whole lives following the rules to get into politics. They went to the “right school”, moved to the “right town”, and got the “right jobs”, volunteered on the “right committees”, and had the proper number of children at the proper time.
I think that people don’t necessarily chose the person they can “connect with”, but a person who answers questions well, seems sincere, and can handle the boot camp of running for President. Time will tell which candidates will do a better job at it, but I for one hope that Sarah Palin succeeds.
— Posted by anna
25.
September 4th,200810:51 pm
I too was horrified by the content of Governor Palin’s speech. I found her mean-spirited, self-serving and vitriolic. I felt that she was exploiting her pregnant daughter by putting her in the spotlight at a time where she might not wish to be the focus of so much attention. I mean, she is a teen-ager after all. And, sure, it is easy to keep a baby when you have the resources and family support to help raise it, but what about most of those experiencing teenage pregnancy? Clearly preaching abstinence is not enough to prevent teenage pregnancy which can be dangerous to the health of the young mother and the baby as well.
And what happened to separation of church and state? This is a woman who wants to ban books from the public library because they don’t meet her standards, who practices a type of evangelical christianity that preaches we are entering the “end of days”. Do we really want a person like that a heartbeat away from the red button? McCain is 72 years old. Perhaps the most important “first executive” decision he could have made would have been to pick a well-balanced person to be his vice president, regardless of gender. Extreme philosophies preclude balanced judgement by definitation.
The selection of Sara Palin truly scared me. I am a professional woman with small children from a small town in America and living in a different small town now. Sara Palin did not speak for me or to me. Because of her alone, I wouldn’t consider voting for McCain, even if I was undecided before.
— Posted by ellen novak
26.
September 4th,200810:51 pm
Palin’s family comes into play because she puts them there. Announcing her daughter will marry the boy? Someone should demand a marriage license.
How many hours are in her day? How often does she go to hockey games? Does she drive all her children everywhere? What special needs legislation has she passed since she’s been governor? If she wants to be credible let her be specific. She has 2 months to share with the country.
— Posted by Marilyn
27.
September 4th,200810:52 pm
Well done, Judith. I only hope many others, women and men, agree with you, now and through Nov. 4. Issues should decide this campaign, including the issue of a candidate’s soundness of judgment. McCain has shown that he is reckless and cares little about the future of the country past his own election: Palin is his cynical cave-in to the religious right. So much for moral principles and community values!
— Posted by Matt
28.
September 4th,200810:53 pm
Judith, Thank you for your thoughtful articulation of the way so many of us feel about this maddening turn of events. I’ll be passing this column around.And thank you to Elizabeth Fuller @#5: ditto!
— Posted by Sarah h.
29.
September 4th,200810:53 pm
Brilliant. Well-said. You’ve brought to light the disgusting double standard that runs in the right-wing media and the Republican Party.
— Posted by Matt T.
30.
September 4th,200810:54 pm
Exactly who does take care of those 5 children?
— Posted by Elena, Lancaster PA
31.
September 4th,200810:55 pm
Thank you, Judith, for articulating so many things we’ve learned about Sarah Palin this week.
Putting aside the very screwed up family life she presents, what are her policies — what does she actually believe? Does she support any alternative fuel technologies aside from artic drilling that benefits her state?
The way she spoke about her opponents was un-Christian — mean-spirited, nasty, sarcastic and very unbecoming.
Get out and work on Barack’s behalf, people. John McCain is 72 and has had melanoma. We cannot afford this woman getting anywhere near the center of our government.
— Posted by Maggie
32.
September 4th,200810:56 pm
LC @ 6 — I am so sad you see this as snotty, that you too are buying into exactly what Judith Warner so accurately lays out is once again the Republican strategy: instead of approaching the election on issues, they are asking us to think in terms of “elitist” or “uppity” or “snotty.”
Instead of having Palin describe her positions on the environment, on what the role of government should be in family decision-making, on earmarks, on deficits and surpluses, they had her portray the world in the most simple, divisive terms: us and them.
Please don’t let yourself fall into what they hope will happen. Please ask about the issues.
— Posted by mossie
33.
September 4th,200810:56 pm
Pamela’s “amen” says it all. After all, this paper and especially these blogs have become the “amen corner” for people who think alike. THEY’RE wrong. WE’RE right. If one of THEM gets a few accolades for making a decent speech, then it’s contemptible, condescending — and if one of THEM happens to be female — than by some convoluted logic, it’s sexist! Give me a break, you sophisticates who happen to feel so superior because you live in New York and/or read the New York Times: people who live in other places, belong to other political parties, hold other points of view are people, too, and they’re not necessarily dumber than you.
— Posted by Peter
34.
September 4th,200810:56 pm
You are the first to relate, with empathy, to me after I listened to Sarah Palin’s speech and the response to it.
— Posted by M. Scott
35.
September 4th,200810:56 pm
Governor Palin has more actual governing experience than Barach Obama. Your crticism of her reflects a condescending attitude toward those who hold conservative beliefs, especially those who live in “middle America.” American culture is not defined by the liberal East Coast elite. Sarah Palin is representative of the values and beliefs that have made our country great, and which will inspire future leaders of our communities and country. I think it is pathetic that you choose to attack Sarah Palin’s status as a feminist rather than debate the real policy issues which she espouses.
— Posted by Kelly Hall
36.
September 4th,200810:57 pm
You nailed every single emotion and thought I had about this situation. And like Elizabeth Fuller, #5, I feel embarrassed and upset, not proud about the “historic moment.” Ms. Palin is like some character in a comic movie…in which some unqualified, spunky look-alike girl piles her hair up, dons glasses, and fools everyone into thinking she is someone else. It can’t be real.
The disdain and disregard for grace and civility, for erudition and thought…it is so worrying and painful. I thought we were supposed to admire people who study and achieve in academics, then try to do something big…not ridicule them.
And as a woman, who grew up believing that everything would be different for women in my generation, and the one to follow, I’m just so sad. This is not what I dreamed about.
I wasn’t a Hillary supporter, but I would still have felt proud, if she had won the nomination. She would have been the real thing.
— Posted by Wesley
37.
September 4th,200810:57 pm
Just when we thought it could not get worse we were handed Palin.
— Posted by Sandra
38.
September 4th,200810:58 pm
Thought I should listen last night, give the “gal” a chance only to realize not surprisingly that she’s a fraud with a big mouth! Who is she? How dare she? All the double speak. Well she’s not like me! I’m nauseous Judith and this stuff scares me to no end. But wait; I have a bachelors degree, am not a bad public speaker either, maybe she is like me… maybe I could try for veep.
— Posted by twabby
39.
September 4th,200810:59 pm
I’ve been burning within ever since I heard Palin speech - glad to see so many like-minded women out there!!!
— Posted by ES
40.
September 4th,200810:59 pm
Thanks! I’m glad I am not the only one who thinks this is humiliating for American women.
— Posted by MR
41.
September 4th,200811:00 pm
Welcome to the new old girls club, more interested in shutting other women out than creating dialogue.
Palin is living what most women would hope to a achieve, with a supportive husband who, so far, strikes me as less sexist than many of the “educated” men I’ve met and so many “smart” women are married to.
Why aren’t we celebrating that she breaks the mold, values life, has intelligent ideas about energy (which extend beyond drilling)?
I don’t agree with all of her positions, but I respect her (and also have long been aware of her). I think women are missing the opportunity to enlarge our dialogue and create a bridge to somewhere with each other.
— Posted by Lisa
42.
September 4th,200811:01 pm
Thank you! Let us hope that the rest of the campaign will start to focus on issues that badly need to be discussed. Unfortunately, I’m very much afraid we’ll be getting only the usual Republican sneer-and-smear tactic instead.
— Posted by Jim Loomis
43.
September 4th,200811:02 pm
Thank you, Judith, for finding words to describe much of the discomfort I’ve been feeling about SP’s speech. It was offensive in so many ways — and unfortunately, dangerous as well. I found myself recalling the Carter-Reagan debates of 1980, when JC repeatedly made thoughtful, informed arguments, only to hear RR dismiss them with the sneer line: “there you go again!”
— Posted by Paul S in Maine
44.
September 4th,200811:02 pm
Dear Ms. Warner - Thank you for your observations. I agree that Sen. McCain’s selection of Gov. Palin is disrespectful of women, cynically dismissive of the American electorate at large, and an exercise in irresponsibility for personal gain. A woman who could lead America would indeed be a woman before whom I would stand in awe. This is not Gov. Palin.
I hope to vote for such a woman in my lifetime. Meanwhile, I will vote for Sen. Obama to begin our nation’s damage recovery, which I expect will require several generations, if indeed it can be done. Thank you again for your contribution to the Dialog.
— Posted by Michael P.
45.
September 4th,200811:02 pm
A very good piece, though I question the assertion that Palin is not intimidating… at least in some sense. I find ‘true believers’ who have no doubt that god is on their side - that they can do no wrong - very intimidating indeed. They are capable of the most amoral acts imaginable when given the power.
— Posted by Jim in Missoula
46.
September 4th,200811:02 pm
Bravo!
as a 51 year old male, Vassar ‘79, i’m quite familiar with strong and intelligent women. I’ve long believed they should be running this country at the executive level. Palin is not of that ilk, not even close. the GOP and McCain should be ashamed for parading her around, token-style. We, as a country, are better than that.
— Posted by casey shain
47.
September 4th,200811:02 pm
Judith,
You have so beautifully described some of the ways in which the Republican have insulted women via the VP nomination. It is one radian in the 360 degrees in which this party has insulted us –”us,” people who care about climate change, about species’ disappearing, about equality for women which we preach in the developing world, about economic inequality within our country and its attendant educational inequality, about their mockery of the ideal of a free press to impose a check on government actions, about their mockery of the public’s ability to hold them responsible when they state lies openly without any fear of being held accountable, about human rights which our representatives also preach abroad, about victims of sex crimes being respected and properly cared for medically and judicially, about equal pay for equal work, about the objectification of women represented by beauty pageants topless and otherwise, about our culture’s recent disparagement of intelligence and expertise, and about the thousands upon thousands of Americans and others who have honorably but horribly died for the questionable motives of those who sent them to Iraq. This party will employ election fraud to extend their reign unless we can ensure a LANDSLIDE of votes against them. They insult every single one of us.
— Posted by Greta
48.
September 4th,200811:03 pm
I am so glad to read this. After watching her speech, then listening to reviews, I began to wonder if everyone had seen the same speech as me. I felt she was harsh and phony at times. I am a white middle class mom, who definitely wanted to see Hillary in the White House, however, the thought of Sarah Palin being a “heartbeat” away from the presidency has moved an undecided voter firmly into the Obama camp.
— Posted by Kim T from Ohio
49.
September 4th,200811:03 pm
I came to this country because America was a shining star that offered a place for anyone who would work honestly and hard a place in this great land. Today, I am so depress and sad and most of all, scare to death of the Republicans. These uneducated, sneaky and rightest people are coming out of the woodwork. Why are Americans that I have come to love and envy allow such terribleness to happen to this great land and for what? Sarah Palin represents the worse of this country, the simplistic, naive, uneducated and immoral people who use their envy to destroy. She in particular, does not deserve the hard-earned title of “feminist.”And yet, what could the Democrats do, what could I do? We are swimming upstream against a polluted tide. We can’t stop them, I am afraid. Unfortunately, there are more of them than us. I am leaving this country if McCain wins. I can’t be here any longer. It’s so sad.
— Posted by Su-Mei Yu
50.
September 4th,200811:04 pm
Thank you for every word in this piece, and for mincing none: nauseating, condescension, humiliation, fake, demagoguery, manipulation, tripe, base.
That’s what has been served up to every woman, man, and child since last Friday morning, from all directions. You alone have taken the lipstick off the pig.
— Posted by RKP
51.
September 4th,200811:04 pm
Great explication of this sad dumbing down of the race and the issue. Seems to me if Palin really turns out to appeal to all the female voters out there, something is seriously wrong with the self-image women in this country have of themselves: “We should have a woman vice president, but not one who actually cultivates her own intelligence and female independence.”
But hey, when was the last time you heard so many Republicans bandying about the term “sexism” so much? Rock on!
— Posted by masayaNYC
52.
September 4th,200811:04 pm
Sarah Palin was able to deliver the speech she did, and the way she did, precisely because of her lack of understanding for the job she has been nominated to and has agreed to accept. If she understood, she would have recognized that she was nothing more than a pawn who was in way over her head — especially given the real possibility that a 74 year old president may not make it thru his first term. And if she knows, then we are in real trouble because we are looking at the next George W. Bush — on wheels! It was a cynical choice and I still hold out the hope that we are better than that.
— Posted by foil_stars
53.
September 4th,200811:05 pm
There is a strong anti-intellectual bent in this country. Educated, articulate, and thoughtful people are branded as “elitist”–which has come to replace ‘liberal” as the Republican insult of choice.
I, for one, do not need a president or vice president whom I’d feel comfortable with at a backyard barbecue or who shares my life story. How did these notions ever become a test of a person’s qualification to be president or vice president of this country?
— Posted by Allan in Oakland, CA
54.
September 4th,200811:05 pm
It has already been observed that the major differences between Gov. Palin and George W Bush are lipstick and heels. I am sorry to say I think this means the present election will be a repeat of 2004. “No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.”
— Posted by Scott
55.
September 4th,200811:05 pm
Very well written article.
I imagine, late October, the Republicans will plan a large “inadvertent” media circus out of Bristol and Levi’s wedding - create an image of duty and responsibility out of it. Their spin is ingenious.
— Posted by gme
56.
September 4th,200811:06 pm
I was appalled by the entire night. Cindy McCain, harsh makeup scrubbed off with her new, soft haircut, told Judy Woodward there was no substantive differences between Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin, and women would happily vote for either. Carly Fiorina, who ran HP into the ground, cut jobs, and then took a $21M parachute, lectured us on the struggles of the ordinary man. Mitt Romney exhorted us about the financial strength of the US, then took a swipe at Michelle Obama. And then came Sarah Palin, spewing snarky wisecracks while pointing her finger, ala Rafael Palmeiro. She reiterated the Bridge lie, and shamelessly trotted out her family while demanding that they be off limits, then deliberately distorted the facts and programs of Barack Obama and Joe Biden. And mention after mention of John McCain’s time in the Hanoi Hotel with each and every speaker. Pit bulls and lipstick, all served up with what many will see as refreshing spunk and candor.
At what point will we understand that our president *should* be smarter than we, and half truths and lies have lead us to where we are today. When will we realize that George Bush never wanted to share BBQ with us in our backyard, and Sarah Palin with never come to our kids’ hockey games. These people–all of them–are not our friends. They are all, or should be, the elite. And we should be voting on issues, not on the spunk factor.
— Posted by Jules
57.
September 4th,200811:06 pm
Ms. Warner right on!! Furthermore, loved Elizabeth Fuller’s (#5)response. I would like to think that educated women are smarter and are able to think more critically than McCain gives as credit for.Renate
— Posted by Renate Porsche
58.
September 4th,200811:07 pm
Thank you for this post. You are spot on about how the Palin nomination reeks of condescension, to women and to the voters she is hoped to attract. It also seems like Palin and her defenders seek to have it both ways. No one, not even the Republican talking heads, has argued that Palin was chosen because she truly was the best qualified candidate, female or male. A crafty political choice, but not one based upon absolute merit. She was chosen because of her ability to play on the needs and fears of target voters and for the possibility that these voters could relate to her. Her status as a mother and spouse are front and center to this. Yet the very qualities for which she was chosen and make her a compelling nominee are supposed to be considered off limits to discussion. She is a mother, but don’t call attention to how she plans to handle the demands of her infant son. And don’t poke around asking what it means that her daughter will join the ranks of pregnant teens this year.
Republicans expect everyone to smile and nod their heads approvingly, even when the family trotted out for photo ops includes the shotgun son-in-law to be. Palin’s life is complicated and her decision to put herself in the limelight for such transparently political reasons means that everything deserves to come under scrutiny.
— Posted by Steve M
59.
September 4th,200811:07 pm
There is an unreal and scary quality about all this Palin stuff. In a time when the country faces threats that may help downgrade us from superpower to also-ran, why would anyone in his/her right mind vote for a tough-talking beauty contestant with no experience and no sense of proporation? She is needed at home to care for her special-needs child and help her teenager through difficult times instead of exposing her to public humiliation. I have the disturbing worry that too many voters are about to prove what the world has said about us for the past eight years: we are arrogant non-thinkers. Bush is a jingoistic fool; McCain is too old and too unstable who compounded his instability by voting with Bush in 90%+ instances.Wake up, Americans. Be wise Jeffersonians, not undemocratic Hamiltonians.
— Posted by Len and Lee Maxwell
60.
September 4th,200811:07 pm
The Tim Robbins movie, “Bob Roberts” comes to mind when I watch Palin. And that ‘Raisin’ McCain’ song after per PREACH realy drove it home.A
— Posted by Adrienne
61.
September 4th,200811:07 pm
Well said. And that doesn’t even touch on the religious zealotry. Did God really want a pipeline?
— Posted by Mike
62.
September 4th,200811:08 pm
We should all be very scared of Sara Palin. President Bush never wavered in his beliefs and he got elected twice. He told us we were going to war. He never pretended. Those same fool people will rally and elect Sara Palin too if we underestimate her or what Karl Rove is capable of!
— Posted by sheila
63.
September 4th,200811:08 pm
Great article.
— Posted by JoshMD
64.
September 4th,200811:09 pm
Thank you, thank you, thank you to you, Judith, and to Elizabeth Fuller (#5 above)for saying what I feel but couldn’t quite put into succinct words. I am so truly frightened for this country if these 2 Republicans are somehow elected, and I feel a bit helpless to stop it. Please, everyone, keep working for Obama and the hope that he symbolizes.
— Posted by Sherry
65.
September 4th,200811:09 pm
Thank you so much Judith for a column that articulates my jumbled emotions. At least I do not feel so alone after reading the many comments that followed. Following this story-I feel as though I am from another planet-and it is scary!
— Posted by egh
66.
September 4th,200811:09 pm
well said judith. it’s frightening how many women are unable to see this pick as the political sham that it is. and now i see the associated press has reported that her higher education resume includes five colleges in six years. that mccain overlooked this nugget, on top of all the others that have been pouring out, is simply insulting.
— Posted by elle
67.
September 4th,200811:10 pm
Hallelujah - I am relieved to read what I have been struggling to articulate. I am utterly insulted by her nomination, and disgusted by support I have witnessed in friends over the last day or so. I am grateful for your response.
— Posted by T
68.
September 4th,200811:10 pm
Get over it Judith. There is beginning a new dawn in America. It is bright and shining and Sarah Palin is in the vanguard. The rule of the elite media is on the wane. Just check the NYT balance sheet! Buh Bye!
— Posted by N Lofton
69.
September 4th,200811:10 pm
Thank-you! This is a disgrace /insult to women. I can’t stop thinking about Golda Meir!
— Posted by Connie
70.
September 4th,200811:11 pm
I’ve read your article and all the comments below it and now I don’t feel so alone. Thank you for voicing all that I feel.
— Posted by Barbara
71.
September 4th,200811:12 pm
Judith, I am sorry the Sarah Palin does not meet your standards of what a leader should be in the 21st century. It must bring you great satisfaction sitting in your elevated position to pass judgement on a young woman who has risen through the ranks to become one of the most visible symbols of what an American woman can be. I think we are very lucky to have two dynamic leaders of one generation attached to two distinguished leaders from the previous generation. For the first time in many years I feel very comfortable with both sets of nominees. It’s too bad we have to destroy one side to elect the other. It’s also sad that you have decided to join in that old fashioned style of politics. God Bless You and sleep well!
— Posted by Guy
72.
September 4th,200811:12 pm
Meeow. What a perfectly catty little column.
— Posted by S. Collins
73.
September 4th,200811:12 pm
RKP—haha. i believe you mean Judith has taken the lipstick off the Pit Bull.
again, great, great column. i’m sending links to everyone i know, and i’m going to print it and put it on my refrigerator.
— Posted by casey shain
74.
September 4th,200811:13 pm
For the Republicans to nominate an uncouth, poorly educated, inexperienced, redneck for Vice President when there are experienced, educated women in the Republican party is the sort of cynical and jaded act of a party which can boast of a Convention where 68% of the delegates are men, in a world where 58% of undergraduates in four year schools are female. The party’s culture is condescending to women, and Senator McCain’s attitude is out of the 50s and 60s when women were one step up from chattels. It was OK to return from Vietnam as a genuine hero (even if it has been milked for political gain since then even more than his wife’s fortune) and believe that gave permission to cheat on your wife and trade her in for a very wealthy new one 17 years younger than yourself. I see a continuity in this decision going back to those days and a political party which endorses this. I really fail to understand how anyone can fall for this.
— Posted by Richard
75.
September 4th,200811:14 pm
#24 (anna), I don’t come to your same conclusion, but I do agree that her unorthodox path to political success is a compelling story for Gov. Palin. It’s a shame that they choose to deliver it with a sneer towards those “privileged” elitists who worked very hard to get into the country’s best schools and chose public service rather than Wall Street.
There’s no reason that both paths can’t be recognized as legitimate and worthy of praise.
— Posted by Greg
76.
September 4th,200811:14 pm
Judith — thank you for pointing this out. You put your finger on what was disturbing me through the whole performance. There’s something of a caricature in her entire presentation.
I wish there were a way to broach this thoughtful and meritorious analysis in the broad political arena.
— Posted by Helen
77.
September 4th,200811:15 pm
“One of the worst poisons of the American political climate right now, the thing that time and again in recent years has led us to disaster, is the need people feel for leaders they can “relate” to. This need isn’t limited to women; it brought us after all, two terms of George W. Bush. And it isn’t new; Americans have always needed to feel that their leaders were, on some level, people like them.”
Well said. This country unfortunately has a problem because campaigning has become such a moronic beauty pageant, instead of anything of seriousness, and it is a reflection of the voters’ intelligence level. We got what we wanted, collectively speaking, and i pray that it doesn’t happen again, but not surprised when it does. I’m not a card-carrying Democrat, and they have their own low level form of rhetoric, but the Republican party has taken campaigning to such an all-time low, and it appalls me that people actually are members of this club, and actually fall for the drivel they spew. (Didn’t really see any minorities at the convention, from the pics i saw on your site… done for effect by NY Times, or just a larger truth there?).
— Posted by pblaze
78.
September 4th,200811:16 pm
I have always voted but have never given my time or any substantial amount of money. Ms. Palin’s speech made both angry and sad…but totally determined to donate as much money as I can spare and to work for the election of Barak Obama. American women have so much to lose if the McCain/Palin ticket is elected.
— Posted by Irene
79.
September 4th,200811:16 pm
Well said. It’s sad to think that McCain’s cynical choice of a running mate could turn out to be an effective albeit manipulative strategy. The prospect of four, or, heaven forbid, eight more years of Republican double speak, lack of compassion, failed environmental policies, blindness about global warming, failure to lead on alternate energy sources, xenophobia, militarism, misguided foreign policy, attacks on government programs and institutions and misogynistic health policies is more than I can take!
— Posted by Wendy Lefkowich
80.
September 4th,200811:16 pm
While the world is focusing on women and babies it might be nice to spend a minute in thought for Genarlow Wilson. As a 17 year old Black teen he was sentenced to 10 years in prison and labeled a sex offender for having consensual sex with another teen. It seems we all forgot to put him on a big stage and celebrate his down to earth life. Genarlo, it seems, just wasn’t a good photo op for anyone. Maybe we should take a minute thinking about what we as a country did to Genarlow before we get too full of ourselves. This type of stuff goes on daily in America while our politicians and their private dancers could care less. To be so stupid to believe that one side has it right and the other side has it wrong, and you are the one that is on the right side, is about as egocentric as one can get. Get counseling. And after the counseling quit supporting these idiots at the conventions and go help the Genarlows of the world. Caring people actually helped him. Unfortunately, they did not get to wear funny hats.
— Posted by Richard
81.
September 4th,200811:16 pm
Partisan much? Geez, Judith, those are some sour grapes. Because the GOP practices a little affirmative action, this is a reason women should be humiliated? So what do we tell the other candidate who has benefited from affirmative action? Let’s not insult ourselves by asserting Obama’s ascent was purely achievement driven. The number of unaccomplished lawyers wandering the earth today already nearly line the Beltway end to end.
— Posted by Peter
82.
September 4th,200811:16 pm
Didn’t Joe Biden show off his grandchildren?
Did anyone ask Joe Biden how many hours there were in a day when he was a single parent of little children and a US Senator? Or ask the question of any male politician?
Should Catholics be humiliated because Joe Biden (a spectacular failure as a Presidential candidate) was chosen to help placate Catholic middle class workers?
These posts are remarkable. Disagree with Sarah Palin if you like, but she rose to the occasion. Give her credit.
— Posted by Tom
83.
September 4th,200811:16 pm
I completely disagree with Judith Warner. I love Sarah Palin. I’m a Hillary voter and Sarah is going to do extremely well with my culturally conservative kin in OH, PA etc.
— Posted by hj
84.
September 4th,200811:18 pm
How stupid do the Republicans think women are? Do they really expect us to vote for a conservative male instead of a liberal male because the conservative male chose a conservative female as a running mate? Can they really question Obama’s “lack of experience” and then offer Gov. Palin as a running mate. (Gov. Strickland of Ohio has more political experience, but that doesn’t make him qualified to run our country, and I certainly wouldn’t want to see one of our city council members running for vice President in four years–and I live in a city of 250,000, not 7,000.) If we fall for this trick, we deserve the leaders we get.
— Posted by Dee E
85.
September 4th,200811:18 pm
She is a joke but unfortunately the joke may be on us. Hopefully not.shae
— Posted by shae allen
86.
September 4th,200811:18 pm
Wesley #36 put it so well:
“The disdain and disregard for grace and civility, for erudition and thought…it is so worrying and painful.”
Quoted for truth!Sarah #24, on the other hand, seems to think that it’s a bad thing that our rulers as edjimacatted at… gasp… good schools!If the campaign were running on “relatability,” the dining hall manager at my school, who has a newborn and is beloved by all, would be heading the ticket.No wonder we’re owned by China. While our pundits chatter and college students in our intellectually-averse nation do keg stands in lieu of engineering homework, other countries’ youth are studying.
— Posted by Nicole
87.
September 4th,200811:19 pm
The most interesting aspect of Palin’s speech wasn’t that it was written by someone else, it was that the words themselves when read did not have the bite, or sarcasm or insulting, meanspirited tone we saw on television. Those were courtesy of Ms. Palin’s own delivery. She put her own personality into the words. And it wasn’t a very likeable one.As for the implied sexism of questioning her family decisions, she uses her family to further her political ends. Palin is willing to parade an embarassed pregnant daughter before the world(is that her daughter’s punishment?) and to haul out her four-month-old special needs baby boy in front of the lights and long past his bedtime.McCain never wanted a female running mate. He wanted Lieberman or Ridge. Palin is only up there because he couldn’t have his first choices and refused to take Romney or Pawlenty, as his staff wanted. Palin is a cynical choice, signifying disrespect for women that they would accept this radical-right, blatantly ambitious, ethically challenged, woefully unprepared stand-in for Hillary or any of a number of qualified female candidates who truly care about the environment and education, a fair tax code and a woman’s right to choose.If Sarah Palin gets singed by the public scrutiny and her ticket ultimately loses, she will find little thanks from the Republican party and no gratitude from American women for playing the patsy for the GOP.
— Posted by Barbara in Texas
88.
September 4th,200811:19 pm
Thank you for bringing some sanity to all this stuff and nonsense.
As Anne Frank, writing in her diary, believed within her heart that…
“… in spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart. I simply can’t build up my hopes on a foundation consisting of confusion, misery, and death. I see the world gradually being turned into a wilderness, I hear the ever approaching thunder, which will destroy us too, I can feel the sufferings of millions and yet, if I look up into the heavens, I think that it will all come right, that this cruelty too will end, and that peace and tranquillity will return again.”
I too believe that all will be made right - by right thinking and right doing and not by more hate and slander. We need to acknowledge and respect our differences and work from that point onward - together. Male and female.
— Posted by Seymour Goode
89.
September 4th,200811:20 pm
You and Wesley #25 got it exactly right.
I have felt a mixture of outrage and downright fear ever since McCain placed a woman of so little accomplishment so close to becoming the leader of our precious democracy.
On a personal level, as a mother, I never could have placed a teenage daughter and her boyfriend into the spotlight in such a way or cynically used a fragile baby to achieve her goal, either symbolically or physically — subjecting him to the lights and noise of the convention hall.
— Posted by Curmudgea
90.
September 4th,200811:20 pm
Thank you, Judith- you are spot on with this one. The exploitation of her pregnant daughter and bewildered boyfriend was disgusting. The slamming of “elites” was pandering. I do not understand why it is so elitist and such a negative to be smart, educated, and thoughtful. She gave us the ’sassy’ turn, which was horrendously embarrassing- plus, I hardly think ’sassy’ will cut it with Putin. Again, the better option is smart, educated, and THOUGHTFUL. And dear Peter, I know plenty of city folk, small town relatives, and suburban friends who also prefer those, i.e. Mr. Obama’s, qualifications.
— Posted by anne
91.
September 4th,200811:21 pm
I’m so happy to read this. You say so well what many of my colleagues and I have been saying. This issue is one I will be discussing with my students in my Media Studies courses this fall.
— Posted by Melissa W., San Diego
92.
September 4th,200811:21 pm
Thank you for such thoughtful and articulate writing. Palin’s nomination was overt pandering - a bungled effort at gender politics. The supposed “maverick” is an empty hypocrite. I too was a Hillary supporter who was both incredulous and insulted by the selection of an neo-con neophyte to supposedly win my vote. The base may have rallied around this choice, but it was at the expense of the political middle.
— Posted by Gina
93.
September 4th,200811:22 pm
Reading the comments of all the feminists here, including the author, who only want a woman to succeed if she totes the PC-feminist line is hilarious.
It was no different with blacks in the beginning, questioning Obama.
— Posted by Sara
94.
September 4th,200811:22 pm
There are three things I am struggling to understand.
1. Why is there such red-hot hatred for well-educated intelligent people? Well-educated, intelligent people do not hate those who are gifted athletes or artists, for example. We are different. Some of us are smarter than others. Don’t we want the smart people in office?
2. I wouldn’t have a problem with a well-organized mother of five being in politics. Look at Nancy Pelosi, for example. But this family is a catastrophe. The oldest is joining the army because of discipline problems. The next one got pregnant *while her mom was pregnant* (ewwww); is there a sadder cry for attention than that? The youngest gets passed around, when he needs to be nurtured more carefully. This is an out-of-control situation, and it is not admirable.
3. Why are “Christians” so mean?
— Posted by Mary Neal
95.
September 4th,200811:22 pm
This has exactly been my horror. We prefer “average” (how many times did Ms. Alaska tell you she was average?) to someone prepared for the complex challenges of 21st Century geo-politics. Give me smarter than me anyday. It terrifies me, honestly.
And acting as if giving birth is a resume-builder makes me sick. Is five times better than two? Hamsters give birth. What kind of a parent are you - mother or father? Are you educating your children to function in the 21st Century? Are you requiring service of them? To think beyond their ipod? I haven’t heard a word from or about Sarah Palin that makes her a remarkable parent. Being a hockey mom doesn’t qualify anyone for the job of Vice President. She’s seems an under-achiever in my book as a parent. I’m not impressed.
I’m also not impressed that she is so harsh as a newcomer. What’s the old phrase? Mind your manners. She has few and a lot of attitude which she thinks is cute, and the masses in St Paul seemed to get a kick out of, but in the real world…especially the East Coast….manners, compassion, and a little wisdom and humility might do her more good than her “kick ass” approach. Not impressed. She behaves like an adolescent.
— Posted by Alecia Stevens
96.
September 4th,200811:22 pm
Judith you write, “One of the worst poisons of the American political climate right now, the thing that time and again in recent years has led us to disaster, is the need people feel for leaders they can “relate” to.” For a moment, I thought you might be talking about the huge fascination with Obama, especially among upper crust mega-years-of-univerity elite, and their entertainment idols. People’s feelings about him sure mean more than what he has actually accomplished, or the path he has actually trod.
McCain and Palin will bring much more competence and credibility to Washington than Obama, and will represent the majority of American people with much greater depth… the columnist’s dislike for Sarah notwithstanding.
— Posted by Mark
97.
September 4th,200811:22 pm
Judith, I’ll sleep better tonight knowing I’m not the only woman in America in total despair. Thanks, not just for your voice, but for all of the rest of you above me who’ve articulated what I’ve been thinking and feeling.
— Posted by Lynda Fitzgerald
98.
September 4th,200811:23 pm
Judith Warner, you have written a brilliant piece. You are so articulate. It is a true tragedy for the future of our country and for the world, that if someone as bright and forthright as you were to be in the polical limelight, people would be see you immediately as itimidating and dismiss you as someone not “like” themselves. The dumbing down of america and the “thinking with your gut” that have taken over like a cancer frightens me.
— Posted by Janet
99.
September 4th,200811:23 pm
That speech was demoralizing - the tone, the language, mean spirited from beginning to end. It has set the recognition of women back years and was a slap in the face to millions of Americans. The disgust I felt was exactly the same feelings I had after reading The Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Atwood many years ago.
— Posted by MM
100.
September 4th,200811:23 pm
Thank you for this wonderful piece. It means a lot to finally be able to read an insightful comment about Sarah Palin. With issues as serious as the Iraq war, the dismal economic state and impending environmental catastrophe, its disgusting that so many political analysts are so taken by jokes about pit bulls that they’ve forgotten what democracy and politics should really be about.If the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who have been killed or displaced or the thousands of wounded or fallen soldiers or the victims of hurricane Katrina had a voice, they wouldn’t be focusing on Sarah Barracuda’s last beauty pageant, but would instead bring into focus the REAL issues plaguing the United States.God forbid that we should again be so taken by someone’s ‘down home’ charm that we forget the terrible consequences of giving wholly incompetent individuals such tremendous power and responsibility.
— Posted by Leyla
101.
September 4th,200811:24 pm
Don’t you gals fret too much. Sarah Palin will be VP for 8 years and then president for 8 more years after that. She’ll grow on you!
— Posted by Paco
102.
September 4th,200811:24 pm
Wow. That’s incredibly true commentary. Thank you for putting such an eloquent voice to my uneasy fears. This whole Sarah Polin episode has been so jumbled by the press and spun by the Republicans, it has been hard to see through to the truth. Thanks again.
— Posted by johnC
103.
September 4th,200811:25 pm
I wonder what the people who find the nomination of Sarah Palin “humiliating for American women” think of the American women who will vote for her. It seems presumptuous for anyone to speak for them. The consensus seems to be, if you don’t agree that Palin is an insult, then you must be an idiot.
I may not agree with any of the policy that Obama has put forth, or the way he has framed his campaign, but, I can try to understand his rationale. Intelligent people can come to very different conclusion. I just wish I had the same insight as you do, as to who is intelligent and who is not.
— Posted by Eric
104.
September 4th,200811:25 pm
The Real Mirroring
I suspect that the rage and bitterness of Democrats with regards to Palins nomination comes from the fact that in important respects Palin is a mirror image of their own candidate. She is as inexperienced, personable, charismatic, well spoken, and good looking, as their own candidate. As of last night she also shares Obama’s come from nowhere nouveau celebrity status. She is a reflection of Obama, his virtues and shortcomings alike and forces Democrats to take a second hard look at the person they nominated for their top spot. Maybe they don’t like what they see in the mirror.
— Posted by Dennis
105.
September 4th,200811:26 pm
I don’t know what’s funnier: the fact that these alleged feminists are actually taking the time to bash the idea of a female VP - which would undoubtedly be historic - simply because her views are night aligned with theirs, or their collective short-term memory of last week’s DNC - which, I seem to recall, had more than its fair share of bashing the Republican party. Talk about a heap of hypocrisy!
— Posted by The Independent
106.
September 4th,200811:27 pm
If Americans let themselves be detracted from the issues by this people drama, then they really deserve what they are going to get.If they vote this person for her policies, that’s even scarier.
— Posted by MB
107.
September 4th,200811:28 pm
I’m sure Golda Meir is not a good example, she certainly wasn’t a good leader, but I’m thinking along the lines of Thatcher and Reagan.
— Posted by anna
108.
September 4th,200811:29 pm
Thanks Judith for speaking on behalf of us in ways that speak the truth.
— Posted by kenny
109.
September 4th,200811:30 pm
After watching the Palin speech, I watched the film Recount, about the 2000 Gore-Bush election disaster. I recommend everyone watch that film and remind themselves what happened. I know that we hate to remember and would rather forget, but we must be prepared. It is all too possible for history to repeat itself. This election is going to be another close one, despite what should be a landslide.
— Posted by shelley
110.
September 4th,200811:30 pm
Thank you Judith for that cold water of reality splashing over the hyperbole surrounding Gov. Palin’s speech. If the McCain camp thought that he would woo the feminists in the Democratic party with this choice, it is clear that he is out of touch. Not only did I find the choice offensive, but I was amazed at how this Governor can be construed as a reformer. From the Bridge to Nowhere and other earmarks she shilled for as Mayor of Wasilla- she is another politician made in the mold of Ted Stevens and his ilk from Alaska. What about Olympia Snowe, Libby Dole, or Kay Bailey Hutchinson- really qualified Republican women. Maybe they think too much for McCain, or maybe being ‘easy on the eyes’ is most important.
— Posted by Louise Reja, Seattle
111.
September 4th,200811:30 pm
This is spot-on! Thanks for the real nuance and insight, which raises the level of discourse among commentators.
Didn’t McCain introduce Ms. Palin by saying that she is what *he* needs?Did he really consider what *the country* needs?
I find it depressing that Ms. Palin allowed herself to be put before the cart–like a true party official. She doesn’t serve, she is being used–but with her own consent.
Interestingly enough, this episode sheds new light on why it makes sense that there is no Obama/Clinton ticket. One might even say that Senator Obama, in a way, honored Senator Clinton by not choosing her as a running mate.
Both he and Ms. Clinton have already changed the country more than VP-candidate Palin ever will.
Posted by B. Hoeckner
— Posted by B. Hoeckner
112.
September 4th,200811:31 pm
Could it be that Sarah Palin seems “real” because she is clearly imperfect? Isn’t that it?
You, dear Judith, have been the great proponent that women suffer when they drive to be perfect and cannot accept their humanity? Hmmm… Perhaps Sarah Palin tells us something not so much about our own pathetic need to “relate” but about society’s desire to drop the pretense.
It’s all very ironic and difficult to swallow. But the fact that I’ve been sick to my stomach since leaving Denver suggests that something very real is going on under all the fake that I’ve been rallying against.
My husband says that Sarah Palin makes people on the right feel the way Obama makes them feel on the left. Perhaps what we need to consider is the apparently common hunger for a leader who is not afraid to be who they are.
Where does this fit into the slot of feminist thinking? I’m not sure. But perhaps it’s time to stop putting everything in slots.
— Posted by Prematurely Grey
113.
September 4th,200811:32 pm
Thank you for putting it into words. She’s like the poster child for a “little lady” who plays along (subserviently) and is rewarded by the men in charge. It is so sad that the only way we could get a woman on the ballot is by going with one who sells her entire gender down the river on every possible level.
— Posted by Sarah Vincent
114.
September 4th,200811:32 pm
Thank you Ms.Warner! You are a much needed, and extremely articulate, voice of reason.
— Posted by MJ
115.
September 4th,200811:32 pm
Just when my headache eases, my stomach turns less, and my heartache dulls, I come across a comment like Connie’s (#67), putting Palin in the company of Golda Meir, and the pain starts all over again.
— Posted by RKP
116.
September 4th,200811:34 pm
Your beautifully written piece should be required reading post haste for all Americans, especially for the many women who are feeling even more marginalized by the choice of Sarah Palin and her everyday supermom bio as compelling credentials to land the second most important position in the world.
— Posted by Jeff
117.
September 4th,200811:34 pm
Thank you for a great column.
I’m with you … shame on them for trotting that five-month-old baby with Down syndrome out all the time. And I am sick and tired of the Republican strategy that has Sarah Palin talking about her children and then objecting when we do. The Republicans did the same thing when they outed Mary Cheney at the RNC in 2004.
Can we all say it together: “It’s about the issues.”
It’s not about Palin as a mommy or hockey mommy. It is about her RELEVANT experience and her views and history on the issues. It is about how her religious views will impact on my right to the separation of church and state. It’s about health care for all and Medicare, about energy independence and climate change, its about education, housing, jobs, the economy. It’s about our place in the world, how we get along with the other people on the planet, and how we stop having wars. It’s about the right to choose, and protecting our civil liberties.
It’s not about how Palin looks or how she dresses. It is not about her accent when she speaks or how well she delivers a speech that someone wrote for her and that she practiced for hours. It is about what she said in the speech and what she believes.
And so far as I can tell, I agree within nothing that she believes. And that is what is important.
— Posted by Karen
118.
September 4th,200811:35 pm
Thank you for a great article and for voicing my feelings. Palin does not represent me or my ideals. For someone new on the scene, she was downright nasty and lied in her prepared remarks. I also took offense to her trashing of community organizers.
— Posted by Terri-Ann
119.
September 4th,200811:36 pm
The Left is entangled in its own politically correct web. You silence legitimate criticism by calling it “sexist” and “racist” and then you are amazed at the mediocre culture that coughs up moronic candidates from both parties.
— Posted by Phil
120.
September 4th,200811:36 pm
You liberals really do have a double standard. Governor Palin will be the first woman to be an executive in the white house, and you are upset because it is not your hero, Mrs. Clinton. Get over it. The Republicans are breaking the glass ceiling in America.
— Posted by Mark
121.
September 4th,200811:36 pm
as a women, in a very fortunate position, who has struggled immensely with being a mother, due to the reality of what it is to be a mother…i find palin and her stance on the rights of women to be tremendously reckless and thoroughly frightening. are more unwanted and abused children an acceptable solution to teenage pregnancy for the christian religion??
— Posted by michelle, brooklyn
122.
September 4th,200811:36 pm
Yes! Excellent points.
— Posted by SEA
123.
September 4th,200811:37 pm
Sarah Palin reminds me of the women the Nazi party put forward as role models when they were in power in Germany.The woman has a future as a fascist!
— Posted by Marea
124.
September 4th,200811:44 pm
“There’s a fine line between likability and demagoguery. Both thrive upon manipulation and least-common-denominator politics.”
I agree, and I think that’s what’s wrong with politics on BOTH sides of the aisle. Obama brought politics down to the level of ordinary people while simultaneously condescending to them, Palin casts her lot in with them and condescends back to the “elites”. What a crazy way to pick a president.
— Posted by Jenn T.
125.
September 4th,200811:46 pm
I’m happy to see so many people feel as I did during and after Palin’s speech. I spent the night composing all sorts of similar comments in my head, which Judith and others here articulate well.
The Republican leaders are the ones who view the working class as dumb. We who support Obama don’t view voters as cynically as Palin and the like seem to. The Republican strategists can’t win on issues (they don’t seem to have an answer to any of the many serious environmental, economic, and foreign problems America faces). So they are trying to turn this election into a class war, pitting themselves as friends of the working class and against the elites. Of course, there’s no logic there and they make plenty of lies about raising taxes and the like to try to sell this idea. The question is, are the middle and working class voters going to buy this rotten bill of goods from McCain and Palin? The R’s seem to believe these voters are so dumb that it will work. I hope and pray that Americans are smarter than the R’s give them credit for.
— Posted by John H
126.
September 4th,200811:46 pm
This article, and articles like it, demonstrate something I’ve thought for years — women are held down mostly by other women.
— Posted by Observer
127.
September 4th,200811:47 pm
Hillary was nothing without Bill.
Obama is nothing. (I am still waiting to hear of any accomplishment he can take credit for).
McCain and Palin are self-made. I respect that a lot. You can disagree with their politics, but your hate for them is rather disgusting.
— Posted by Scott
128.
September 4th,200811:47 pm
Palin is their ’savior’. She’s “the one”. The newest Republican rock star. No issues other than demonizing her opponents (who clearly aren’t right with God and you know what that means).
They’re sacrificing McCain to prep Palin. Keep your eye on Rove. This gal is better raw material than Bush.
— Posted by thebob.bob
129.
September 4th,200811:47 pm
Really? You didn’t find her intimidating? If I were Barack Obama, I’d find her quite intimidating.
She’s not “using” her family any more than Barack did. And there’s something quite dignified about her refusal to be ashamed of her family’s perceived failings.
There’s a lot of sour grapes out there from Hillary supporters who are dismayed to find out that sincerity and humor actually matter…and that women with political chops aren’t necessarily all pro-choice Dems.
I’m a Barack fan, but - if he’s going to be condescending to blue-collar Americans behind their backs - then he should be prepared to be hammered about it. And rightfully so.
Palin was very impressive.
— Posted by timd