Print This Post
Sep
4
*I am 100% certain that not all parents who consider themselves hockey moms support far right politics - so let’s be clear. This quote about hockey moms, pitbulls and lipstick comes from Governor Sarah Palin - and I’ve added a few words.
Gloria Feldt, a writer and thinker I admire and have had the good fortune to get to know a bit more through one of the listservs to which I subscribe, has an excellent column posted today about Governor Sarah Palin’s speech last night, given after she accepted the nomination to be the Republican candidate for vice president on the ticket with U.S. Senator John McCain.
In the piece, Gloria writes,
Jill Miller Zimon at Writes Like She Talks put together a wide compendium of opinion about McCain’s veep pick and concluded it will turn out to be a miscalculation on his part. Seems to me that Palin’s speech last night suggests otherwise.
I’m sticking with my instinct that this choice of Palin is a huge miscalculation, and, in a comment, I explained why. Here is the text of my reasoning:
For one thing, as the poll that came out yesterday from EMILY’s List seems to support, there’s nothing in his ticket for moderates or Independents. His VP choice is right to far-right and he himself has been working to appeal in the [same] direction as well.
For another thing, Gov. Palin’s speech offers up rhetoric which might play well in the arenas she’s mastered before, but we have a lot of vetting, including transcripts, of what she’s been saying - and an awful lot of it is not just finessing, it’s false.
Third, Gov. Palin’s comment about community organizing not involving responsibility is plain wrong and, in my opinion, shows her to be either completely naive about what community organizing is, or [to] have a very overblown sense of what being mayor of her town involved. The community organizers I know in the Cleveland area have far greater responsibility for large numbers of individuals and goals than it seems Gov Palin believes to exist.
Which brings me to a fourth reason, which, living in Ohio, I’ve seen played out: Rural v. urban. The population centers of this country are still in the urban areas, which happen to be the areas that tend to vote Democratic and tend to have a lot of newly registered voters this year. There is absolutely nothing Gov Palin has said that would intrigue a city dweller to believe that Gov Palin knows about or cares about the urban dweller’s needs or desires. Now - maybe she does - but as a voter, what has she told us?
Fifth, her message is one that encourages people to embrace fear of what is different from themselves. How is she doing this? First, by working to reinforce how she is just like them.
Now, Obama and Biden also try to help us see how they are like us - and between the two of them, I would say they come at least close enough.
However, Gov Palin isn’t much like most working women - for one thing, the Alaska economy has no resemblance to any other state’s economy. Just in scale alone, it is very unlike many of the states. And she’s shown excrutiating little interest in getting to know, care about or understand any other state, at all.
That in itself engenders this idea that different is bad - because the state is so homogenous. The number of Jews in all of Alaska’s 660,000 residents is fewer than the number in one of the synagogues in my town.
Sixth, Palin’s attachment to religion will be exceedingly troublesome to Independents. Her stance on creationism, praying in church that God can influence legislators to get them the oil deals they want and of course reproductive rights all send up red flags.
Finally, and this is what I wrote before, Gov. Palin breaks no glass ceiling - if anything, she is moving backwards. How can that be, some might ask, since she’s being recognized as being competent enough to be the VP of the USA? Because the choice of her was a political choice - as someone else wrote and I apologize for not recalling who exactly, if Gov Palin’s first name was Stanley, the GOP would be selecting a different nominee. If they really wanted a reformer, they could have gone to Bobby Jindal or Mitt Romney. If they wanted an ethics person, they could have gone to Mike Huckabee. And if they cared about experience nearly as much as they appeared to all the time they were decrying Obama’s alleged lack of it, they would have gone to any of the other women previously named by the GOP as possibilities - Kay Bailey Hutchison or Christie Todd Whitman who I believe would have been a far more appealing candidate to the independents and moderates.
Gov Palin mentioned that the difference between the hockey mom and a pitbull is lipstick, but, as much as I’ve always hated this expression, sincerely, Gov Palin is, to me, lipstick on a pig - and the pig in this case is the GOP that has nothing of value for working women in its platform.
Thanks for your always thoughtful writing - and I hope you’ll let me know what you think of my holding firm here.
What are you thinking today? Whose miscalculating - me, or John McCain?
By Jill Miller Zimon at 4:15 pm September 4th, 2008 in Barack Obama, Campaigning, Elections, Jewish, John McCain, Ohio, Politics, Predictions, Religion, Sarah Palin, Social Issues, Vice President, Voting, WH2008, leadership
Comments
19 Responses to “Difference between hockey mom & pitbull? Lipstick - on divisive far right politics*”
Leave a Reply
-
Upcoming
WOW! This is the stuff I want to hear more of. This is real discussion! This is what women ought to be digesting and discerning. I am afraid for women who are blindly following this VP and not even questioning her possible acsension to the 2nd most powerful seat in our gov’t.
Keep it coming! Intelligence trumps ignorance every day of the week…even on Sundays!
Thanks, Babz. I was actually feeling very good about this - because even though there are a zillion ways to slice and dice the judgements she’s made regarding her work as a parent, many voters do not want to go over that. And I respect that - so I will try, TRY to stick with style of vetting.
But I can’t make any promises, now.
What do you mean “judgements she’s made regarding her work as a parent?”
Try this:
“judgements she’s made, regarding her work as a parent?”
“Gov Palin is, to me, lipstick on a pig - and the pig in this case is the GOP that has nothing of value for working women in its platform.”
Love it, love it, love it. THANK YOU for this. There is no miscalculation here on your part.At all.
Your reactions are your own, and authentic, obviously, but I do think you’re putting a lot of stock in what is, essentially a partisan group poll.
I would not put that much stock in a poll from any right-wing group as I would not want to be caught flat-footed.
That being said, it’s clear the undisputed effect of Palin so far is a galvanizing of the Republican base, where it goes from there we don’t know yet, but I have some guesses.
I don’t think McCain is counting on Hillary voters. But he knows he can’t win without an enthusiastic base.
Well considered points and I agree that the cross-over appeal is important to McCain at this juncture.
Given the hell of the last eight years, it’s reasonable to project the boogie-woman shadow onto Palin, but I think unfortunately, it’s an overreaction.
I would argue that it’s McCain’s moderate policies that would be in effect if he were to be elected and that there’s no reason to think that Palin would deviate from them.
I think strategically it’s short-sighted to think that the only legitimate first time woman candidate for the White House should be some one who appeals to a majority. Let the first one enter and the rest will follow.
Jill, some of your arguments here are all jumbled. You accuse Palin of encouraging people to “embrace fear of what is different from themselves” by “reinforcing how she is just like them.” You acknowledge that Obama & Biden are doing that as well, but then they’re absolved because they’re succeeding at this ruse? “Close enough?”
Even worse, you then go on to say that “Gov Palin isn’t much like most working women…” Talk about encouraging people to “embrace fear of what is different from themselves.” And Alaska is too different a state to elect someone from. Really? Is Iowa OK?
And your idea that she’s not breaking any glass ceiling because her pick was political-that’s not exactly a disqualifying factor in politics.
[...] Lipstick on Divisive Far-Right Politics posted on September 4, 2008 at 7:38 pm [...]
What evidence do you have that she’s taken absolutely no interest in learning about other states?
Or that the folks out in Parma and Medina, urban dwellers that they are, connect better with a beltway insider like Biden or a citizen of the world like Obama?
There’s also a few Native Americans in Alaska, I hear. They don’t count on the diversity scale?
I’d say her religion and stance on abortion severely limits the number of undecideds she’ll draw, but a lot of what you’ve argued is wishful thinking at best.
I think you’re right on.
Whose miscalculating - me, or John McCain?
Since you asked, here are a few points …
Difference between hockey mom & pitbull? Lipstick - on divisive far right politics*
I’m amazed by the reaction this joke has gotten. (An over-the-top caller from Germany on the Diane Rehm Show this AM said the statement brought to mind neo-Nazism.) Here’s the syllogism underlying Gov. Palin’s statement: “Hockey moms are tough. I’m a hockey mom. Hence, I’m tough.” Big deal.
For one thing, as the poll that came out yesterday from EMILY’s List seems to support, there’s nothing in his ticket for moderates or Independents.
EMILY’s List isn’t exactly a neutral source and most of the respondents to the poll knew about Gov. Palin only from the pollsters’ description of her. I’ll reserve any conclusions until I see polls taken over the next few weeks.
For another thing, Gov. Palin’s speech offers up rhetoric which might play well in the arenas she’s mastered before, but we have a lot of vetting, including transcripts, of what she’s been saying - and an awful lot of it is not just finessing, it’s false.
I’m not exactly sure what you’re referencing here. Gov. Palin’s changed position on earmarks, or something else?
Gov. Palin’s comment about community organizing not involving responsibility is plain wrong
Quick, who has greater responsibility–a full-time mayor or a community organizer? You’ll remember that the Obama campaign last week essentially dismissed Gov. Palin’s experience as a mayor. If Gov. Palin’s mayoral experience is to be dismissed, why should Sen. Obama’s time as a community organizer be considered a relevant qualification?
Which brings me to a fourth reason, which, living in Ohio, I’ve seen played out: Rural v. urban. The population centers of this country are still in the urban areas, which happen to be the areas that tend to vote Democratic and tend to have a lot of newly registered voters this year.
If Democratic urbanites were the sole deciding factor in elections, there wouldn’t have been any Republican presidents in the last 28 years. I would also suggest that the rural/urban dichotomy may be a little simplistic. Think big cities, suburbs, exurbs, mid-sized cities, small towns and rural areas. Will Gov. Palin play well in Democratic cities? Probably not. In other areas she may be quite attractive to many voters.
Fifth, her message is one that encourages people to embrace fear of what is different from themselves.
I mostly agree with Brian O’Connell’s assessment on this point.
Sixth, Palin’s attachment to religion will be exceedingly troublesome to Independents. Her stance on creationism, praying in church that God can influence legislators to get them the oil deals they want and of course reproductive rights all send up red flags.
You seem to assume independents have a common stance on creationism, prayer, and “reproductive rights.” Aren’t unaffiliated evangelical Christians and unaffiliated atheists “Independents?” Why would you believe that Gov. Palin’s religious views would necessarily be a problem to all of them? (I don’t share Gov. Palin’s views on creationism or prayer, but that doesn’t disqualify her for the vice presidency as far as I’m concerned.)
[I]f Gov Palin’s first name was Stanley, the GOP would be selecting a different nominee.
That sounds similar to me to comments Geraldine Ferraro made last March about the Democratic presidential nominee. Interesting.
My overall opinion of the choice of Gov. Palin: I think she connects with much/most of the Republican base, and I believe she’ll connect with many Americans who consider themselves ordinary people. I believe she strengthens the Republican ticket. Time will obviously tell.
Jill wrote: For one thing, as the poll that came out yesterday from EMILY’s List seems to support, there’s nothing in his ticket for moderates or Independents. His VP choice is right to far-right and he himself has been working to appeal in the [same] direction as well.
Because the EMILY’s List poll has been cited in two of Jill’s postings, I thought I’d add a relevant data point. According to the latest Rasmussen poll:
[Sarah] Palin is viewed favorably by 58% of American voters. [...] 37% hold an unfavorable view of the self-described hockey mom. [...]
Perhaps most stunning is the fact that Palin’s favorable ratings are now a point higher than either man at the top of the Presidential tickets this year. As of Friday morning, Obama and McCain are each viewed favorably by 57% of voters. Biden is viewed favorably by 48%.
I wouldn’t make too much of this one poll, but it does provide an interesting contrast to the findings of EMILY’s List.
[...] I wrote this almost a week ago and no one has asked me to apologize. Maybe my readers are smarter [...]
By now many of the “talking points” given to Sarah Palin by former Bush speech writers, taking advice from Karl Rove, have proven to be misleading if not downright false. The “Bridge to Nowhere” (supported it when running for governor, then when she saw the writing on the wall withdrew her support without so much as an apology to the city of Ketichan), selling the government jet on ebay (sold by a broker for $600,000 loss), firing her cook (reassigned her), starting a $40 billion natural gas pipeline (a member of her personal staff once lobbied for the Canadian firm that was awarded $500 million to work on the project); but the project has not started, may not ever start, and if it did would take at least 8 years to complete), fighting the Rebulicans in power (Ted Stevens supported her election…I guess she really let him have it),and spearheading ethics reform in Alaska government (the impetus came from minority democratic legislators before her election). If these things are inaccurate, how much faith can we have that the rest of what she is saying is true?
In rhetoric typical of political candidates that lack their own issues, she tried to distort Obama’s stances on taxes. I challenge you to find a reference to when he’s said he would raise taxes for anyone other than the richest 2 to 5% of the population that had received the biggest tax break under Bush.
As mayor, she had a full-time city manager that did most of the work, thereby significantly reducing her responsibilities.
She is clearly in favor of earmarks; who can blame her for following the path of most of our elected officials. But this doesn’t fit well with McCain’s position on the subject. I guess he was willing to waive that point as long as she could drum up some excitement in his lackluster campaign.
Her religious beliefs, stemming from association with an extremest non-denominational church, are not just different, they are downright scary. As Commander-in-Chief, you could expect her to turn strategy meetings into prayer meetings, as she seeks God’s will (I have no reason to believe she has a unique, clear line of communication with the Almighty). She believes gays can be made straight through prayer; in other words, people are gay because they don’t pray enough. She encourages people to pray for the natural gas pipeline…yeah, the one she claims is already underway. She believes in banning books that are offensive to her (and was willing to fire the librarian who stood in the way of Sarah Barracuda). She opposes abortion, even in rape and incest cases (she also supported a move in Wasilla to have rape victims pay for their own rape kits; I guess only people with extra money to spare get raped in Wasilla).
Her environmental responsibility stops when it interferes with profit. She opposes the protection of polar bears, baluga whales and salmon; she supports drilling oil in one of our greatest natural reserves. She denies that global warming has anything to do with people. Drill, baby, drill (using money from a profit windfall tax on big oil companies, the people of Alaska were awared $1,200 each; drill more oil wells and the people of Alaska could earn even more…no wonder her approval rating in Alaska is at 80%)!
She was able to cut millions from the Alaskan budget because they had such a huge surplus on hand; not hard to cut out a few million if you’re not really using it anyway (try that when the budget is tight, like it is in most other states).
She lacks experience: with federal issues (she didn’t even know what a VP does, suggesting the job was meaningless),and she hopes the war in Iraq is following God’s will. Obama far outshines her in this area. And, running his campaign has proven his executive skills far better than anything she could do as either mayor of tiny Wasilla or as Governor of a state in which about 70% is controlled by the federal government.
My biggest concern is that our voters are too lazy to think for themselves. If Bill O’Reilly or Rush Limbaugh or Hannity or Guiliani or Thompson or Palin or McCain say it’s so, it must be so…no need to think any more about it. People have fallen all over themselves over a woman who has virtually nothing to offer our country in such an important position…other than her ability to read a speech well…and perform in front of an audience. Shoot, if that’s all you need to do to be vice president, there are a number of people out making those inspirational speeches who could be making diplomatic decisions for our country.
I truly believe McCain chose Palin, not because she would make a good VP, but because she would make a good running-mate. It was a strategic decision, and not a decision that is in the best interest of the country. After all, if she ever has to step into the president’s role, he wouldn’t really care…he’d be dead. What a hero.
“After all, if she ever has to step into the president’s role, he wouldn’t really care…he’d be dead. What a hero.”
Such cynicism is killing this country.
“Such cynicism is killing this country.”
I assume you have data to prove that point. Or is it just an observation. If so, it is no more or less valid than mine. Seems to me this kind of mudslinging, political propoganda has been a part of our country for well over a 100 years, suggesting that it is not killing this country, but a part of it’s make-up.
What’s the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull? You can spay a pit bull.
I Love it lets get some true pit bull temerment and loyalty in the white house.