I’m all for being cynical and skeptical, but the trumping up and clutching of some of these ideas.

Ok – I need to stop. Now see what you did by commenting! You got me all worked up again!

Bet it wouldn’t suprise anyone to know that the conference idea I’ve been submitting to whomever will take is a session on language and labels.

… yeah, that doesn’t need a comment, it just stands on its own.

I read in what you write the suggestion that women who didn’t vote for Palin need to take a guilt trip over not voting for her because, as you say and I agree, women frequently don’t treat other women well.

But that takes it too far for me.

If you’re not suggesting a guilt trip when you write this paragraph, then I apologize for the wrong interpretation – but would be interested to know, then, what you wanted the reader to come away with after reading it:

“I am realistic enough to know that the only reason there are not more women in power, from both parties, is because we as women have failed them. Considering how we treat our own, it’s not surprising.”

I think this an oversimplification and not accurate: “the only reason there are not more women in power, from both parties, is because we as women have failed them.”

Palin was not responsible for the rape kit issue, despite some attempting to make that an issue. It was something that other cities and states have had to deal with and some still were until recently.

Women should support other women, it’s the main reason why there are not more women in office and some celebrate a mere 1% increase in DC. We don’t support our gender. The whole concept of women supporting women is what organizations like “She should run” are about, or at least what they were supposed to be about.

You can be a feminist and not support abortion, despite those that claim it is not so, it is. Groups like the New Agenda have been created for this specific purpose, to focus on how to improve the lives of women and their political impact/power while not allowing the issue of abortion which has been used to divide women for years to become an issue.

Some women did see that even a conservative like Palin would break the glass ceiling and make it easier for other women. It’s pure hypocrisy to not accept the fact that for some race was their primary motivation in supporting the presidency of Barack Obama but to ignore the fact that some women out there viewed gender the same as others did race.

Ironically some of the very same women who fought for us to have the right to vote, did not support abortion…While some would like to forget that historical tidbit it shows those of us who look at the real long term goals of having an equal representation of our gender in elected office that reflects the diversity of all women not just liberal pro-abortion women benefits us all.

It’s why I have pushed for all women to blog, not just liberal women or those who share my beliefs. It’s why I support all women who want to seek office, it does not necessarily mean that they will automatically get my vote, but I’d much rather have more women in office, no matter their party affiliation.

We as women have the opportunity to move forward or we can continue to allow and assist men to hold us to a different standard, to bash our gender as a whole and to continue to tell us to be good little girls and wait our turn. We can continue to allow abortion to be used as the dividing issue, and we can pretend that our party is better when it comes to women’s issues. We can as women write we “abhor” another woman not because she is some evil monster but because she has a different political ideology, one that a good portion of this nation also holds, which I guess suggests they should all be “abhorred” as well. We can continue pretend that we for some reason are better than “those women” and we are the only ones worthy of being elected.

As you can guess, I’m opting to be one of those who wants to move forward. I am realistic enough to know that the only reason there are not more women in power, from both parties, is because we as women have failed them. Considering how we treat our own, it’s not surprising.

1. Palin first defines her own form of conservatism as “not believing that government is the answer to all of our problems and challenges”.

2. She then says that “my position on abortion is —” … and trails off, talking about common ground instead of actually saying what her position on abortion is. Fortunately we all know that her position on abortion is that it should be illegal, all the time for everyone, including in cases of rape and incest.
That’s a clear case of government intervention in what would otherwise be a private matter. The opposite of her stated conviction that “individuals and our families, [...] can make better decisions than [...] big government”.

The synthesis of these apparently antithetical views can be found buried in the first statement: “not believing that government is the answer to all of our problems and challenges”. When she says “all”, she’s defining conservatism very broadly. In fact, anything other than absolute totalitarianism fits the definition above. Everyone agrees that government should not do it “all”. The question is which things we want government to do. Palin believes stopping abortion is inside the role of government, but that health care is not. She believes that funding the gathering of evidence of property crime is inside the role, but funding the gathering of evidence of rape is not.

These substantive policy differences are why many people abhor her; and so they are the topics she must at all costs avoid.