Scofflaw Governor, Part Deux

Why has it been 24 years since any major party chose a woman VP candidate? The so-called "liberal" Democratic party has done an extremely poor job of grooming, mentoring, and promoting its women politicians, so it really can't pat itself on the back for "breaking a glass ceiling" with a singular, 24-year old example.

I don't like Palin or her politics, but surely you can't blame her for leaping at the opportunity to run for VP. Any man in her situation would have, and I'd bet he'd be praised for his ambition.

but don't mix it up with comments about her sex, or her age for that matter.

I was responding to your derision, Sarah, that Palin is "nothing less than a feminist," and mocking her for being just recently graduated from high school when Ferraro was a VP candidate. (How can Palin be criticized for that?)

Stick to her record as governor and don't get wrapped up in conversations about her sex. Because there is no question but that she is an important person in women's history because she is the first Republican VP nominee.

Don't make me put on the cape, please, please, please....

She defines "McGuffin.

Can we stop beating ourselves up over her? She's a non-issue.

Oh, I agree with Bringiton. Please, Please don't go!!!!

-----------------------------

Around these parts we call cucumber slices circle bites

(besides tweaking the Democrats' nose on Clinton) was, to me, that they intend to win and Palin would be the first female VP.

Don't all the candidates have themselves introduced as 'The next president/vice-president of the United States!' in every appearance they make? I know I've seen Obama do it, as well as every candidate I can remember. That's what I thought she meant, and while others may disagree, my reading isn't an unreasonable one.

Speaking of PB2.0, this kind of gotcha game to make a point -- sniping at Palin because she made a mistake of history which she didn't actually make (she mentioned Ferraro, plus she can claim first Republican female nomination), and then mocking her for claiming to be a feminist, when she didn't make that claim at all, is just silliness.

The trooper stuff is probably a loser, if for no other reason than the brother-in-law sounds like a jerk, plus the Republicans won the first impression game. As Paul said the other day, they're also winning the 'media is against us' riff -- that, combined with what seems to have been a fairly favorable reaction to Palin's speech means people are going to read about a couple of emails Palin sent about her (kid-tasering, drunk on the job, wife-abusing)* bil through their Palin-favorable filters and think, piffle.

The family/scandal stuff is a loser, imo, but if we're going to keep on it, let's clarify what the discussion is: are we talking about strategy (of either side) and its bff public perception, the facts, what it means in relation to readiness to be VP, or ethics/morality?

* all truthiness, but sufficiently in circulation to make the argument a loser nonetheless.

In all honestly, Valhalla, she may not have explicitly said she was a feminist there, but she's certainly a proud member of Feminists for Life. I'd have to spend another 24 hours on the Google to back it up, but I'm pretty sure I've read that she has called herself a feminist once or twice explicitly in the past.

and concentrate on the McCain.

-----------------------------

Around these parts we call cucumber slices circle bites

Treating Palin like some peter-principled doofus whose non-seriousness is evidenced in part by her sex is a big mistake. (Witness today's Gallup and Rasmussen dailies.) Getting angry about the Republicans seizing the moment and having an attractive, manageable candidate for VP is beside the point. Being annoyed because the Republican party is better at defending their candidates on feminist grounds than the Democratic party? I'm right there with you, but that's the Democratic Party's fault, not the Republicans' fault.

The Dems shoved Ferraro down the Memory Hole themselves, when she said things that weren't part of the Scripted Narrative about Obama. Palin is perfectly right to point to her place in American history and women's history--and the fact that she can, and that it can be used to highlight Democratic failures, is the Democratic Party's own fault.

I was commenting on this particular gotcha, in which I don't think Palin was claiming feminism.

Personally, my guess is that Palin's FFL membership (which, as far as we know if just sending money once a year, or whatever the membership requirements are) is a politically-based way to separate herself from other anti-abortion groups -- one thing Palin is not, and probably does not want herself confused with, is rich Republican women with pearls and charity tea-parties tut tutting over starving (and heathen) children in Africa but never actually risking their manicures to get down and dirty with the hoi polloi.

So while it wouldn't surprise me if you're right, Palin has referenced herself as a feminist, it's not (as far as I can tell) any prominent mainstay of her politcal persona. You're right; factfinding on Palin now is a nightmare, with all the haka from both sides pouring onto the internet. I would not want you to have to go fishing in those crazy waters.

But if she has claimed to be a feminist in the past, then what does that give us? An opportunity to zing her on hypocrisy? Or even less, an opportunity to zing her on what would be hypocrisy if her premises were the same as ours (can't be a feminist if you're anti-abortion), which they're not?

It's the zinging/gotcha games I'm arguing against. I'm much more interested in discussing whether Palin could be considered a feminist, or, if not, whether she'd help or damage women's equality, regardless what she says she is. That is, instead of trying to track down any implication of hypocrisy we can find so we can trumpet that and blowing the feminist dogwhistle.

Btw, I'm not saying that you were arguing for feminist dogwhistles; just that I'm arguing against them.

I wildly, enthusiastically support you on that.

Dunno whether I'm all that interested in discussion of Palin's actual feminist creds, though, since that argument always bogs down in the abortion issue and it seems to be impossible to put that aside and talk about the rest of the package.

Is she good for women? Personally, I'd say unequivocally yes. There's some saying out there I can't call up to the effect that you haven't achieved full equality until it's possible for bad candidates to end up on top as well as good.

I think Obama is a bad candidate, but there can't be the slightest sliver of a doubt that his winning the nomination, or the presidency, is fantastically good for racial equality, even if he wins and turns out to be a rotten president. The seeds of aspiration and expectation and assumption have been sown in children's minds no matter what happens from now on.

Inputting Palin + Feminist into Google just now turned up over 500,000 hits, and it'll probably be over a million by the end of the week. Times like this, the "information superhighway" actually impedes the acquisition of information. Sigh.

Why has it taken 24 years to get here again? Other Republican women would have been just like picking a Romney or the Huckster or worse. Where are the Republican women from? Would they make a difference this year? Palin represents a newness, a game breaker this year. She is unlike many Republican women in politics. She does represent the future. And many more women will now get more involved for her presence. Should she win this year and I think that is entirely possible. This will break that glass completely.

Look, all those fears about her conservatism are just fears. Democrats will have majorities in both houses of Congress for the next four years. Divided government will keep the checks and balances going. SCOTUS, there is a Democratic majority, how will another Justice Thomas get through?

Back in 2001, Senator Kennedy got together with President Bush to get NCLB passed. He said that he had waited since the 70's to get another at bat at this issue. He had pulled that education reform because it wasn't all he wanted. He thought that next year he'll get it done. That next year turned into 2001. How remarkable, how long for another at bat at this? We have a chance to get this done now. Do you really want to let this go by and wait till "next year"? Next Time?

Please get past all this noise if you can? She will make a good advocate for women.

Wasn't Obama going to vote for Roberts before his aid told him of the repercussions? I was using the Justice with the closest confirmation vote of 52 to 48.

then there's this today:

As a Matter of Faith, Biden Says Life Begins at Conception

By KATE PHILLIPS
Published: September 7, 2008

WASHINGTON — Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., the Democratic nominee for vice president, departed Sunday from party doctrine on abortion rights, declaring that as a Catholic, he believes life begins at conception.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/08/us/pol...

Interesting isn't it? How was he vetted?

Hey folks, the MSM is tasking terrorist reporters to look into Palin.

http://counterterrorismblog.org/2008/09/...

"A number of veteran reporters in the mainstream media have broken important stories using sources and methods that the intelligence community could not or chose not to exploit."

Desperate????????

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/el...

Look at the likely voters numbers

Larry has been so wrong a lot of the times.

Sure, but don't most national polls begin to register with individual states, sway opinion?

RCP average-- http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/...

This was one weak-assed post. Not strapping in the baby, by itself, could have been something to talk about, but all of the extra shit was just terrible.