Women in politics
September 3, 2008 by kellys
Filed under family, news, odds and ends
Let me say at the outset of this post that my intention is not to be political as much as it is to vent! I am appalled at the coverage Sara Palin has received in the last few days. Why should her daughter get dragged in the mud? Why can’t they just attack her political views and leave her family out of it. You don’t see reporters going into the schools that Obama’s kids attend to find out if they are having trouble in their schools or give grief to Chelsea Clinton?!?!?!?! Even Obama says that family and children are off limits politically.
I want a REAL conversation on political issues. Stop trying to find some dirt to fling as to whether she can raise her family and be the vice president. I don’t remember hearing anyone question if Hilary Clinton or Geraldine Ferraro could be effective. Can someone tell me the difference? It seems like the press is lynching her. I thought the media WANTED a woman in the white house? Why does it matter what party she belongs to?
So now we are to believe that a woman can’t work outside the home and travel AND raise a family? I don’t hear anyone questioning how effective of a grandmother Nancy Pelosi can be since she splits her time in DC. Somebody is going to have to explain this to me because I just see bitterness and not reality.
Sara Palin put her daughter at risk for this public scrutiny by accepting the VP nomination. It would have been foolish for her to think that this would not have happened. First of all, she is a strong advocate of abstains teaching when she has a daughter at home that proves that it does not work. That only adds fuel to the fire. I am not saying that the media is right, but Sara should have put her families interest ahead of her own political aspirations. I shutter to think that this woman has a chance of being the president. I also have to ask you, if the shoe were on the other foot and it was Obama’s daughter that was pregnant (say she was 16), you would throw stones, wouldn’t you?
I agree with Emily, that Ms. Palin knew she would be bringing this media attention onto her family when she agreed to join the ticket. I would also disagree with you that she is only getting this negative press about her family because she is a woman. I think Cheney went through all this and more when it came to light that he has a gay daughter.
All politicians (and I would daresay, especially Republicans) at this level of national government run for office with some sort of stand on family values. When people or events in their own immediate family do not align with the values they or their party claim, of course they will get attention from the media about it. As they should.
I don’t think it’s fair to make it personal, but if the president could be making decisions about the legality of gay marriage in this country, knowing that his VP has a gay daughter makes us informed voters. The same goes for the issue of abortion and a VP with a pregnant teenager.
I do not feel that her daughter’s pregnancy means that Sara Palin is a bad mother, or that she will be a bad VP. And my thoughts on whether or not she can work and travel and raise a family will not affect how I vote in November. I feel that it’s fair that the press informs us of things in the personal and family lives of candidates that may indicate how they would stand on the issues. But beyond that, I do wish they would leave this poor girl alone. Life has got to be difficult enough as a pregnant teenager, an it’s not her fault her mother is in a position to get this much national press.
I’m curious to know if having a pregnant teen proves that teaching abstinence doesn’t work, does that mean that pregnant teens who learn about birth control in school prove that those classes are worthless?
I saw a group of women rip John Edwards to ribbons over his infidelity and laugh that they knew it was ironic since they supported Clinton in spite of his own issues in that area. These same women who are champions of the working woman, women in politics, and have never so much as uttered a shocked sigh at a pregnant teen…..suddenly they feel that Sarah Palin should be at home with her kids and she is being irresponsible to think that she can both parent and hold down a job. As for her pregnant daughter you’d think it was the first time anyone heard of a teen being pregnant. I guess hypocrasy is alive and well.
I believe that there is a lot actual political conversation occurring about Palin… and that her 17-year-old daughter is pregnant is relevant.
Were she a working mother with a pregnant child that is one thing…However, as a person in a powerful position who is able to implement policies that have very real impacts on thousands of peoples lives, I’d like to know if her beliefs are not only founded, but effective. Judging from the pictures of her daughter drinking copious amounts of alcohol and her current pregnancy, I’d have to say, notsomuch. And as Emily and Becca point out – other politicians have been put through the ringer as well. Not to be cold, but this is the Major League, you should know what you will be up against or you shouldn’t be in the game.
As to her being a working mother, I am too, and I think that the questions of her effectiveness arises because we haven’t seen much of her husband, and he will need to be the primary care-giver for the children while she is in office. While she’s made choices that I wouldn’t (like going back to work only 3 days after having a baby, never mind that he’s a special needs baby) what really raises my eyebrows is the fact that her husband’s position puts him on the north face (as my Alaskan husband says) for four months at a time, and he’s out of the picture for other long stretches pursuing outside interests; with a busy, busy mom – who is raising the kids?
1. Chelsea took a lot of heat for a variety of things during Bill’s campaign. As an adult, she took heat for having a job at a tough to get a job at firm, for not campaigning for her mother, for campaigning for her mother… She hasn’t been immune. Not even close.
Not sure why Obama’s kids aren’t being scrutinized other than the fact that they are quite young, and Obama has asked repeatedly for the media to leave his family alone/out of it.
2. Palin’s qualifications (or lack there of), policy positions and track record in Alaska (what little of it there is) do not lend her to ANY comparison Hillary. Not even close.
Hillary– pro-choice, Palin– pro-life; Hillary– global warming, Palin– no global warming; drilling in Alaska; birth control; DC policy experience… nothing about these two is the same.
Assuming “the media” (or the people) wanted a woman, any woman, undermines the intelligence and progress American women have made through the years. Some might argue the right thing for feminists is any woman, but a woman who does not uphold feminist thought would undercut her base. (And yes, feminism can and does support SAHM, etc… it’s the woman’s choice with the exception of some extremist sub-cultures within feminism).
3. As for family, the difference b/w Hillary and Palin– Hillary’s child is grown. Palin’s children are at home, one of which is an infant with special needs. I am not saying it is right or that I agree, but you asked.
Hope that helps.
These are issues of policy. Palin’s voting record shows a great deal of hypocrisy on what she supports “politically” and what she is doing for her family. Thus far, she has used her political power for a great deal of personal gain — her sister and the state trooper issue; being against education for pregnant teens in schools; etc. Her political views show her to be a opportunist (whatever is best for her career at the moment.)
I am also shocked that the media would attack her as a mother. Where are all of those feminists that said women can work and have kids? Now all of a sudden Palin is a bad Mom, because her daughter is pregnant.
That is ridiculous! I also found it disgusting that people tried to say the youngest baby with Downs wasn’t even hers. How sick is that?
And what about Colmes who suggested she didn’t take care of herself prenatally and that’s why the baby has Downs. That is the most absurd thing I’ve ever heard! Clearly Colmes knows nothing about Downs.
No one EVER questions how a man will be a good DAD if he’s in office.
Sarah Palin is a Creationist. That’s all I need to know.
It is not that she was a bad mother for having a son with down syndrome, but the way she handled the pregnant. Before she was to give a major speech, she was leaking amniotic fluid. Instead of going to a hospital she gave the speech. When it was over, instead of going to a hospital, she flew all the way back to Alaska. This is when Ms. Palin already ~knew~ she was pregnant with a down syndrome child.
I’m sorry — I meant, handled the “pregnancy”.
I was a Clinton supporter and they lost my vote by adding Palin to the ticket. The only similarities between Ms. Palin and Ms. Clinton are that they are both female – that’s where it ends. I think we all want a woman in the white house if she is qualified and a good representative of our country. In my opinion, Ms. Palin is neither. Also, I don’t like her small-town, arrogant attitude. In international relations that doesn’t go over so well.
I believe we should put higher standards on people that lead our country and that the way these leaders handle family issues is indicative of how they lead our country. They represent all of us as Americans to the world. From a PR perspective, they need to be a positive representative of the country.
I do not think a mother who has 5 children, one of whom is special needs and the other is in crisis, who chooses to take on more work and expose her children’s problems to the media as she has is a good representative of our country and “American Family Values.” I am a mom of one special needs child so I understand what is involved in parenting these children. It requires a lot of attention.
Politics are personal and I think people can choose to form their voting decisions in whatever way works for them. When McCain added Palin to the ticket he lost my vote.
I agree that special needs children deserve extra time and attention. They need extra love and most of the time, extra medical expertise. But unless you have extenuating circumstances, like being a single mother, I don’t think both parent sshould stay home and be with the child 24/7. I do feel, however, that one parent needs to make the commitment that they will give the extra time needed. Who says it has to be Sarah? Why can’t her husband take that lead for a time?