Sarah Palin - On the New Media and Obligation to Tell The Truth

Sarah Palin, speaking at the "Right Online conference in Las Vegas", delivered yet another inspiration speech on the power of the press - or in reality - the Power of the New Press, as defined by Matt Drudge, Andrew Breitbart, and perhaps millions of bloggers, pointing out fact versus the fiction one most often sees or hears or reads in what has become known as "The Mainstream Media". If one has not had the opportunity, or dismissed taking the opportunity due to political prejudice, to listen to Palin deliver a speech, this is the time to take ten minutes and watch and listen to the woman who, although maligned by the likes of Couric and Company, is one of the wisest of politico's - and surprisingly non-partisan (for all the Rhetoric). The speech and introduction below are courtesy of Real Clear Politics, via "The Right Scoop". There are times in history, when one individual has the ability to affect many in a positive manner, and with Palin, that is exactly who she is - a warrior for the truth, a later day Boudica or Boudicca who is fearless in her delivery, passionate in her cause to see our nation move forward, and who is an inspiration to those who would help to effect change.

This is not about one of the two Dominant Political Parties, that have appeared to meld into one - rather about individual responsibility to keep them, and the "Mainstream Media" honest - in order for generations to understand that there is a struggle, and that the "Press" and the ability for the "Press" to exist as it does under our most venerable document - the Constitution - extends beyond the power houses of print and broadcast - to the kitchen table, the college dorm. She goes further, noting that we can, indeed, be organizers and in person effect change.

Powerful, determined, and stalwart in her love for the United States of American, Sarah Palin is one to be admired and perhaps one of our greatest American political forces.

Progressive Strategy – Demean Women in Politics to Distract from the Issues

One understands that politics are dirty, and that when one enters the political arena, be it a male or a female, they are subjecting themselves and often their family, to the proverbial microscope of the press. No matter how frivolous a charge or alleged “scandal” might be, and no matter the position sought, a “leak” of the most ridiculous sorts, suddenly becomes “national news”. That said, the disparity between the opposition attacks against women, regardless of party, is fairly prominent, and especially true this past week as the nation has less than 42 days to determine the shape of the 112th Congress, and incidentally immediately following, the candidates for the Presidential primaries for 2012.

One which stands out more than most is the embattled “Tea Party” Candidate Christine O’Donnell, of Delaware. O’Donnell: If one Googles' O’Donnell is the search engines News feature, they will find thousands of articles regarding a videotape of Ms. O’Donnell as a teen, making a silly comment about being involved with Wicca (witchcraft). Of course, Mr. Maher, the HBO talk show host, who if one reviews his past videos will find remarks made by the host that would elevate Ms. O’Donnell sainthood.

For example the video below shows a younger Maher, comparing dogs to “retarded children”. This is the same man who is taken seriously when dismissing a Senate candidate for a comment made while a teen. That said, the media jumped on this nonsense and moved it to the spotlight, which certainly distracts from the issues at hand that affect voters in Delaware. Ms. O’Donnell’s opponent on the other hand, is an avowed Marxist and believes in increasing the size of the U.S. government Of course, nothing to concern Delaware voters about Mr. Coons, also dubbed Harry Reid’s Pet must, according to press logic, be the better candidate.



Aside from the ridiculous, serious charges have been leveled against Ms. O’Donnell, specifically regarding a lean placed upon her by the IRS, which is running in an ad throughout Delaware, what the ad fails to mention (given that it is a DNC ad), Ms. O’Donnell received an apology from the IRS for their mistake. In fact, for every spurious accusations against the woman, she has asked and answered with full documentation (the actual documents) on her website here at Chrstine2010.com. Meanwhile, nothing is being asked and answered by either candidate about issues. But, as a woman, the “witch” tag is sticking and the word “teen” has made its début.

Although one could argue it is partisan politics (dirty, agreed), it is an attack on O’Donnell personally and as a woman. (Bill Maher remarks in his video with a then high school age O’Donnell “what’s with the 90’s hair?”.

Speaking of hairstyles: Hillary Clinton, the woman who should have been President (opinion with a basis in fact (i.e. popular vote in primary dismissed by super-delegates in favor of the brilliant Obama who has failed to show his brilliance) is to this day, under the fashion microscope, this time, her faux pax is a hairstyle. How silly. Yet, in some ways, not at all, as it is the beginning of firing “salvos” should the former New York Senator decide to run against this particular sitting president as rumors suggest. This article by the New York Daily News, goes into detail on Clinton’s “new hairdo” for a UN meeting. Apparently, Clinton had worn a banana clip of sorts, looking as if she had more to worry about, and chose a “banana clip” to get the hair up and away from her face. Herein lies the crux – perhaps Ms. Clinton’s hairstyle is big news to those who hit the salon on a daily basis, but for those of us who work for a living, it looks familiar, and comfortable, and lastly “normal”. The end result, in trying to dismiss Clinton via hair, or what she wore on a particular day, etc., is that she becomes more human to the rest of nation that might find themselves in that same pantsuit situation.

One can, however, bet the house that should John Kerry assume the role as Secretary of State, (rumored to be replacing Clinton as she seeks a way out), then the press will undoubtedly not fixate on the type of tie he wore on a particular day, or the cut of a suit.

Finally, Sarah Palin, who has been criticized on wardrobe, and more, continues to be a target, as she has taken a prominent place in politics and is possibly one of the 2012 candidates for President. One can anticipate the attacks on Palin to be "ramped u a bit" and, should Clinton join her from the opposite side of the aisle, attacks on her as well, not on the issues but on what both women wore, their makeup, their hairstyles, ad nauseum.

This is nothing new in the political arena, when women attempt to cross over into a predominately male “club”. The first woman to break the political glass ceiling (Vice President, not President), Geraldine Ferraro, was also treated with the same hair brush, discussions regarding her were national news.

That was in 1984. A mere 26 years ago, which is current in the scheme of women in politics.

Two stunning Women and politics facts:
1920 - Given the right to vote – last “group” to be given that right.
Ongoing - Categorized as a minority (seriously women and minorities)

Observations:

Are considered to have broken the glass ceiling by merely being a, candidate

Progressives for all their “solidarity” are as sexist as a men’s only club.

However, there are more women candidates for state and federal offices in 2010 than in previous years, specifically in the GOP. Philosophically, (Feminism) and legally (EEO) regardless of party or politics, women should be treated no differently than their male counterparts when applying for the same position, be it in the private sector or the public sector. It is far past time, for there to be two qualified candidates for the nations highest office, and should those candidates be women , then all the better. As the press would be forced to speak on issues, rather than what dress one wore, or what hairstyle the other chose for a particular meeting.

The Non-Feud (Palin vs. Letterman) Sarah Palin Shows Class while Letterman Wallows in Abject Self-Importance

Sarah Palin - Conservative Feminist - photo harpymarx

David Letterman, CBS’s early late evening talk/variety show host, made the tactical mistake of taking an “alleged” joke too far early this week. Mr. Letterman makes no excuses nor hides the fact that he follows the Progressive Left ideology – one need only try and watch the show for 10 minutes and it is glaringly apparent that Mr. Letterman feels he is an “elitist”, one who, through “comedy”, reaches the masses in order to educate them regarding the good “Democrats” versus and one remotely “Conservative”. In this instance, Mr. Letterman attacked the favorite target of the left, Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin, early remarks clearly went towards the woman’s appearance, and Letterman suggested that she looked more the prostitute. He did not stop there, however, he went on to insinuate that her youngest daughter (14 years old), was sleeping with a 34 year old celebrity baseball player. No matter now one slices it, there was no way to consider the remarks made to be humorous in the least, but, it is the norm for those on the Progressive side to step down into the trenches from their lofty elite positions in order to offer up base opinions on those with whom they politically disagree – and that apparently extends to family members.

Letterman with Obama - Ideology Trumps Civility -photo Swamp Blog

Conservative Groups and those News Outlets that had any sense of decency, reported on the incident with justified outrage. The Palins reacted with little more than a statement of “disgust” that anyone in the public eye would think that it was fine and dandy to make such remarks.

Following the hailstorm of criticism from conservatives (who, one must remind Mr. Letterman are at the least 50% of the population and growing), he issued a semi-apology on his program. That was the subject of many a pundit last evening over on the Fox News Channel.

What one finds most interesting is according to ABC news Mr. Letterman, would like to have the Governor appear on his show. Obviously Letterman is aware that the opposition over at NBS has seen a sudden rise in ratings since he uttered those obscenities, and the need to pump the ratings is immediate. However, Sarah Palin, one of the most astute women in government today, understood the motivation and declined – nothing that she would prefer, given the circumstances, not to aid Mr. Letterman’s ratings. Therefore, there will be no Trump-Rosie feud for Letterman.

The real question surfaces – how important are these “entertainers” anyhow? In the grand scheme of things, what can Brad Pitt, or George Clooney, or Rosie O’Donnell, or name a celebrity, do to have an impact on the general public (other than to throw money at the Democrat National Committee and any candidate they put forth)? One would hazard to guess, that in reality, only those who are in that 30 percentile of “committed” leftist that actually might vote in this country may take someone like a Moore, or Clooney or even Letterman, seriously. The rest are smart enough to realize that they are merely actors or radio talk show hosts (this goes to the right as well), who have less education (formal) than the average guy or gal, and although they have a right to an opinion – “Who cares?”.

David Letterman counts on comedy and guests to keep his ratings, as well as sponsors – should those independents and conservatives who tune in find him not-funny, they’ll tune out and go elsewhere (again see Conan’s rankings rising and he’s not particularly funny either – but one can bet the house, he won’t go where Letterman went).

Women, in particular, any woman with a feminist bone in her body, should not be tuning into Letterman, or for that matter, any program that pointedly insults or insinuates negative anti-feminist rhetoric towards any woman, regardless of party ideology – those women should understand that the stereotype applied to Governor Palin this week, will be applied to them, or their daughters, or granddaughters, should this trend go unanswered. It is unthinkable that those so-called “Feminist Organizations” such as NOW, haven’t stepped up to the plate, unless and until one examines the low membership numbers and finds that particular organization is growing more irrelevant by the day, as far as issues of concern for real women are concerned. Therefore, those real feminists (regardless of organization, if any) should send Letterman a message; whether by turning him off, writing him a letter, or as suggested by the bloggers over at Hillbuzz, contact every sponsor and let them know how a women feels about Mr. Letterman’s comments.
Hillbuzzhas a very specific list of sponsors, including Kellogg’s, and the blog includes a tutorial on writing letters to Corporate Executives.

In the final analysis of the entire brouhaha, Governor Palin will continue to attain new highs, as she fights for those in home State of Alaska, as well as conservative principals and humanitarian projects around the country, while the curmudgeon Mr. Letterman, will be confined to his late-night bubble, living for ratings and wallowing in self-importance. The media (those which are considered mainstream), would give Letterman a pass, considering their views of Governor Palin, which is the bigger hurdle the Governor faces. Have no doubts, she will, in time, prove to those sniggering in editorial rooms over Letterman’s base remarks, that she has more import and impact on the nation, than any late-night television entertainer – it will be the dwindling subscribers sand viewers that will have the final say.

Conservative Feminism – Is Palin Credited for Beginning a Movement?

A comment on this blogs Post, “Sarah Palin, Sexism and Politics Why the Sudden Respect”, questioned the emergence of Conservative Feminism as “newly found” and tied exclusively to Sarah Palin the G.O.P. Obviously, there has been an increased interest, judging from “Google Search” (1.9 Million searches for Conservative Feminism, 2.9 million searches Conservative Feminist) in the term since Palin came to the national stage, however, “conservative feminism is not defined by one woman’s candidacy or by one party. The blogger, Merge and Divide’s comments here are worth sharing. What follows is a rebuttal to those who would define a movement by one individual and/or one political party.

The idea of “conservative feminism” is not something that has risen out of the candidacy of Sarah Palin – “within the past few months” – Palin definitely played a role in bringing conservative feminism to light – given her high profile – that said; from a personal perspective, I have always been a feminist, I have not always been a conservative, and yet, when I found that my point of view towards social and economic issues changed to a more conservative point of view, I did not lose my basic feminist instincts – therefore, I was both – a conservative and a feminist. Conservative Feminism is not tied to any specific religion as is claimed by “Merge”. One cannot say that those that follow Christian, Judaic or Muslim doctrine, all religions that prohibit “abortion”, are less feminist for being religious. The problem many of the “old traditional feminists” have is that they are a one issue, and exclusive – focused on “reproductive rights” – (abortion) rather than the big picture. They would cast blame on man, rather than work with other feminists who do not share some of the same ideology, in order to push one political party over another. Conservative Feminists take a different approach – it is not exclusive, rather inclusive - understanding that although one may disagree on a certain issue, there are more than enough problems facing women as a group to necessitate working together towards a common goal.

The notion that Conservative think and GOP does not go hand in hand is something the national parties failed to understand. Liberals are not necessarily Democrat and conservatives are not necessarily Republican – to think that people are that easily pegged is naive to say the least. When Clinton ran up against sexisms stone wall – those that came to her defense were both liberal and conservative – something – the situation was so severe that even right-wing (and that is not to say conservative, but specifically right-wing) columnist began to take notice. Go figure.
The assertion that the “vast majority of attacks (on Palin) having nothing to do with sexism” is ludicrous. Those who had Google email alerts on Palin from July through present find articles that are still focused, not on the issues, or her perceived inabilities, rather – the wardrobe, the celebrity status, ad nauseum.

Now, as to the role of women in the GOP, it is fairly well documented that more positions of equal pay and equal status have been granted to women in that party than in the Democrat Party. Additionally, there had been slow progress made in employment (jobs that we’re traditionally held by men, given to women) in the 1970’s, during the 1980’s more women assumed these positions but still held the same “less than” status, during the 1990’s – nothing changed, with one exception, there was less emphasis on gaining ground and more on the status quo, which is where it has stood. It was gratifying to see the Conservative women coming to the GOP (and I am not referring to the ridiculous Pink Elephants – that was demeaning) during this campaign, from both parties. Some because their personal convictions were more in-line with the Party and others because they felt their party had abandoned women, yet again. Try and find bills regarding women’s issues proposed by either party over since 1999 in the Senate and you will find little from either party.

On Palin and 2012 – No one has any idea of who will run in 2012 – Palin has a fan base within the Republican Party – to be sure, but one can almost bet the house that there won’t be a woman on the top or bottom of either ticket in 2012. Palin will work for conservatives and for her State. However, no-one knows if she will emerge as a candidate in 12, or if another woman, from either party, will decide to run, including Hillary Clinton.

Shelly Mandel, NOW CA - Endorses: Palin

Shelly Mandel, the head of the LA Chapter of NOW has endorsed Sarah Palin and John McCain. Mandel called Palin and Feminist as well as a supporter of women's rights (Something every Conservative Feminist would know)at a recent CA rally for McCain. There is reaction to this here: Democratic Underground and Here and IUSBVISION.

It is about time, that NOW members broke with NAREL and worked on feminist issues, instead of party issues. Shelly Mandel has it right, and perhaps her courageous move (she will take plenty of heat as shown by the KOS), will encourage more feminists to join the the ranks and actually elect a woman to the White House.

Video: Now Chief Endorses Palin