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.
Showing posts with label Geraldine Ferraro. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Geraldine Ferraro. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Monday, November 17, 2008
Sarah Palin - Sexism and Politics - Why the Sudden Respect?
In September, when Sarah Palin was introduced to the nation as the Republican V.P. nominee, the press and the public entered into a love-hate relationship that transcended politics. She was hailed by conservatives, who had followed the Alaskan Governors’ career, as a stalwart conservative who was a breath of fresh air that the party desperately needed. She connected with “the people” at a personal level, a rarity for politicians. On the other hand, the press, and those in the Republican Party who would maintain the status quo, reviled her as less-than intelligent, a “bimbo” who was out-of-touch with mainstream values. The vitriolic reporting drove Palin to a level of celebrity status over night – from false allegations about her youngest child that made daily newspapers read like the worst tabloids. There was a never ending litany of complaints regarding her hair, her accent, her cloths, her religion, ad nausea – There were literally hundreds of negative “Sarah Palin - Google News Alerts” daily – up until November 5th.
One has to ask – What gives? From the San Francisco Chronicle’s Debra Saunder’s defense of Palin against anonymous campaign leaks to the Boston Globe’s Jeff Jacoby article on Palin’s Political Potential the mood has changed a bit post November 4. There continue to be articles and blogs from the left that recycle, the “Palin as Inept” theory - Democrat Susan Estrich, writing in the Hartford Currant, dissects the choice of Palin as a V.P. pick noting: “The fact that anyone could believe a candidate for vice president was capable of being that ignorant is enough. and going on to rehash the Couric interview. One cannot fail to see the difference between those articles written by journalists and those written by partisan commentators. The difference: Palin no longer represents a short-term threat to Obama, but to another, yet unnamed Democrat in the future.
Two other women, who had reached high in national politics, Geraldine Ferraro and Hillary Clinton, were subject to more intense scrutiny than their male counterparts, and scrutiny that had little to do with issues – rather the fact that they were women. Although, one would expect that a twenty-four year gap between vice-presidential and presidential candidates that just happened to be women, would have changed the rhetoric – it did not – in fact: “We’ve come a long way, baby”, should be “We’ve got a long way to go”. Clinton was treated to a review of her marriage, her pantsuits, her laugh and her cleavage; which was enough to drive conservatives to her defense, however, transparently sexist as the treatment Clinton received, nothing compared to the evisceration of Palin.
In this past contest, both Vice Presidential Candidates gave enough material to the press to be equally criticized, yet, Biden received a virtual pass. One might be inclined to believe that the pass given to Biden was partisan, however, examining article after article, it was clear that clothing, hair, children, and other feminine attributes took center stage – never the issues - sexism, plain and simple.
In retrospect, both Clinton and Plain although subject to unusual scathing from the press and from members of their own party, came through standing up and standing tall – taking the punches better than many of their male peers may have. It speaks volumes. Some may feel that the “glass ceiling” has become a “cement ceiling” – after all, what woman would want to go through what these two patriots have? One has to believe that both women have inspired, through their strength and ability to weather the “political storm”, others who will shortly follow in their footsteps. It is not that “our time has come”, rather it is that the notion that women are unable to grasp the brass ring, is no longer valid. Palin, who took the brunt of it, a working mother, a Governor, whose political future is now being trumpeted by those within her party as well as those in the press, has proven that women can aspire to and achieve anything. Love her or hate her, depending upon one’s political affiliation, she is owed a debt of gratitude from all women and parents who have daughters. Sexism was used to distract the general public for political gain. It was evident, and women have taken note. Will sexism be used again in politics and succeed? That question remains - hopefully, because of women like Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin, the nation will not have to wait another twenty four years before learning the answer.
One has to ask – What gives? From the San Francisco Chronicle’s Debra Saunder’s defense of Palin against anonymous campaign leaks to the Boston Globe’s Jeff Jacoby article on Palin’s Political Potential the mood has changed a bit post November 4. There continue to be articles and blogs from the left that recycle, the “Palin as Inept” theory - Democrat Susan Estrich, writing in the Hartford Currant, dissects the choice of Palin as a V.P. pick noting: “The fact that anyone could believe a candidate for vice president was capable of being that ignorant is enough. and going on to rehash the Couric interview. One cannot fail to see the difference between those articles written by journalists and those written by partisan commentators. The difference: Palin no longer represents a short-term threat to Obama, but to another, yet unnamed Democrat in the future.
Two other women, who had reached high in national politics, Geraldine Ferraro and Hillary Clinton, were subject to more intense scrutiny than their male counterparts, and scrutiny that had little to do with issues – rather the fact that they were women. Although, one would expect that a twenty-four year gap between vice-presidential and presidential candidates that just happened to be women, would have changed the rhetoric – it did not – in fact: “We’ve come a long way, baby”, should be “We’ve got a long way to go”. Clinton was treated to a review of her marriage, her pantsuits, her laugh and her cleavage; which was enough to drive conservatives to her defense, however, transparently sexist as the treatment Clinton received, nothing compared to the evisceration of Palin.
In this past contest, both Vice Presidential Candidates gave enough material to the press to be equally criticized, yet, Biden received a virtual pass. One might be inclined to believe that the pass given to Biden was partisan, however, examining article after article, it was clear that clothing, hair, children, and other feminine attributes took center stage – never the issues - sexism, plain and simple.
In retrospect, both Clinton and Plain although subject to unusual scathing from the press and from members of their own party, came through standing up and standing tall – taking the punches better than many of their male peers may have. It speaks volumes. Some may feel that the “glass ceiling” has become a “cement ceiling” – after all, what woman would want to go through what these two patriots have? One has to believe that both women have inspired, through their strength and ability to weather the “political storm”, others who will shortly follow in their footsteps. It is not that “our time has come”, rather it is that the notion that women are unable to grasp the brass ring, is no longer valid. Palin, who took the brunt of it, a working mother, a Governor, whose political future is now being trumpeted by those within her party as well as those in the press, has proven that women can aspire to and achieve anything. Love her or hate her, depending upon one’s political affiliation, she is owed a debt of gratitude from all women and parents who have daughters. Sexism was used to distract the general public for political gain. It was evident, and women have taken note. Will sexism be used again in politics and succeed? That question remains - hopefully, because of women like Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin, the nation will not have to wait another twenty four years before learning the answer.
Wednesday, October 01, 2008
Palin – The Opportunity to School The Press (1984-2008)
Had anyone watched the debates from Alaska and checked Palins overall approval rating in the state (which is based on performance, not a popularity contest) at 80%; one has to understand that she is a formidable opponent. Palin may not appeal to the majority of journalists and of course, NARAL (Pro-Abortion), rather to the average working woman with children, regardless of party, and the mighty Republican base. The problem that she has faced has been a reaction to her womanhood. Historically, there have been two women who have made it to the bottom of the ticket, Geraldine Ferraro and Sarah Palin and one woman who has undertaken the task of running as a Presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton – all three have come under the microscope and have faced a very sexist media. The phrase, “History repeats itself”, is apparent in the way the press and specific groups have gone after Palin; much in the same way they went after Ferraro in 1984. From the July 24, 1984 Pittsburgh Post Article ”Mondale is Planning to Keep Ferraro on a Short Leash” to attacks on family members ”FERRARO'S FATHER, IN '41, HAD LIQUOR LICENSE REVOKED” it is evident that a woman running in a traditional male bastion faces the task of getting past not only those who truly believe that a woman’s place is in the “home”, but also women who are more tied to a political party than any true sense of feminism – and continue to call themselves feminists – who attack a candidate based on issues ranging from family to personal choices made when putting themselves through college. Clinton suffered attacks from within her own party – stunningly from a media, specifically women commentators and journalists, who represent more ‘fluff’ in the industry than actual hard news. Male to female ratio in journalism is dismal, as it is in government. One would think that given the credentials of all three of these women, those who were capable of supporting them would not have taken cheap shots at everything from what they choose to wear to the occasional gaffe that all politicians make.
What remains to be seen is how the debate will play out tomorrow night. One has to understand that although Biden may have experience, his tone is rather boring and he is prone to gaffes, while Palin has a track record of being more formidable in the debate forum. Should she exceed expectations, which have become dismally low given the media’s constant drumbeat of “inadequate” the past three to four weeks, and impale Biden in this debate, the press will then face a daunting task and the attacks will become more vicious than to date. How important is the press in all of this? The more the press can keep the focus on Palin through attacks and “scandals’ yet to be created, the more they can keep the heat off their chosen candidate – Obama. Unlike Ferraro, both Clinton and Palin have been crucified in the press, not only because they are women (which does play a large factor), but more so because the press has an obvious agenda and that is to place their candidate in the White House. This perception of the press is what has killed rankings and driven subscriptions into the tank – the general public is suspicious of and generally scrutinizing each and every article and broadcast for hints of partisanship and sexism.
Palin has the base, McCain can count on those moderate conservatives as well as right-leaning independents and Clinton Democrats who are concerned with the overly Progressive tone of the party, while Obama has the dedicated Progressive Democrats and those independents that are looking for a change in party and would lean left in any case. This will bring the 2008 presidential race to the same conclusion as the 2004 race; where one must recall that polls were extremely kind to John Kerry, up to the exit polls that had most conservatives in the doldrums through the noon hour on Election Day, only to find that Bush had succeeded handily. The difference in 2008 is Palin; she will continue to draw on the working mom and most importantly the large Republican base, despite all the criticism from the press. A point she had made still is bandied about by those who the media targets: Palin did not get into this to please the press; she did it for the American People.
Addendum: Will Palin get a "fair shake" from the moderator? Gwenn Ifall, from PBS, (network funded and paid for by the taxpayer), will be releasing her new book on Inauguration Day - the Book, Pro-Obama. From past debates, Ms. Ifall has been obviously partisan towards the more Left leaning party. Gwen, most likely oblivious through arrogance and a sense of media self-import, should be true to style. Why not have Ophra moderate the debate - with intermissions featuring the Obama Children's Youth Choir (See Hitler) (Update: that particular YouTube video has suddenly been set to private, and all traces taken from public view). Fortunately, the average American has more common sense than most of these so-called "journalists" and pundits who are so blinded by the propaganda that they espouse, they can no longer see the forest through the trees. Suggest a double bag of popcorn for this debate.
What remains to be seen is how the debate will play out tomorrow night. One has to understand that although Biden may have experience, his tone is rather boring and he is prone to gaffes, while Palin has a track record of being more formidable in the debate forum. Should she exceed expectations, which have become dismally low given the media’s constant drumbeat of “inadequate” the past three to four weeks, and impale Biden in this debate, the press will then face a daunting task and the attacks will become more vicious than to date. How important is the press in all of this? The more the press can keep the focus on Palin through attacks and “scandals’ yet to be created, the more they can keep the heat off their chosen candidate – Obama. Unlike Ferraro, both Clinton and Palin have been crucified in the press, not only because they are women (which does play a large factor), but more so because the press has an obvious agenda and that is to place their candidate in the White House. This perception of the press is what has killed rankings and driven subscriptions into the tank – the general public is suspicious of and generally scrutinizing each and every article and broadcast for hints of partisanship and sexism.
Palin has the base, McCain can count on those moderate conservatives as well as right-leaning independents and Clinton Democrats who are concerned with the overly Progressive tone of the party, while Obama has the dedicated Progressive Democrats and those independents that are looking for a change in party and would lean left in any case. This will bring the 2008 presidential race to the same conclusion as the 2004 race; where one must recall that polls were extremely kind to John Kerry, up to the exit polls that had most conservatives in the doldrums through the noon hour on Election Day, only to find that Bush had succeeded handily. The difference in 2008 is Palin; she will continue to draw on the working mom and most importantly the large Republican base, despite all the criticism from the press. A point she had made still is bandied about by those who the media targets: Palin did not get into this to please the press; she did it for the American People.
Addendum: Will Palin get a "fair shake" from the moderator? Gwenn Ifall, from PBS, (network funded and paid for by the taxpayer), will be releasing her new book on Inauguration Day - the Book, Pro-Obama. From past debates, Ms. Ifall has been obviously partisan towards the more Left leaning party. Gwen, most likely oblivious through arrogance and a sense of media self-import, should be true to style. Why not have Ophra moderate the debate - with intermissions featuring the Obama Children's Youth Choir (See Hitler) (Update: that particular YouTube video has suddenly been set to private, and all traces taken from public view). Fortunately, the average American has more common sense than most of these so-called "journalists" and pundits who are so blinded by the propaganda that they espouse, they can no longer see the forest through the trees. Suggest a double bag of popcorn for this debate.
Saturday, August 30, 2008
Sarah Palin – McCain Makes The Right Choice for Women and for the Nation
First, some facts: At 44, Sarah Palin is the first female governor of Alaska, and the second woman to be chosen to run on a major political party ticket as Vice-President. (The first and last woman to run on a major party ticket was Geraldine Ferraro in 1984.) As governor she passed major legislation to construct a gas pipeline and overhaul state ethics law. She is the Chair of Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission , a multi-state agency promoting conservation and efficient recovery of domestic oil and gas resources in an environmentally sound and safe manner. She serves as Chair of the National Governors Association Natural Resources Committee. She also chairs the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission – (regulates non-renewable resources).
Her public service began with the Wasilla, Alaska City Counsel, where she served two terms. She then went on to serve two terms as the mayor/manager (reduced property tax, increased services, insured a business friendly environment and drew new industry). Palin was also elected by her peers to serve as president of the Alaska Conference of Mayors. She has served one term as governor.
Born in Idaho, Palin has been a resident of the State of Alaska since 1964. She studied Communications-Journalism and Politics at the University of Idaho, and received a BS in Communications-Journalism in 1987. Married to Todd Palin, a production operator and member of the Steel Workers Union, Palin is also a mother of five: Track (enlisted in the US army – deployed Iraq), Bristol, Willow, Piper and Trig. Finally, Sarah Palin enjoys an 80% approval rating according to Hays Research as Governor of Alaska.
In her introduction to the nation, Palin indicated that she had fought “The Good Old Boy Network”, something that every woman over the age of 40 understands all too well. She came across as family oriented, yet strong in her convictions as a reformer of government. Critics were quick to jump to the conclusion that McCain chose Palin solely because she might appeal to those disenfranchised Clinton voters. Bunk.(Palin for VP blog) McCain first met Palin in February at National Governors Assn. meeting in Washington, and added her to a list of possible running mates because of her knowledge and work on energy issues. In reality, several women were mentioned in regards to the vice-presidential spot; however, this fact went largely ignored by the media. The focus was on Mitt Romney, Pawlenty and Ridge since June. It was assumed that McCain was not considering a woman – this by the same media who repeatedly ran sexist attacks on Hillary Clinton throughout her campaign. Now that same media is now expressing concern that McCain picked a woman, any woman to appeal to Clinton voters – go figure. It appears that McCain picked Palin because her ideology and accomplishements most closely align with his own.
Palin will appeal to women, but not all women. NOW has expressed dismay and outrage over the choice of Palin. Palin is pro-life, while NOW is pro-abortion. Those members of NOW equate feminism with one issue and one issue only: abortion. Feminists are not defined by one issue. The Obama campaign quickly jumped on the experience, or lack of experience, that Palin brings to the table. In reviewing her resume, Palin has served the People longer than Barrack Obama, granted in different capacities: she governed, he voted “present”. The biggest question is will she appeal to independent voters? Given the disgust for business as usual politics in Washington (Congress continues to enjoy dismally low poll numbers under the Pelosi/Reid watch), the antipathy towards the sway held over our government by special interests groups such as NOW, the out-of-control spending and pork laid out by members of both political parties - Palin may just fit that bill quite neatly.
She is perfect because she has governed, she understands the needs of the people over the needs of a political party, she has fought successfully against special interests, her own party and has refused to accept Washington pork (our taxes wasted on often frivolous and unnecessary projects) and yes, she is a woman. Is she ready to lead? Is Obama ready to lead? The question becomes rather moot when the top of the DNC ticket has less experience than the bottom of the GOP ticket.
Her public service began with the Wasilla, Alaska City Counsel, where she served two terms. She then went on to serve two terms as the mayor/manager (reduced property tax, increased services, insured a business friendly environment and drew new industry). Palin was also elected by her peers to serve as president of the Alaska Conference of Mayors. She has served one term as governor.
Born in Idaho, Palin has been a resident of the State of Alaska since 1964. She studied Communications-Journalism and Politics at the University of Idaho, and received a BS in Communications-Journalism in 1987. Married to Todd Palin, a production operator and member of the Steel Workers Union, Palin is also a mother of five: Track (enlisted in the US army – deployed Iraq), Bristol, Willow, Piper and Trig. Finally, Sarah Palin enjoys an 80% approval rating according to Hays Research as Governor of Alaska.
In her introduction to the nation, Palin indicated that she had fought “The Good Old Boy Network”, something that every woman over the age of 40 understands all too well. She came across as family oriented, yet strong in her convictions as a reformer of government. Critics were quick to jump to the conclusion that McCain chose Palin solely because she might appeal to those disenfranchised Clinton voters. Bunk.(Palin for VP blog) McCain first met Palin in February at National Governors Assn. meeting in Washington, and added her to a list of possible running mates because of her knowledge and work on energy issues. In reality, several women were mentioned in regards to the vice-presidential spot; however, this fact went largely ignored by the media. The focus was on Mitt Romney, Pawlenty and Ridge since June. It was assumed that McCain was not considering a woman – this by the same media who repeatedly ran sexist attacks on Hillary Clinton throughout her campaign. Now that same media is now expressing concern that McCain picked a woman, any woman to appeal to Clinton voters – go figure. It appears that McCain picked Palin because her ideology and accomplishements most closely align with his own.
Palin will appeal to women, but not all women. NOW has expressed dismay and outrage over the choice of Palin. Palin is pro-life, while NOW is pro-abortion. Those members of NOW equate feminism with one issue and one issue only: abortion. Feminists are not defined by one issue. The Obama campaign quickly jumped on the experience, or lack of experience, that Palin brings to the table. In reviewing her resume, Palin has served the People longer than Barrack Obama, granted in different capacities: she governed, he voted “present”. The biggest question is will she appeal to independent voters? Given the disgust for business as usual politics in Washington (Congress continues to enjoy dismally low poll numbers under the Pelosi/Reid watch), the antipathy towards the sway held over our government by special interests groups such as NOW, the out-of-control spending and pork laid out by members of both political parties - Palin may just fit that bill quite neatly.
She is perfect because she has governed, she understands the needs of the people over the needs of a political party, she has fought successfully against special interests, her own party and has refused to accept Washington pork (our taxes wasted on often frivolous and unnecessary projects) and yes, she is a woman. Is she ready to lead? Is Obama ready to lead? The question becomes rather moot when the top of the DNC ticket has less experience than the bottom of the GOP ticket.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
