Rant - "the woman candidate"

[doc_strange]

Those of you expecting a rant against the Republicans on this score, you're about to be disappointed.  Nor is it praise for them. Nor anything about the Democrats.

Let's talk a little about Governor Palin.  Oh, wait, don't I mean "Sarah Palin?"  No, after all, we complained the press weren't calling Senator Clinton by her title while calling her opponents by theirs, as that's demeaning; but Palin, we're gonna never use her title?  Strike one.  You know who you are.  Shame, shame.  You can demean her by leaving off her office when you buck the party and fight your way to an office supervising over half a million people and over a half a million square miles.

If she were less comely, I suspect her actual history of 2 years in office might be in discussion rather than her looks.  Admittedly, of course that's not a long time in high office - but how about we actually, you know, discuss it?  Senator Obama is just as inexperienced and he's at the top of the ticket, and we HAVE discussed it.

Yesterday and today, I've read (all from people I took for social liberals) comments on her being a "bimbo," a "whore," a "walking uterus," "a token," and even some worse.  Very interesting.  Not a word on her actual 2 years as governor - for example, bucking the party on constitutional issues on the advice of the state attorney general, bucking party line by obeying court orders, renegotiating critical contracts with big oil, and opening up pipeline bids to international takers (Canadian company won), etc.  I guess I have to ask if her 2 years as a governor are too little, then why are Obama's as a Senator not?  Closet misogyny, that's why.   If McCain had picked Liberman, would we be talking about the token Jew, a Kike, a Himey?  Would Jindal be a token Indian (and he's really, really young), or called a "baby [ethnic slur here]"?

The obsession of looks->negatives is mostly coming from the general left, and maybe that's slanted because my friends' list is generally very left - but reading this outpouring of misogyny - and it is, you deniers, it is - I can only wonder if the left has more closet misogynists than the right.

During Senator Clinton's campaign, the media - even the left media - did some rather amazingly (closet) misogynistic things. They commented on her clothes and makeup as much as her speeches and positions. They made rude predictions on former President Clinton's role in the White House, and they questioned whether "having a woman in the White House" would affect our miltiary bearing. Rather a surprise for me how entrenched in the core of all US society misogyny is.

Senator Clinton complained about it, and, damned if she wasn't right.

And now we have it - worse, with real acid - for Governor Palin. Rather a disappointment for me, a disappointment in many of my friends.  It's like discovering many of them are closet anti-Semites who believe they aren't prejudiced.  "Hey, it's OK, I'd vote for a Jew candidate!"  Uh, huh.

Why not discuss her as a candidate, rather than by her looks, as a "bimbo" for the right, etc.?  Why is she not "the Republican Candidate"?

Remember the Saturday morning PSAs on prejudice? 

"Who's Senator Palin, Jimmy?"  "She's the Republican's woman candidate."  Uh, huh.

Noooo, that's not showing a prejudiced core. No, sure isn't. Uh, huh.

My friends list is being trimmed, permanently. I will not remain "friends" with people whose souls are full of acid but who think they are full of balm. Those of you full of acid and happy to admit it, please stick around.  You at least are honest, and sometimes a lot of fun.

Comments

[ilcylic.livejournal.com]

"Who's Senator Palin, Jimmy?" "She's the Republican's woman candidate." Uh, huh.

Governor.

Well, I have to cop to referring to her as "Sarah Palin", too, but I call all the candidates by their names, (titles are for feudalisms) and I've certainly being doing it with respect. But then, she's the person I hoped would get picked for the position for a couple months, now.

I'm full of acid, and perfectly willing to admit it, but not over Mrs. Palin. :D I wish she wasn't a twit about gay marriage (well, I wish she wasn't a twit about abortion too, but that one's way more entrenched as a GOP thing) but overall, I really like her. The bit about selling off the executive jet that her predecessor bought on credit, on Ebay, well, that just warms the cockles of my dank black soul.

I had an amusing exchange with R. last night, where I said I must be channelling her, because it was pissing me off all the people who are saying she just got the job 'cause she's a girl. As though she couldn't possibly have been picked for her merits.

[attutle.livejournal.com]

"As though she couldn't possibly have been picked for her merits."

I hadn't paid the slightest attention to who McCain might be looking at for a VP, and didn't have any clue who might be on the list, but when Obama selected Biden instead of Hillary, I was certain McCain would select a female VP.

It's entirely possible Palin is also the best candidate if you discount gender, but a multitude of statements from Clinton supporters earlier this year already made it obvious that discounting the gender issue would be premature. People aren't over that yet. They're fighting for justice, and it will be worth switching parties for some of them. There are people for whom the gender mix on the ticket is the most important issue, and it was obvious he wouldn't pass that up. Simple game theory, politics is ugly, and they go for the biggest bloc of votes wherever they think you can score them.

If we figure a roughly 50/50 split between Democrats and Republicans, and close enough to a 50/50 split between Obama and Clinton supporters, we have 25% of voters being disappointed Clinton supporters who have spent a year looking forward to having a female president. For some of them, that single issue has been the most important factor. McCain will gain votes based on this choice, the only question is how many. No other VP choice was likely to have this sort of impact.

We've already established that we're talking about established politicians and power-brokers. It's fanciful to think they might have overlooked this and selected someone based on non-gender merits alone.

[ilcylic.livejournal.com]

I'm not attempting to claim that it was entirely a non-factor. I'm haranguing the people I've heard claiming it's the only reason she was picked.

[docstrange.livejournal.com]

re: Senator - yeah, that came off wrong, as I was just being extra snide there spoofing those old prejudice commercials. I am perfectly happy to discuss all Gov. Palin's qualifications, disqualifications, positions, bad ideas, good ideas, etc. I am also happy most of the comments in here are to those effect.

Certainly her being a woman with executive experience played a role. I'm just stunned at all the lefties I know - and I'm pretty darned left socially - talking about her in the terms I put forth above. Those were actual quotes.

[unclevlad.livejournal.com]

Ok, I am a social liberal - no secret there - on most things. I have a problem with Governor Palin's position on certain issues that are important to me, including abortion, gay marriage and freedom of religious expression. I am still trying to look past a lot of the rhetoric being spewed to find her actual position and voting record on other key issues I feel are important.

All that being said, I am not happy with either the Republican or Democratic tickets. I think both VP choices involved way way too much pandering. No slight against either person selected, but nothing in politics can occur in a vacuum. Was her gender a consideration when Governor Palin was chosen? Probably. Was it the only consideration? I doubt it and certainly hope not.

[docstrange.livejournal.com]

I have zero - zero - problem ripping into her for her deeds and her positions on issues. I have major - major - problems with those self-professed liberal friends of mine who cannot resist throwing in a dig at her being a "walking uterus for the Republicans" or the like. I think it tells about a deep, dark well in those people.

[holzman.livejournal.com]

I'm also unimpressed with her creationism. Nor her suit against the federal government trying to delist polar bears as an endangered species.

I'd be more impressed with her as a reformer if she wasn't under investigation for pressuring state officials to fire her brother-in-law during his divorce from her sister.

I'm in Philly right now, which means I check my e-mail in a coffee shop, and they have the news running. I forget which channel was running, but I heard it from McCain's campaign itself, and I paraphrase, that the more he thought about it, the more he realized he should select "a woman." (The quote is direct.) Nor has she been exactly subtle about hoping that disaffected Clinton supporters would find her an acceptable pallative.

I've read plenty of Republicans chortling about how if Democrats criticize Gov. Pallin's inexperience it plays right into their hands regarding Obama, but I haven't seen many Democrats taking the bait. Rather, I've been seeing Democrats amused (and believe me, I am one of them) at how his choice of Gov. Pallin undermines his criticism of Obama.

On the other hand, she is on board with Obama's energy plan, so one could even make the case that she's actually more qualified than McCain.

References: (I'd hyperlink inline, but they're not sufficiently tagged for precision)

What is McCain Thinking? One Alskans Perspective
McCain's VP Choice under Ethics Investigation

[keyne.livejournal.com]

I don't think any serious analyst, Republican, Democratic, or otherwise, doubts she was chosen for her gender as well as her right-wing credentials (see Andrew Sullivan's blog for a number of reactions). McCain's only chances to win are to pick up some of Clinton's disaffected primary voters, and he believes he can attract both the PUMAs and the Christianists with a single pick. I think it was a good call on his part, and I hope he's wrong.

No, I don't feel that two years of experience governing a population smaller than Boston's — following on the heels of being a mayor of a town of six thousand — come anywhere close to Obama's years as a state legislator and then a senator dealing with foreign policy issues. Palin has said, in an interview this summer, that she doesn't even know what a vice president does. That's just sad.

Chalk most women's reactions to a female, right-wing, clearly underqualified candidate as misogyny if you like, but I think it's a difficult argument to defend (clear misogynist slurs — most of which come from men — excluded).

[docstrange.livejournal.com]

See, there you are criticizing her for her actual positions and statements. I may disagree on the value of her experience vs. Sen. Obama's, but let's be clear we're not arguing over their token aspects.

So, I think her old comments on the vice presidency were apt. If being offered the position by a McCain Presidency, she would need to know what it would entail. The powers of the VP, other than tie-breaking in the Senate, are defined by the presidency. There's not much more "there" there. The VP was once considered the graveyard of politics. It's only since fairly recent times that the position had any power.

As to the rest, Obama's experience is is something we'll disagree on; I'm very disappointed in his performance, having given him my vote twice before this campaign - he was for a time my state senator and US Senator. He never has been in a position to decide anything in government, and Emil Jones ran him on a fast track in the IL senate.

But this, my good friend, is a good argument.

[attutle.livejournal.com]

"No, after all, we complained the press weren't calling Senator Clinton by her title while calling her opponents by theirs, as that's demeaning; but Palin, we're gonna never use her title?"

Hilary's campaign should get some of the blame here as well. They decided to use 'Hilary' instead of 'Clinton', 'Senator Clinton', or anything else. This set the stage to refer to female candidates by first name.


"The obsession of looks->negatives is mostly coming from the general left, and maybe that's slanted because my friends' list is generally very left - but reading this outpouring of misogyny - and it is, you deniers, it is - I can only wonder if the left has more closet misogynists than the right."

Sounds like they're bitter. They've been out-played, and they know it.

Picking Biden instead of Hilary handed this advantage to McCain, and they're pissed because they understand it could cost them the election.

[docstrange.livejournal.com]

Hmm. A good point on the Clinton campaign having a hand in creating the "lack of title" scenario it later complained about. Is that a subtle buy-in to the predominant ethos/culture that would think it OK - nay good - to "humanize" a strong woman that way?

Of course, bitter is no excuse for dredging up one's personal swamp. I'd be freaking if the Clinton camp were calling Obama a token [slur] or Lieberman a kike. I think this is no better, bitterness is no more an excuse than drunkenness.

[rmjwell.livejournal.com]

I apologize for not referring to the Governor by her title.

[docstrange.livejournal.com]

And maybe apologize for dumping my name in your journal when it appears no where else on LJ? You're doing great in my book, sir.

[caladri.livejournal.com]

I tend to look at politics through a lens that removes qualification, considering mostly the pandering and FUD, since that's what seems to swing (at least) the polls, and moreover some elections. Certainly George W. Bush was vastly under-qualified the first time he was elected, for example. I think the McCain campaign shot themselves in the foot by choosing Palin, since she is roundabout the same ballpark of qualification and experience as Senator Obama, who the McCain campaign have often caused trouble at the polls by way of FUD about being inexperienced. With all voters a little shaky about McCain's age and health, phrases like "a heartbeat from the presidency" are bound to be thrown around about his VP pick with slightly more earnestness than normal. In this case, you have Governor Palin a heartbeat away, and that really takes away McCain's ability to call Obama out on experience grounds.

They've also made a point of drawing attention to Obama's appearance from time to time — that he's a good-looking, vapid celebrity. I think it's (politically) fair to throw that back in their face on Governor Palin, if one can say with a straight face that she's some sort of überpretty (I don't think I can, even by the low standards for politicians.) The way I see it, they had several possible VP picks who were almost identical to her but with more experience, and who were mostly more established politically. Governor Palin slightly sharpens McCain's maverick image, but her own anti-corruption story is as stained as his, if much shorter, so she at most only barely helps there.

I think it's cynical, but not misogynistic, to think, given all that, that one of the main reasons the McCain camp chose her was that they thought that she would win over the moderates, who they assume will decide the election in large part, who were going to vote for Sen. Clinton just because she was a woman. They've reduced the politics of the candidacy to that before, and I don't think it's unreasonable to do that, especially in light of the increased noise about people who wanted to support Clinton but wouldn't support Obama around the DNC, during which the McCain campaign attempted to steal some thunder by offering up what they thought those woman-seeking moderates were disappointed to not get in Obama's announcement. The McCain camp has said a lot of dumb, misogynistic things about women wanted to vote for a woman, and fanned the flames of that problem within the Democratic Party. To assume that they would reduce the politics of winning to such absurdity is not misogynistic, it's just assuming their thought processes have some continuity, when it comes to manipulating the politics and image of the campaign.

And of course, Governor Palin is a member of a group (according to various Family™ organizations, anyway) called Feminists for Life. They like the Life bit, they don't like the Feminist bit, but she is in part a pander to the social conservatives who just don't believe McCain after all the years he's been a thorn in their side. They got very alienated by Romney's flip-flopping in the run-up to the decision on the top of the ticket, and hadn't really come back to the table yet. Now it looks as though they might swallow their pride and endorse McCain because of, in no small part, Governor Palin.

Choosing a VP is usually a very calculated political choice to balance the ticket and to attract people from across the aisle and who were otherwise disillusioned, and I don't think that's not the case in this election for some mysterious reason. I'm certain that part of why Governor Palin was chosen was to (1) give the campaign a younger look (2) draw some people who wanted to vote for a woman, any woman, in the White House (3) bring the pro-life and social conservative crowd over. I think #1 was a mistake and #2 and #3 will come back to bite them, if they haven't already, but that's neither here nor there.

[docstrange.livejournal.com]

Ok, I can appreciate that argument, and while I think some of the points about ability may or may not stand up to scrutiny, the larger discourse on the impetus behind the VP decision is well stated, albeit one we can only speculate about for now. But I also note you don't call Gov Palin a "token uterus" or say that the party is being insulting to women by putting forward a "dumb bimbo," which at least it's clear she is not. You don't resort to such language because it's not a layer of sludge at the bottom of your mind. Some people, however, not so much, at least so I think.

I am very happy to engage in and discuss the qualifications and positions of these candidates, from McCain's (sloppy and frightening) pandering to the far right despite his history of ignoring them, to Obama's promise to create domestic security forces and (no doubt miscalculated) statement that he intends to reduce the US to the per-capita energy consumption of the 1780s. Same with the VPs - is Biden beholden to and tied in with big banking, and is Palin the same with big oil? Is Palin who we want as "one heartbeat away from the presidency" with under 2 years of exec experience? Is Biden really who we want as "one heartbeat away from the presidency" when he could barely garner 1% of the primary vote? Is McCain who we want in the presidency, considering his health? Is Obama, considering his lack of any major exec experience and less than a year as Senator before he began running? Those are interesting questions that serve to elucidate matters, and do not seem to unearth latent prejudices.

Rant Response

[biguglymandoll.livejournal.com]

Doc, your post made me review mine on the topic. On retrospect, I think I was a lot less respectful of McCain than of Palin, although her (very!) good looks are obviously the foil I used.

I decided to write it the way I did based on an admittedly quick survey of her stance on *my* key issues. She seems to be a rabid antiabortionist and against gay marriage, as well as less tolerant of non-mainstream lifestyles (although less fanatically). Looking at those issues, I wouldn't care if she were a purple Martian with three heads and a tail, or a shoe-in for Ms. America, or had the longest resume for world politics since Winston Churchill. If Churchill was running today, and was a rabid antiabortionist, I wouldn't vote for him either.

Based on that, I stand by my post. I bet Palin's a great person to sit down and have a beer with, and I like her sense of style - selling Murkowski's jet on eBay? Pure Win. She seems to have integrity, competence, and charisma. But with her views, I don't want her in the White House, under any circumstances.

SOBUMD and I went around for a while on Clinton's run; the bottom line is that we *really* don't care about the gender of the President. Could it be a women? Sure. The conclusion with Hillary Clinton: Wrong woman for the job, wrong person for the job. I feel the same way about Sarah Palin.

The better question is, to what extent do the ends justify the means? How low can, and will, and should, one side go to keep the other from being elected? You and I have limited readership, but we *do* have readership, and this is a (very) public forum. Is it OK to make jokes about McCain's age? Is it *fair* to disguise the pathos of an emotional appeal as a logical, reasoned argument? Most Americans can't think worth a damn these days, and the big-name political consultants know that. The election has been a popularity contest since the dawn of television, and it's getting worse. There's a reasonable chance that we get a hard-right conservative in high office for *no better reason* than because she's nice to look at. That's not going to prove that we're not misogynists, and it's not OK.

So those of us with forums face a dilemma - can we hold to the moral high ground of Aristotle and Cicero's Rhetorical schools, while doubting that the other side will do so? At the end of the day, the only person I have to be able to look in the eye is the guy on the other side of the mirror while I'm shaving. If I haven't done what (little) I can to keep *the wrong people* out of the White House, I won't be able to do that. Because I think those wrong people are out to win, and they won't hesitate to grab an advantage.

The funny part is, I'd be willing to bet - and I have no real idea, but I'd be willing to bet - that McCain and Palin personally would prefer to maintain that moral high ground. I just don't believe they're ultimately in control of enough of the campaign to do that.

Whaddaya think? I'm leaving you on my friends list. You're right about the tone of the media coverage so far, and I think you're right about the general American misogyny. However, "You won't rescue Lotho, or the Shire, just by being shocked and sad, my dear Frodo," and I'd be willing to use that American misogyny (since it's there anyway) to prevent a worse evil. If McCain had picked someone who leaned closer to center, I'd've thought harder before voting for Obama (I'm not thrilled with him, but I think he's smart enough to surround himself with good people). However, abortion is a driving factor in my choice, and I can't let the current Republican ticket - regardless of gender - win.

Re: Rant Response

[docstrange.livejournal.com]

Your post, though you danced all over the [n]ILF thing, wasn't so very misogynistic as, well, willfully sexist for the sake of humor? But I do think your post does press that button, and I don't think it's ultimately helpful for people to go on doing that without self-reflection. Insert some other, less-tolerated-today class of prejudice in there, and I bet it'll seem much less humorous, except to a much more limited audience.

But at least you didn't call her sexist names [er, excepting the [n]ILF thing], and the Wonder Woman reference was pure genius. Of course, Wonder Woman was supposed to be a symbol of forward-moving feminism. [pauses... blinks] Yeah, yeah, I know.

And if this thought experiment helped get you to write some more about the actual issues on which you are guiding your choice, then that's even better.

[ivy]

I could hug you. I went to post something similar, and you beat me to it. I was unsure whether the outpouring of similar venom from the left towards Senator Clinton was because they just didn't like her in particular rather than women in general, and I was willing to accept that many people called her Hillary because it's how she marketed herself in an attempt to be seen as more accessible. But this is just unforgivable and disgusting. Do you mind if I link?

[docstrange.livejournal.com]

Not at all. It's a rare public post for me on such a public issue. I am glad you liked it.

Comparative criticism

[docstrange.livejournal.com]

Let's compare comments on appointing a "token woman|bimbo|uterus" with an actual criticism of the merits and risks, experience questions and problems of VP-nominee Governor Palin: http://volokh.com/posts/1220123152.shtml - by UMN law professor and UChicago Law graduate Dale Carpenter. We'll also note that Carpenter says he was leaning towards McCain.

I actually think it's one of the better vettings (in terms of tone and focus) of Gov Palin on the experience question I have yet read, even if he does never call her "Governor Palin."

[xthread.livejournal.com]

A fine and well-put rant.

[docstrange.livejournal.com]

Cheers.

[starstraf.livejournal.com]

luckally I have a much different friends list from you.

I don't like that he picked someone that I see as a bow to the conservative religious right portion of the republican party.

I do have a concern about her being a female in that she has a 4 month old child with special needs - I know that if I had such a new baby I wouldn't be able to be out on the campaign trail.

[chorus.livejournal.com]

Hrm, makes me glad I have a tendency to just sort of jump over most political discussions these days.

I know the news is making a big deal about Palin's gender, and while I do think one reason she was picked was her gender, it has nothing to do with her; it has to do with the fact that it seems like there's always some purely vote-gettin' reasons when it comes to who people pick as running mates (all parties, not just the GOP). But it can't be the only reason, or every single candidate ever would only pick [insert some under-represented group in politics] as their running mates, and from what little I know about her (not much, I admit, because it's not like I was waiting to see who McCain's running mate was before I decided I wasn't voting for him) I imagine they also figured her political views would balance McCain's some. You would think that would be the assumption by most people, and what people would care about.

I had missed people were discussing her looks, and boy am I glad. I don't really care what my presidents and vice presidents look like, and if anyone else does, they're just wacko.

[docstrange.livejournal.com]

Long time no see. And a very fine entrance if I may say so.

*agrees on all counts*