women and the direction of this country. let's not be stupid.

"It's always said that the most important decision a presidential candidate makes is their pick for vice president. It shows their thinking and judgment. John McCain, in his first decision, has just told the world that he believes Sarah Palin is the most qualified person to be a heartbeat from the presidency."

There were only 4 other presidents within 10 years of McCain's age, and two of them died in office. I don't read the Huffington Post very often, or even know who Robert Elisberg is, but he wrote a thoughtful post outlining what is wrong with McCain's choice of Sarah Palin for vice president. Elisberg calls it gross misconduct and certainly, definitely, not "putting America first."

I have to agree. I've never found John McCain unpalatable, and found his candidacy and stands in 2000 appealing (although I didn't vote for him). But he is cleaving further and further from his past, and his VP choice tells me more about John McCain's character, judgement, and motivations than anything else he could have done at this point.

I don't think anyone can deny that the discontent of Hillary Clinton supporters was a large part of why he picked Palin. If she were a man, she would not have been chosen. Did he really think we wouldn't look past this tokenism? Did he really think he'd pick up all those disgruntled voters? Does he really think women are longing so much for a female candidate we would overlook the GOP's positions, his beliefs, Palin's views, and vote for this ticket?

Although I shave my legs and always wear a bra in public, I consider myself a strong advocate of women's rights, interests, and equality. I would love to see a woman in the White House. But not, under any circumstances, at the expense of my own self-interests.

Do we really consider having two X chromosones as more valuable than protecting our right to choose? As more meaningful than finally turning away from oil, acknowledging our role in climate change, and creating policy to combat it? As more important than preparing future generations to understand science so that they can make wise choices to face our changing world? As an acceptable trade-off for an utter lack of experience -- no, position -- on foreign policy? This woman could be president!

Apparently, the answer is yes for some of us, such as this woman, and most of her commenters. I don't care how much you like a candidate, this kind of squealing, babbling, game-show-worthy outpouring just makes these women look silly, superficial, and flirtling with hysteria. Don't tell me they have independently studied Sarah Palin's stands on issues of national importance, or made a reasoned examination of her experience. She's young! She's tough but she's pretty, too! She's a mommy! I DON'T GIVE A SHIT! This woman could be PRESIDENT!

Sisters, are women so generic that so long as there is one on a ticket, you'll cast your ballot for that ticket? If women don't choose substance over symbolism it says to me that we are not demonstrating our ability to be rational leaders.

Comments

[Rita Wilhelm]

I was angry yesterday, and then woke up in the middle of the night even angrier.

Do men really think that women are so stupid that they just want a woman in office, rather than a qualified woman in office?

[swamp4me]

Well said! You have articulated what I've been feeling ever since McCain made his announcement. Thank you.

[jess]

Hell no.

Just had a "conversation" with my mom about how she thinks Palin's more qualified than Obama.

Arghhh! I don't know whether to scream, hold my head in my hands and cry, or fly back to the midwest and bitch-slap my entire family.

[Birdwoman]

This VP choice is a joke of the good ol' boy/frat boy clique that has run our country for the last eight years and it is a slap in the face of every woman of intelligence. You have stated the case very well. I can't imagine that women voters will actually be taken in by this, but as my husband frequently reminds me, "Never underestimate the stupidity of people." I think we all better get busy to make sure that we don't someday have a President Palin.

[Nuthatch]

Some info on Palin's executive experience:

• Scroll down a bit on the post I linked to. Her experience as mayor was of a town of 9000. Think about the nearest village to you of that size, and if you'd want its mayor to be President. Her position did not even extend to voting on council matters except in the case of a tie.

  I'd venture that being the president of the Harvard Law Review, a university lecturer on constitutional law, a community organizer, and a state and U.S. Senator are more intellectually challenging and complicated than running that town. If you don't think so, here's what's going on there.



• She is governor of a state with 683,000 people it in. Sixteen U.S. cities are larger. The budget is a fraction of a month's expeditures in Iraq.


• And the two major Alaska papers are questioning her qualifications!
  

As far as preparation and knowledge, Obama has laid out positions in great detail. Palin has no recorded stance or position on most issues.

Her lack of depth where it counts is, to repeat myself, troubling on two fronts. First, the actuarial reality that she may be president. Second, what it says about John McCain, even if she doesn't.

[farlane]

Well written - thanks for the link to the Elisberg post.

You might also want to read The Palin Trap.

[Nuthatch]

It's a bit of a reach, for those who wish to look into Palin's economic status, to say that she represents the middle class.

Her husband, working as an oilfield production worker, makes between $100,000 and $120,000/year. (He took a leave of absence, but is now back on BP's payroll.) He also owns a a commericial fishing operation, and derives income from sponsorship of his snowmobile racing.

Sarah Palin's salary as AK governor is $125,000/yr. She also is/has derived income from being a consultant.

They own at least 3 homes.

[MikeS]

I found this article through 9rules. I doubt if I share your political views, but I definitely think you are on the money here.
I can't help thinking this was tokenism, but you have clearly demonstrated why this will not work. I think more people will agree with you that political positions and principles are not trumped by gender or race.
In both party offerings for president I find serious lack. As a person who is more conservative, the reaction I am having to Obama seems to be similar to your reaction to Palin. I would never ignore my political principles for race or gender. I can't imagine any thinking person would.

[Nuthatch]

Mike, I appreciate you stopping by! I feel comfortable with Obama for a number of reasons. A main one in which I think he is vastly different from Palin is his education, intellect and intellectual curiosity. From what I have read in the Alaskan press, Palin has not demonstrated much interest in foreign affairs or national interests. I'm tired of intellectual shallowness in the White House.

[Beverly]

What can you say of a politician who has said that she does not believe that climate change is “man-made” or who oposses stem cell research as the Anchorage Daily News reported in 2006. If one is at all concerned about protecting a wildlife refuge, what could be said of a politician who believes that drilling for oil on the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, where there are shared (with Canada) caribou herds, and for drilling along Alaskan’s northern coast and to creating a Trans-Canada pipeline…which would be one of the largest construction projects on the planet and where we put at risk some of the most pristine coastline in the world?

Do all Alaskan polititians vote only to bring more money to Alaska, to create more jobs in Alaska, regardless of consequences (or law, for that matter)? I wonder what Polin’s views on Senator Stevens, who also strove to bring money and jobs to Alaska…regardless the consequences.

I am overly tired of hearing religion in politics. I thought we created US to break politics and religion and to keep them separate. It seems to me the current Republican party is all about rubbing their religious beliefs deep into the fabric of the laws they try to pass. It cracks me up that 99.9% of Muslims are as different from AlKida as are 99.9% of Protestants, Mormans and other Christians different from members of religious secs like The Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (FLDS…think Texas) or the Branch Davidians (think David Koresh) or how about the People’s Temple group (remember Jonestown?)

I tell ya, I’m a spiritual person…but all this religion in politics scares me. Polin’s religious beliefs, so inline with McCains, are just another reason to be wary of her.

Yeah, going on and on that Obama is too young and experienced (he’s nearly 50 and comes with lots of leadership experience not to mention as much political experience as both presidents Lincoln and Kennedy) and then appointing a woman who is younger and far more inexperienced the day after Obama’s appointment and choice of runningmate just slays me. Does he think women are stupid -----? Oh wait, he does; remember?

[Clare]

"as far as foreign policy is concerned, very few people can say that they lived within a hairsbreadth of being Russian or Canadian every day of their life."

Darn, she exposed our plan to invade Alaska. Darn Darn Darn! There goes the element of surprise.

[Nuthatch]

That ranks up there with the fact she's governor of the "largest state" means something because of its size.

[Mike]

Nice one, Nuthatch. The sad truth is that some decisions aren't intended to appeal to reason. Reasonable voters probably aren't in play at this point.

[scienceguy288]

Brilliantly written article. I really have this problem with women who have "gone to the dark side" because Palin is a woman and Hillary lost. I agree with you on all points except the one on abortion, but that is an entirely different matter.

[Nuthatch]

I believe the way to reduce abortions is comprehensive sex education, easily available and affordable contraceptives and reproductive health care, among other things. Taking away a woman's right to choose vi legislation is not.

[scienceguy288]

All of those ideas you mentioned should be carried forth, no doubt. But I believe infanticide should not be legal. I do not seem to be setting off on the right foot here.

[Nuthatch]

No, no -- differing opinions so long as not rudely, irrationally, or long-windedly stated are welcome here.

I agree that infanticide should not be legal. But a fetus is not an infant, although one could quibble semantics. Which leads us to the point that I don't think there is any way to reach a consensus on the question of when a group of cells becomes a human with equal rights as the fully functional adult that sustains it.

What we need to strive for (this was one of the things I meant under "among other things" in my previous comment) is a culture and society that places the right value on reproduction and the responsibility for conceiving and raising children. Then a woman's right to choose will go beyond whether or not she has an abortion, but whether or not she conceives.

[scienceguy288]

I definitely agree with your ideas. I just tend to think that a fetus is an infant. And I also don't want to quibble over symantics. This has been an intersting discussion. Thanks.