About Me

Name: Matthew
Location: Woodstock, GA
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Here Piggy, Piggy

The Obama campaign set off a firestorm yesterday with the repetition of the old saying, "If you put lipstick on a pig, it's still a pig."

The McCain campaign was quick to jump on the statement as sexist, the Obama campaign reminded us that McCain used the same saying referring to one of Hillary's proposed policies, and the 24-hour news cycle was protected for another day from political fatigue.

Whatever else one might say about Obama, he isn't an idiot. I don't buy the line that he was showing sexism with this comment, as he was referring not to Palin but to some of the policies of the (R)s. One can find plenty of other examples of Obama's sexism that don't require much of a reach (Right, Sweetie?). So what was this man who is so careful with words saying?

One of the ripples that is spreading from the Palin nomination is the recognition that Palin's strongest appeal is to the group of people least likely to be affected by the snobbish denigrations of the media - the average American. Obama is trying to be "a little bit country," as Marie Osmond used to sing. He is trying very hard to be Main Street instead of Hyde Park. He is trying to connect/reconnect with the American midwest, the place where people can use the pig analogy without anyone thinking the speaker sexist.

If you approach his comments from that perspective, the "pig" comment is about as likely as Paris Hilton working on a farm. The visual doesn't work; and you get the feeling that, once the cameras are off, the "star" runs to the shower as quickly as possible. Got to get that demeaning stench off. That stench of commonness.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Attacking Palin, Phase Three

Winston Churchill said, "You have enemies? Good. That means you have stood up for something, sometime in your life."

I was reading an opinion piece from the NY Times online. I apologize; I know each hit on their site just encourages them, but sometimes I can't help myself. The piece was written by Judith Warner, and was attacking (drum roll please) the nomination of Sarah Palin as insulting to women.

Hardly news, right?

I saw an entirely new reason presented for women to hate Gov. Palin. Warner says that it is shameful that the discussion of a female candidate has devolved to her childcare needs and breast pumps.

I agree that is shameful. But who was it that started that discussion? Let's rebuild the time line.

Palin is announced on Friday, August 29th, before noon.

Within the hour, the Obama campaign announces its disapproval of McCain's selection of a person whose experience is that of a "small-town mayor." Stop giggling. I know, she's a governor. I know, he should never deride anyone else on "experience."

By 8:00 that night, John Major at CNN has asked about whether she is a fit mother.

By noon on Saturday, most of the media has figured out the experience thing goes in a direction they should avoid, so they focus on the "bad mother" angle.

To be fair, some were asking legit questions about Palin's record and her stand on national-level issues. To those who focused there, thanks for doing your job.

But it was the press that made her family's recent and pending maternities an issue.

So now feminists are supposed to be mad at Palin because some members of the press are mysogynysts.

The whole thing makes me dizzy.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Media Apologies

I saw an article on Politico a little earlier where the author was mocking the idea that the media owed Sarah Palin an apology. The article was well-written sarcasm. Made me want to write, "It's a human thing; you wouldn't understand."

If anyone is asking the media to apologize for questions about Palin's position on issues, I'm not aware of it.

If anyone is suggesting that the media crossed the line by doing any research into what folks in Alaska think about her - both her supporters and detractors - they're mistaken.

The issue is not that the media asked questions. I don't even think her family (or Obama's) should be off limits.

The point where the "media elites" crossed the line was when questions started to come up that would never be asked of Barack Obama. Or John McCain, for that matter.

The idea that CNN's Campbell Brown (one of many, sadly) would question Palin's fitness to serve because of her recent maternity is mind-boggling to me. The idea that a reporter would use the euphamistic "Some would say..." to cover the fact that the specific reporter is the Some in that statement is ridiculous. The idea that being the mother of a pregnant, unwed teen in any way reflects on Palin's ability to lead...sheez!

Apparently, many members of the press are closet Puritans. Who knew.

It is also apparent that they were never teenagers, never went through that time of life where the idea of parental respect usually goes on vacation for a few years.

In today's society if two of Gov. Palin's five kids remain unscarred by promiscuity prior to marriage, she's beating the odds, regardless of what she teaches.

I also saw an article today on ABC's site repeating the claim that Sarah had once belonged the the Independent Alaska Party. There was a quote waaaaaaay down at the bottom of the article from the woman who leads that party saying she already made it clear that wasn't true. How's that for responsible journalism?

And what of "Troopergate"? Heard yet that no one claims she was involved in the pressure on the appointee? Heard yet that the issue was an abusive father who tasered his stepson? As I wrote elsewhere, anyone involved in getting that thug out of a cop's uniform should get a medal, not an investigation.

If the media wants to ask about issues that relate to the job she's vying for, I say more power to 'em. But taking the easy way out by looking for excuses to dismiss her rather than weighing her experience and growth in her political life is not Pulitzer material.

Am I sold on her as the very best qualified person for the Veep slot on the ticket? Don't know. Don't care. She is the candidate; second-guessing that now seems kinda pointless to me. If the McCain campaign had asked my opinion, my suggestion would have been even wackier than a moose-hunting beauty queen.

I think she brings a lot to the ticket, and I know that's why people are usually selected for the junior spot. Selecting her was no more cynical or desparate than was Kennedy choosing LBJ, or Obama choosing Biden.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Just A Distraction...That Works

Senator Obama is spending a lot of time explaining how superior the amount and type of experience he has compares to that of Gov. Palin.

The Senator has a legendary ability to focus and ignore things he calls "distractions." I'll not attempt to list all of the things that have been dismissed as distractions in this political season, since that list would be a distraction in and of itself, but I'm sure you've heard the term "distraction" thrown about once or twice regarding things you thought might be real issues.

However, he does not seem to be able to find that focus, that inner voice, when it comes to the comparisons between himself and Gov. Palin.

He is fixated.

He has to keep coming up with examples of how he is better than she.

His campaign staff has a budget 36 times that of Palin's mayoral town. He manages 1200 people - she only managed 60-ish, maybe.

Ignoring the issue that he has a campaign manager and chief of staff who are primarily responsible for the things he is taking credit for handling, and that she is a governor now (not just a small-town mayor), it still fascinates me to watch his responses.

One does not respond so vorasciously out of casual dismissal; one does it out of fear.

So what fears could there be that would explain this behavior?
  • Mysogyny has to be a major suspect. The idea that anyone could compare him to this woman, and maybe give her some respectability in the balance, might be more than he can take.
  • His own need to prove himself is a driving force. There was an interesting article in the Chicago Trib last week about how Obama is always requiring more of himself ("Must do better" was the catch-phrase in the piece), is very driven to rise to the top of whatever arena he enters. He has a right to this presidency. He is supposed to walk up and just claim the throne, because he is smarter, better-looking, and more urbane than his opponent. And now people dare to compare him to this backwoods, gun-toting, fisherman's wife-beauty queen? How dare they.
  • His inner voices/doubts, which are usually behind both mysogyny and an (artificially) high level of personal drive, could be a factor. When he selected Joe Biden as his running mate, many saw an indication that he saw his own weakness in experience and foreign policy. His introduction of Biden as "The next President of the United States" was also seen as a Freudian slip, as if to say, "I know I'm not worthy; how about this guy?". Most people who are subconsciously unsure of themselves eventually turn to tearing others down in order to make themselves look better, or at least to feel better. I sense a lot of that in his attacks on Palin.
If I didn't already find Palin's candidacy just the right tonic for the McCain ticket, this would seal the deal for me. Any time you can get a presidential candidate to keep comparing himself to your veep choice, that's a good thing - especially if that Presidential candidate is already struggling with appearing presidential. Obama is off message, and is beginning to show some desparation in his attacks. I don't think Mr. Obama can stop himself.

No He Can't.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Palin by Comparison

When John McCain announced Sarah Palin as his running mate yesterday, the energy level of conservatives spiked as it has not in 20 years. It has been a long time since we were able to look at the Republican Party's leadership and not feel a little stung by the "rich old white guy" rhetoric of the left (not that they had much room for pointing fingers, mind you). It has been a long time since we were able to see someone up there who really lives like one of us.

The immediate take on the MSM was that this was a play for the Clinton backers, the PUMAs. I beg to differ. While the left chose to interpret her introductory speech as a play for those voters, I saw it as an honest recognition that her presence on that stage did owe itself to a couple of women who, whether we all agree with their ideals or not, have opened the door for other women to raise their voices in politics. It is fitting, when you look at how Palin has truly reached across the aisle in filling her cabinet and in getting legislation through the Alaskan legislature, that she would mention those who made the "glass ceiling" appear not-so-thick.

Susan Estrich, a liberal Fox News contributor, had an article up almost as soon as Palin's name was out stating how the Republicans had another think coming if they thought women would flock to Palin. That was demeaning to women, sayeth Estrich, to think that they would vote based on anatomy. I agree. That is condescension at the same level as assuming that someone might vote for a candidate based on pigmentation.

Palin deserves a closer look not because she is a woman, but because she was willing to take on the criminals in her own party.

She deserves consideration because she is not the normal product of the slow-grinding political machine that turns smart people into bobble-headed mouthpieces.

She deserves consideration because she recognizes that being a representative of the people is a priviledge, and that it does not deserve priviledges.

She deserves consideration because she walks the talk - she knew the likelihood of her baby being born with developmental issues, but stayed true to her beliefs (and Trig isn't a showpiece for her; he is a blessing).

She deserves consideration because she is skin-and-bones evidence that conservativism is not dead.

Strange that it took John McCain to bring us Sarah Palin.



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (11) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »