As a former field organizer for congressional campaigns, and a former organizer and state president of NOW, I fell out of my chair grappling with rage, laughter, fear, and a guilty sense of excitement when I heard the VP pick for McCain was Alaska Gov Sarah Palin.

There are a couple rules of politics that I have to refer to to explain why Sarah Palin is the worst thing that could happen to Obama/Biden.

NUMBER ONE:  Past Behavior is the Best Indicator of Future Behavior.

This is the number one rule in politics. Even for all the sexists bastards in the republican party, the possibility that they would cross over to the all male Dems ticket rather than vote for a woman is completely impossible. Most voters have been voting for years, and the hardest thing to do in politics is to get a voter who has been going into the booth and pulling the lever the same way for the last 20 years to pull the lever a different way. It's the same reason my diabetic mother can't lay off the cookies and why I have issues quitting smoking when I have expresso in my hands.  Habit is really hard to break - and voting is just the same - if not more so - especially to older voters. This is why Independent voters matter so much to elections, they have a past behavior of switching.  They are the only ones consultants can craft a message to that will actually respond once they get into that booth.  Its not an opinion, really, its just political fact.  We get data that, while it does not show who voted for whom, it does show the statistics of how often those who registered a certain party voted that party, and it is always very high data, regardless of the candidates positions.

My point is that McCain is not going to lose any of his base. They are shored up, regardless of his VP pick. Especially since republicans are more lemming-ish than democrats. They are experts at falling in line.

NUMBER TWO: The Majority of Voters are Women.

In election after election, more women than men vote.  This is true in both parties, in all age groups, and amongst Independent and Unaffiliated voters. This makes the Independent and Unaffiliated female voters very very important.

McCain's age means that he is wagging the possibility of the first female president at all the heartbroken Hillary fans out there. Even though Palin is on the wrong side of most feminist issues - that is a carrot that is really hard to pass up for all the women who have been feeling that they lost their only chance of seeing a woman in the top slot in their lifetime. That carrot is really hard to pass up.

NUMBER THREE:  In the end, it's all about numbers.

Behind all the hype, right at this minute, there are thousands of people behind databases and knocking on doors tallying votes because in the end, it's really all about the numbers.  Publicity, websites, speaking engagements, all of these things are really designed in politics to do one thing and one thing alone: Build a reliable list.   On election day, we execute the list.  The Republican version of this is super sneaky.  Take the Federal Marriage Admendment.  It was never going to pass, it has never had the votes.  But it gave the right wing the opportunity to get lots of names and numbers and email address in the process of pushing it, lots of names and numbers and email addresses that they could GOTV (get out the vote) on election day.  This is also why the right would encourage state right wing organizations to push a constitutional amendment to their state constitutions to ban gay marriage.  The vote on these ballot measures happen the same day as the presidential election, and so it is another right wing cause pulling votes to the polls - and while they were there, they could check George Bush's name for president. So lets look at the numbers:

In this corner, the Republicans have:

1. All of the republican base: which was enough to elect president bush twice.

PLUS

2. A portion of women who were going for Hillary, got hyped up for Hillary, but cannot resist the carrot of a possible female president in their lifetime.

In the other corner, the Democrats have

1. All of the Democratic base, which was almost enough to elect Kerry and Gore

PLUS

2. All of the new and younger registered voters.

So the question comes to this: Are all of the new voters more or less than the number of women who will jump to McCain's side due in part to his picking a female VP who could, given his age, become president? The numbers are quite scary.

NUMBER FOUR:  The fewer people vote, the easier it is to control the vote. 

Obama proved this already.  He won the nomination with hardly any large states, because he was focused on the caucus states where you could get the most delegate votes per actual citizen vote.  He didnt have to get the vote of every democratic voter - just that of the caucus goers.  Numerically, it costs less per vote to the campaign in campaign costs.  So Obama was really slick in choosing the caucus states.  NOTE: Unfortunately, that left us a candidate who to date has lost most battleground states in the past. 

The republicans are more vicious with this rule.  They employ horrible voter suppression tactics to control the vote.  All you have to do is have street construction on the way to polling places in inner cities or change a polling place last minute on a campus to eliminate tens of thousands of votes rather easily. 

So keep your eye on voting machine issues between now and election day.  And if the campaigns are smart, they will keep making sure that the people they register will actually appear on the board of elections list because quite often they do not in republican areas and areas that are college towns.

NUMBER FIVE: TV & Media Love a Cat Fight.  They Only Pit Women Against Women.

Didnt you notice how odd it felt to see Clinton and Obama sparring? Thats because when you see a female commentary making a point, it is usually another female who is used as the counter point. They still don't let us play with the big boys, we have to stay in our sandbox and throw sand at only each other.

Now here is the BEST part for Hillary supporters: Obama is going to need to explain why he didnt pick the most qualified, popular, eloquent, and charismatic female politician in US history while McCain, a republican no less, picked a female right away. And since the news always and ONLY pits females against females in debates, Obama is going to need a female and ONLY a female to take on Palin. That makes Hillary Clinton his new best friend. He is going to have to call a LOT of favors, and after her being snubbed, I am THRILLED that he is going to have to rack up the favors with her.

tee hee.

This is a cynical, condescending move.

my mouth dropped open when I saw the news on Jezebel.

my first thought?

"Wow, McStain must be really desperate and he's so out of touch. What a sneaky man."

It is an OBVIOUS DESPERATE ploy to lure angry Hillary supporters to vote for him. But I think his plan will backfire, because Hillary is probably going to stump for Obama even more.

Excellent analysis Suzannah. I don't know if I can add more to what you said but my initial reaction to the news was simply of surprised. You have to agree that this is a pick from nowhere and, I just hope that Clinton supporters that were thinking of voting for McCain think twice about it. And I was one of those Clinton supporters!
You are right that Clinton has just become more important because once she sets the contrasts between her and Palin (and she is the one that has to do that), people will begin to understand.

Now here is the BEST part for Hillary supporters: Obama is going to need to explain why he didnt pick the most qualified, popular, eloquent, and charismatic female politician in US history while McCain, a republican no less, picked a female right away.

No he isn't. The Democratic Party has just spent a week explaining why Joe Biden is an excellent good choice for VP and uniting - Hillary and Bill Clinton most emphatically included - behind the Obama/Biden ticket. Obama has absolutely no explaining to do here, and the fact that you're celebrating something you see as good news for an anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-worker party is extremely problematic. If John McCain and Sarah Palin win, the right to choose, any chance at recognition for same-sex unions, and an economy not built for the super-rich go the way of the dodo; is what you think of as good news for them (and I'm not entirely sure I agree with that assessment) something to celebrate?

And most people, Democrat or Republican, can see why John McCain picked a female right away - not because she's the best choice for the job, but because it's a cynical move to pick up independents. This clearly is not a choice based on who can take over the office should the 72-year-old man become unable to perform its duties. I can count three Republican women off the top of my head who are more prepared for the presidency than a woman who's barely been governor for two years, and has been embroiled in ethical scandals for virtually her entire term.

"In other words, the party is pro-woman-candidates, as long as they enact anti-woman policies."

I agree with this in general, though I wouldn't say all members of the party support all the party's anti-woman policies (some people I know, for example, are fiscally very Republican but dubious about the parties' stances on abortion, gay marriage, etc--then again, it could be argued that the fiscal policies themselves are anti-woman. But I digress!)

The news hit me like an electric shock. I've been suspecting for months that McCain would win, anyway, (whether Obama or Clinton was the nominee), but this clinches it for me.

My first reaction was: "YESSS! McCain had to swallow his apparent contempt for powerful women [Reno-Clinton jokes, anyone?] and 'saddle' himself with one to renew his maverick persona and scrape by into the presidency." Seriously, this man "wants it" more than a lot of recent candidates of my political memory. It's funny how the media made Clinton seem like she was a grasping, grossly ambitious, Machavellian politico when in fact, male candidates--including and especially McCain--have just the same characteristics.

It's oddly funny to me that so many self-professed "progressive" men I know had borderline-sexist stances towards Clinton, but that here we have John McCain--MCCAIN, he of the "cunt" jokes, by God!--hamming it up right now in his speech and extolling his "mother of five" running mate. Un-freaking-believable.

I truly believe John McCain will be the next President. And I suspect that at least once during his presidency (e.g. a heart "episode"), Palin will be considered to be about to step into the Presidency herself. It reminds me of the all times in history women have stepped into the shoes of male predecessors or relatives and gained power in that way.

It's a strange world.

I'm so angry... I just see this as a bald-faced ploy by the GOP, banking on the idea that women vote gender over interests.

I just hope Obama & Biden, with Clinton's help, can expose her for what she is, before too many fellow "hockey moms" in swing states are wooed.

Also, I think the experience argument goes out the window here. The VP needs to be ready to take over the country, and McCain is saying someone with two terms as mayor of a small town and two years as governor of a sparsely populated state is ready for that.

It is a ploy for sure... not at all surprised by those sneaky and deceptive Republicans...

Thanks, I am sorry about the long post, but I haven't gotten the posting to my profile here figured out yet - got some errors. I hope Hillary bargains big on this. I hope she gets the full reign on taking over Health Care Reform in exchange to being point person on this. You know right now Hillary is the camp the news are going to for comment, and you know the question "Why Didnt YOU Pick a Woman?" is going to get asked over and over and over to Obama's camp.

Honestly? I think this is really insulting. I think it's some cynical move to grab women voters because Republicans have a low expectation of general female intellect.

though, I should also say... yes. More women involved in high-level politics is a good thing. I just wish it was someone who would do more to help women, instead of rolling back many of our hard-won accomplishments.

Suzannah - I wish I had more time to explain how much I disagree with your analysis (although I can appreciate how detailed and thoughtful you were about it).

You keep saying many former Hillary supporters "can't resist the carrot of a female candidate" - well I was (and still am) a HUGE Hillary supporter and there is NO WAY I would ever entertain voting for McCain/Palin simply because I "cannot resist the carrot of a possible female president in [my] lifetime." Palin has so little in common with Hillary that I find any sort of comparison (aside from gender) quite a stretch.

Perhaps I am alone in this, but I'm watching the Palin acceptance speech right now and she sounds like a ditzy 14 year-old fawning over her husband and McCain. Her first few minutes have been spent talking entirely about her children and how much she admires her husband (I'm sorry, he is running for VP?).

SHE COULD NOT BE MORE DIFFERENT THAN HILLARY!

@ Celestanj:

good. I'm glad Sarah Palin's speech comes across as ditzy and fawning. Then that means it will turn off pro-Hillary voters away from McStain's campaign.

Just out of curiosity, why does it matter that she has five kids and one has Down syndrome? Like if she were pro choice she would have aborted the baby with Down syndrome?

CAtherine_M: You got it! Pro-choicers are all about killing Down's Syndrome babies and baby seals!

I'm also glad to see a woman elevated to such a level, but frankly, I'm more insulted and patronized by McCain's pandering and tokenism. I just listened to Palin's speech and spent the first five minutes talking about her husband and the last 5 minutes talking about each of her children. It's as if she has to reassure conservative voters that not only does she has a man backing her up, but she's not one of *those* feminists, either.

Oh God, here she goes:

"Hillary left 18 million cracks in the glass ceiling of America. It turns out that the women of America aren't finished yet and we can shatter that glass ceiling once and for all!"
-Sarah Palin, 5 minutes ago

I've been reading comments on cnn.com, and I keep seeing McCain/Palin, and it makes me think McCain/Pain. And that is what a term with the republican ticket will be like: Pain.

This makes my dread of McCain winning even stronger. Now if he wins he's going to turn the first woman in the white house into a total joke, just a ploy for votes instead of an important moment in history.

Catherine_M, thanks for saying that... that is how McCain is selling her.

So, do they expect us vagina voters to follow Ms. Palin like poor little sheep to the polls? Identity politics are good, but having political VIEWS is better. And, a shock to the GOP, women have views about candidates. Thanks but no thanks.

Great analysis at TAP, thanks for that.

Wow, she just compared herself to Hillary Clinton. Nice.

I'm certainly not one of those people who thinks that Hillary is entitled to be the first woman in the White House, but given her policy positions and the fact that I think she was given this position in nothing more than an attempt to draw Hillary supporters who haven't/may not jump onto the Obama bandwagon, I find that comparison incredibly offensive.

I am so angry with McCain and Palin for co-opting Hillary Clinton's success and momentum. Yes, they are both strong women. End the comparisons there, please. How insulting to Hillary that she's being used like this.

Brown Trash Punk - I mis-read your "McStain" as "McStalin." I chuckled at my mistake.

I'm tired of these talking points which, as noted by the updated original post's quote, are incredibly condescending to HRC's supporters. I can't imagine that PUMAs are as wide-spread as the punditry in the MSM would lead us to believe. Those talking-head assholes love to instigate "cat-fights."

John McCain thinks you can't tell the difference between people with vaginas.

ladies, come on. Do you really think Hillary is going to stand by and let Palin compare herself to her?

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!

riiiight. a woman with less than 20 months of experience in office, anti-abortion, anti-gay, and the mayor of a small town in the place of norwhere... LMAOOO!!!!!!!!

I'm waiting for Hillary to declare: IT'S WAR!

ladies, come on. Do you really think Hillary is going to stand by and let Palin compare herself to her?

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!

riiiight. a woman with less than 20 months of experience in office, anti-abortion, anti-gay, and the mayor of a small town in the place of norwhere... LMAOOO!!!!!!!!

I'm waiting for Hillary to declare: IT'S WAR!

@Orka: Grow up. I was asking a question. It was completely unnecessary to inform us all that she has a child with Down syndrome. It has nothing to do with being pro life. I know lots of pro choice moms/families that have kids with Down syndrome, so being pro life is really not a prerequisite to having a child with Down syndrome.

Talon23 - AMEN.

celestenj-
Hey, I TOTALLY agree with you actually, and any Hillary supporter who knows the issues would be offended by this obvious pandering. I just wish I believed that every Hillary supporter was an issues hound like you and me. But a lot of her supporters were blue collar, and had far less access to a higher education, or to the free time that comes with being an issues hound. I am convinced that when you know the issues, you know this is pandering. But there was a large contingent of Hillary supporters that didnt have the access or time on hand to become educated on those issues. They are busy with kids and jobs, and lack of money. Where's the time to research the issues when you have to put one kid to bed, talk to your partner about the face you are short on rent, help the other kid with their homework, and do the extra hours at work because your job just downsized and now you have twice the work to do as before?

I am also convinced that the biggest problem with the Democrat party is that our soundbite is not a 10 second soundbite. We can't sum up our positions with easy little sayings like "it's a child not a choice" as it is so easy for right wingers to do. It is going to be really hard to make the sound bytes necessary to reveal Palin for what she really is: not the "hockey mom just like you." She sure as hell looks the part.

In the end, only Hillary can save the day, which is what is really funny. We need Hillary on the TV pounding it home that is Obama who is good for women.

here's an idea. Hillary & Obama need to pull some serious pro-woman legislation out of their Senatorial asses that McCain is SURE to go on the record as being against, and then bring up that vote over and over and over ad nauseum.

This is a tremendously insulting pander to feminists - it screams, "We know all you want is a vagina on the ticket! We know you don't read!" Who gave us the most powerful black woman in America? The worst president in recent memory, and McCain really is trying to be just like him. It's the Rovian tactic of surrounding yourself visually with individuals from minorities so that you can own the "progressive" label as you aggresively seek legislation to screw them over on a mass scale. I trust, however, that few progressive feminists will fall for it, the same way few women and African-Americans cheered Condoleezza's ascension in the administration.

Catherine_M, what are you talking about? My post was in agreement with/in support of your points.

Eek. I'm sorry, I misinterpreted your response. I have a sib with DS and every time something comes up in the media about DS and you say anything about it, like hey, people with Down syndrome aren't mutants or anything you get accused of being a crazy prolifer... So again, I apologize for misinterpreting your response!

just to throw this out there... mccain waited for obama's announcement before he decided for a reason. had obama chosen clinton, mccain would likely not have chosen a woman. so i'm really hoping that this doesn't turn into obama being harassed as to why he didn't choose a woman (which wouldn't have been politically viable)because the only reason mccain chose one is to put (negative) attention on the fact that obama did not. all the republicans in my office are ecstatic right now and they truly believe that hillary supporters think a woman in office doing nothing for women's issues trumps a man in office working for and with women on issues important to us. i sincerely hope they are wrong.

@Okra & Catherine re: "(She recently had her fifth child, who has Down's syndrome.)"

Regardless of whether the author meant to imply that a woman who learns that her child may be born with Down's Syndrome or any other disability should make that a factor in choosing whether to carry the pregnancy to term, that's how it sounded to me when I read it.

Choice is choice is choice and I think everyone reading this site would agree it needs to be protected as part of a larger reproductive rights and health agenda. That's why a line like that is so problematic - it seems to infer that women who have many children or who have children born with disabilities are doing the wrong thing. I would never vote for McCain no matter who he chose, but reading that line on a site like this surprised me. I think you know better.

That's okay. ;) I probably should have put a *sarcasm.* With the internet the way it is, and the potential for misinterpretation and all...

It's already started... the news is already introducing her as "Sarah Palin, a mother of five..." Did you ever hear Dick Cheney introduced as "Dick Cheney, the father of xx" or "John McCain, a father of xx" and so on.

Also, Feminists for Life is pleased to announce that Palin is a member ...

Ack.

My favorite Palin quote so far:
"What exactly does a VP do?"

Watch her say it here:
http://www.endpoliticsasusual.com/2008/08/hillary-supporter-and-congressional.html

As soon as I heard this news, I zipped over here to see what you all are saying: Glad to see we're all on the same boat!

I'm grossed out & offended by this decision. I mean, we Hillary supporters might be bitter, but we're not desperate!

And as much as I would have liked to see Obama run with a female, I respect and thank him for not cow-towing to pressure to pick a woman- ANY WOMAN- just to be able to say he did so. It makes sense that he chose someone like Biden, whom he knows and respects. Not just some random selection done for the sake of image.

My only question is why did McCain stop there? Why didn't he pick Condi?! Black AND a woman! Give that man the keys to the union!

I am listening to Congresswoman Blackburn from Washington make the argument on MSNBC that Palin's experience as a wife, mother, and businesswoman trumps Obama's experience "chairing a committee in the Senate". She suggested that women gain leadership from their roles as wives and mothers (a notion I do not necessarily disagree with)... but then somehow mysteriously extrapolates that into national political leadership. I think that says a lot about the role that Governor Palin is intended to fill in the VP slot -- sort of a pseudo-feminist who can make the overwhelmingly white, anti-gay Republican party feel "progressive".

I am really torn about this. On the one hand I am thrilled to see a woman on a presidential ticket, albeit for the Republican side. On the other hand, I can't help but think this is an absolute ploy -- a conniving, pandering ploy.

Two more random observations: as ardent a feminist as I consider myself to be, I will admit to cringing when I saw that she has a 4-month old infant son. As the mother of young children myself, my immediate thought was, "What is she doing running for VP with a 4-month old?! That baby needs her around, not traveling all over the country giving stump speeches!" Of course, I then felt immediately guilty for this, and realized that I never once had a similar thought about Obama being absent from his girls' lives. Still, her baby is only 4 months old! I don't know -- I guess I have strongly conflicting feelings about this news.

Finally, did anyone else roll their eyes at the music selections? The theme from Rudy? Puh-leez. And then Van Halen? Get it -- 'cause it rhymes with Palin? Lame.

I am listening to Congresswoman Blackburn from Washington make the argument on MSNBC that Palin's experience as a wife, mother, and businesswoman trumps Obama's experience "chairing a committee in the Senate". She suggested that women gain leadership from their roles as wives and mothers (a notion I do not necessarily disagree with)... but then somehow mysteriously extrapolates that into national political leadership. I think that says a lot about the role that Governor Palin is intended to fill in the VP slot -- sort of a pseudo-feminist who can make the overwhelmingly white, anti-gay Republican party feel "progressive".

I am really torn about this. On the one hand I am thrilled to see a woman on a presidential ticket, albeit for the Republican side. On the other hand, I can't help but think this is an absolute ploy -- a conniving, pandering ploy.

Two more random observations: as ardent a feminist as I consider myself to be, I will admit to cringing when I saw that she has a 4-month old infant son. As the mother of young children myself, my immediate thought was, "What is she doing running for VP with a 4-month old?! That baby needs her around, not traveling all over the country giving stump speeches!" Of course, I then felt immediately guilty for this, and realized that I never once had a similar thought about Obama being absent from his girls' lives. Still, her baby is only 4 months old! I don't know -- I guess I have strongly conflicting feelings about this news.

Finally, did anyone else roll their eyes at the music selections? The theme from Rudy? Puh-leez. And then Van Halen? Get it -- 'cause it rhymes with Palin? Lame.

I'm wondering if this will end up being a Harriet Myers moment for McCain. This seems just like Bush trying to claim that Myers was the most highly-qualified candidate who just happened to be a woman so the Dems would have a harder time rejecting such a "historic" choice. Bush's move was quickly seen for the cynical ploy that it was because Myers was so obviously not qualified. Given that McCain has lambasted Obama over and over for his "lack of experience", can he really claim that he's added the most qualified (or even sufficiently qualified) person to his ticket given that he's talking about a half-term governor? It's so clearly a Republican form of tokenism - surely Hillary supporters won't bite. I mean, seriously?

Julia, I interpreted Ann's phrase about DS child to be sort of a nod to what the MCain camp talking point would be (sort of like what I was trying to do with my baby seal comment). I can picture McCain et al playing up their anti-choice cred by "see? See? she's such a good woman and pro-lifer, she kept--GASP!!--a baby with Down's syndrome! [Because merciless baby-killers would have had no compunction about aborting!!]" It's insulting and low all around--to people with Down's Syndrome, to their mothers and fathers, to pro-choicers, and to those women who have made the choice for abortion, for any reason.

(I think we're saying the same thing, just thought I'd throw that out there).

inmyhead, great point about the timing. You are absolutely correct. But, I'll add to that: if Obama had chosen a Clinton, McCain would then have picked a non-Euro male. Although Bobby Jindal is terribly young and inexperienced, but heck, Palin's not all that experienced either!

McCain knows that when the two sides are standing up at a podium together, the very fact of Obama's (a) ancestries (b) party [Democratic] and policies, and (c) very appearence all send powerful signals of "change." By comparison, McCain and, say, Romney, will look like the crusty older rich White men's club--the antithesis of change.

McCain sees that "Change" worked so exceedingly well for Obama--it was put him over the top of Clinton's more pragmatic taglines--that he needs to attack that "change" at the heart. And how does he most quickly do that? By slapping the women/non-Euro Band-Aid on his candicacy.

But here's one question I would LOVE for you all to answer for me: How does the anti-affirmative action party reconcile themselves to this, the most blatant and cynical act of affirmative action imaginable?

Oy vey. PUMAs do exist. And they are jumping on the bandwagon: http://www.hillaryclintonforum.net/discussion/showthread.php?t=26089

I can't understand it. This is blatant pandering, but they are eating it up. Do they really want a woman president at any cost, even if that cost includes the right to control their own bodies? (And that is possible, considering that John McCain would not hesitate to put right-wing justices on the Supreme Court.) I don't want to resort to stereotypes here, but is this maybe a generational thing? Most of us who watch/post at Feministing are in the under-40 crowd, and most of us support Obama because he supports women's issues (at least more than McCain does.) Maybe the disgruntled Clinton supporters are older and afraid they will not see a woman president in their lifetime? I mean, I certainly want a woman to be president, but I would not want THIS woman to be president! (And considering John McCain's age and mediocre health, it's a distinct possibility that she could take over.)

I guess that all I have to say is that, when it comes right down to it, having a single woman in a position of power is less important to me than women everywhere (i.e., everywhere in the States) being able to gain and keep their basic rights.

A few things.

One, I don't understand what being pro life has to do with having 5 kids, one with down syndrome.
Two, her wanting creation taught in schools is not what she said. She said that students need to understand all sides of the debate and she's right. You can't argue with your opponent if you don't know what they believe in.
Three, being a "hockey mom" and spending time talking about her husband and kids. We talk about Michelle Obama and Cindy McCain all the time. What's the difference? As for her kids, no one outside of Alaska has any idea who she is all she was doing was introducing her self. She is a governor, her husband runs (owns?) a successful company, 5 kids ranging in age from 5 months to adult - I think she is a great example of a women who doesn't let society tell her what to do. She wants to call her self a hockey mom, thats fine, but she's a hockey mom who is now the VP nomination and that, I believe, can give hope to those women who feel like they have to choose between a career and kids.
As for being pro life and anti gay marriage to be honest I don't know to much on how far right she is. She did VETO a reform that would have denied same sex partner benefits to state employees and while it may not be marriage its a step in the right direction and it shouldn't be ignored.
I am from Alaska and over all I have loved what she has done since she has been governor. There is a part of me that is disappointed that she accepted the nomination because McCain is so beneath her. She has spent the last (almost) two years reforming the state government which was filled with so much corruption and run by the "old boys club". She has totally bucked the system and goes against tradition in the way she runs the office. She is in support of off shore drilling, so are most Alaskans. The drilling of oil and gas up here is not so black and white as it is down south.
She cut back pork barrel spending and gave more money to eduction and the SChip program. She is a big believe eduction (including programs to help poor and disadvantaged kids) and health care for everyone - but more importantly she has backed up her words with the money. I truly believe that what she has done in office has been to promote the welfare of Alaska and not her pocket book and political aspirations.
She has the ability to stand up to McCain and if you watched McCain at all during her speech there were times when he was looking very uncomfortable with the things she was saying. She threw a couple of jabs at him that he did not find to funny. She is NOT a push over and McCain would have a very difficult time keeping her "in line". Of course McCain is hoping to use her gender and I do find that offensive but she is nobody's lap dog.

What a condescending, superficial and cheap trick. Like that would make me forget his opposition to reproductive rights and complete stupidity regarding access to birth control, not to mention his less-than-stellar history with fair pay. Unfortunately, though, we should never underestimate the American public's habit of just not paying attention. I really hope the Democrats, especially Sen. Clinton, respond aggressively to this.

Anyone familiar with John McCain's record on women's issues - let alone Sarah Palin's - should be pretty disgusted with his pander.

But Susannah's analysis confirms my worst fears, which is that there might be enough idiots in this country to see nothing more than a woman.

Obama needs Hillary to help shut Palin down, first and foremost (on that note, I think she'll be eaten alive by Joe Biden in the debate). They'll also have to - albeit carefully - nail her on her inexperience, and on the fact that she is up to her ears in an ethics scandal.

I also think that there has to be a way to point out the problem with having the mother of a four-month-old with Down's syndrome on the ticket. Obviously, in no way am I saying that moms shouldn't work (which is exactly how a lot of Republicans will spin it), but I don't know any woman, Democrat or Republican, who would leave a special-needs infant plus four other children to do such an unbelievably difficult and time-consuming job. My mother is a nurse who works with newborns, and her reaction to Palin was along the lines of "is that women batshit crazy?"

I can commend McCain's political acuity for picking someone that would shake things up a bit, but he's now the one putting an election before a country. From everything I've read, Palin might help the ticket, but she'd do a shitty job in the office itself. Let's hope that comes through.

I was waiting for someone to make such an articulate, and well thought out statement.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ojt_ndiYIT4

All I can say is, I can't WAIT to see the Vice-Presidential debates. I think maybe Joe Biden can take her... and make her look like the nobody she is.

I haven't seen too many comments from Alaskans here, so let me toss in my two bits. (mind you, I'm an ex-pat in Oregon and Palin's a part of the political and social landscape that drove me away...)

To her credit, she is all about "clean government" which is huge in Alaska, the last frontier and refuge for racketeering and nepotism (see also: Lisa Murkowski). Once she won her mayoral seat (Wasilla, pop. 8000 or so), she reduced her own salary. She's also all about state rights and state sovereignty, and works to free Alaska from it's place at the Fed's feedlot (see also: Gravina bridge/bridge to nowhere). And while she's against gay marriage, she did veto a bill that would have taken benefits from the same-sex partners of Alaska state employees. It's certainly not an endorsement of gay rights by any means, but it certainly surprised this Alaskan dyke.

However, she's as pro-life as it gets and is a hard-line social conservative. I can't stand her politics, and her record on women's issues is lousy. She certainly fits the McCain ethos, though: she's got a bit of integrity and belabors that for all to see.

As for the scandal with former Commish Monegan, Palin's ass is covered, although foul play may be involved. Essentially, her ex-brother-in-law, a former State Trooper, and her sister were involved in a messy divorce. When Monegan didn't fire the ex, Palin fired him. It's more complicated than that, (both the Anchorage Daily News and wikipedia have good summaries) but it just sums up what I think of her: she plays up the momma bear image, keeps her trail clean and undercuts civil liberties quietly and often. McCain could have picked someone more corrupt, but he also could have made a less calculated, less inexperienced, less out-of-left field decision. We'll see.

Becca-

I believe the first point is because it's one of those Republican talking points; women's first job is wife and mother, ect.

As for your second: I respectfully have to disagree. Creationism is a religious based theory. It has no base whatsoever in science. So teach it in a church or a religious school or your home; the USA has a separation of Church and State, and until someone can say to me 'here is hard evidence and scientific proof for Creationism' I do not believe it has any place next to science in the public school system.

As for McCain's choice... I am not surprised, per se, but rather angry and disgusted.

It is a blatant attempt to gank ex-Hillary supporters- one that hopefully will not fly- and condescending to boot. What McCain is telling the country with this choice is that women are interchangeable, and that he assumes women like me, who supported Hillary to the bitter end, are somehow stupid enough to simply vote for someone because they have the same parts we do. I think McCain is of the opinion that we cannot tell people with vaginas apart. One ladybit is the same as the next, right?

Palin is so inexperienced it's a JOKE. McCain better can the 'Obama doesn't have enough experience' shit now, because his running mate makes Barack look like an motherfucking elder statesman of the highest order.

Palin is extremely anti-choice (I refuse to say 'pro-life' because to say that is to imply my position is 'anti-life' which is CRAP) vehemently against gay marriage, and spent her acceptance speech largely talking about her husband and children and blatantly trying to assure people she is not one of '*Those* feminists'.

She is the new Coulter; stroke material for the rabid right. So what if McCain chose a woman? He chose one who is an ex beauty pageant contestant and a yes-man for the party's biggest misogynists.

It's insulting and horrible that he would try and manipulate the country like this. And when Palin had the balls to compare herself to Hillary, I may have died a little inside. I hope Hillary turns around and gives it to her with both barrels. Because Palin is no Hillary Clinton. She's essentially a political blowup doll and I maintain that anyone who would argue differently is fooling themselves.

My first reaction: "Goddamnit."

My second reaction: "Fuck!"

You know in movies when things seem to be going well, but then the opposition invokes some sort of deus ex machina or hidden ordinance or something that sends everyone back to square one? Yeah.

From a political standpoint, it's a brilliant move. But I still hate it.

(And I agree with the other posters about the Down's Syndrome comment. That was unnecessary and, as presented, has some seriously uncomfortable implications.)

"Hillary left 18 million cracks in the glass ceiling of America. It turns out that the women of America aren't finished yet and we can shatter that glass ceiling once and for all!"
-Sarah Palin, 5 minutes ago

Well, Hillary was running for President, not Vice-President, but it's not surprising that such an anti-woman woman would believe achieving the #2 slot shatters the glass ceiling "once and for all." Deep down, she knows her place.

Two, her wanting creation taught in schools is not what she said. She said that students need to understand all sides of the debate and she's right. You can't argue with your opponent if you don't know what they believe in.

Not to get sidetracked, but creationism and evolution are not "sides" of a debate. One is science. The other is not. To position creationism as merely a competing theory to evolution is to really, truly, fundamentally misunderstand, well, REALITY. If Palin doesn't understand this she is an idiot. If she does understand this she is pandering. Either way, I'm not impressed.

The irony of this present VP situation is that Joe Biden is more of a feminist than Palin.

I, like many of you, like to scoff at this insulting attempt to attract women to the republican party this november but that does not a damn thing to suppress my fears about this election. I know that all polls should be taken with a grain of salt but the fact is every poll in the nation has had Obama's support shrinking and shrinking to the virtual dead heat the two candidates are now presently in. I feel like half of the country is being duped once again into believing 2+2=5 and all I want to do is scream in their face about how ignorant they are.
As Stephen Colbert (or was it John Stewart) so often said, "Don't F**K this up America!"

I'm wondering if this will end up being a Harriet Myers moment for McCain.

Same here! I said the same thing to my husband. McCain might think we are ignorant sheep (and sadly, some Americans are), but I think most people will see this as the blatant tokenism it truly is, especially the Hillary supporters he hopes to attract. Not to mention, McCain will be the oldest presidential candidate to be elected to first term. Should he die in office, is this little-known rookie truly experienced enough to assume the role of commander-in-chief?

I hope he doesn't reconsider his choice, though. In the end, I think Palin will work to hurt him more than she will help him.

I hate the way that she compares herself to Hillary and brought up the glass ceiling that she could get the chance to break. The reality is, she is getting pulled through by a man. It is a slap in the face for Hillary supporters because we saw how hard she worked to prove that she was more than Bill's wife, that she could stand on her own and lead a nation regardless of who she was married to. Palin is being used for her gender to woo women(funny move for a party known for thinking affirmative action moves "less-deserving" minorities over others). Does he really think we are that simple minded?
I really hope this backfires on him.

Great analysis suzannah,

My sister called and woke me up this morning telling me this news. She was SUPER EXCITED. As I was half sleep I felt absolutely desperate, anxious and exhausted.

I understand and share her excitement. I think all feminist activists should be happy because of this choice. This means the candidates are strongly courting women's votes and that gives us all a chance to really talk about what women want and need in this country. We should be happy because this is a chance for America to pay attention to its women.

We should also be very nervous because IF WE DO A BAD JOB of bringing attention to women's demands, this move (Palin as McCain's running mate) jeopardizes the chances of getting a candidate who is actually FOR women's rights in the white house (i.e. Obama).

This is a huge responsibility on our shoulders. and that's what makes me exhausted. I'm already tired of trying to explain to my friends about things that came up with Hillary's candidacy and why I supported her. Now I have to explain an even more complex situation...

We need to be organized, aware, and active. We need to think practically while also always speaking about women's demands (a diverse group of women). and we need to stay away from perfectionism, and idealism and ideologies altogether.

This weight is on our shoulders and future generations are going to be looking at feminist activists today to lead us in a good direction.

ps. and there is that issue of sexism against Palin, which we also need to be carefully vocal about (no matter how difficult)

This is such a disgusting punch in the face to feminism. The possibility of having the first woman vice president be an anti-feminist politician that has only been given this opportunity BECAUSE she is a woman McCain wants to use to score some votes.

He picked a young, female politician with very little experience who is a self-described soccer mom. Anti choice, anti equality.

How horrifying.

We have a lot of work to do until November! I hope this doesn't cause anyone to lose hope! We are going to win this thing because we have to!!!

An aside on the Creationism debate from a staunch secularist -

Entertaining Creationist theory in state-funded schools is unconstitutional not only because the theory does not lend itself to the scientific method, but because to teach one religion's story of genesis is a big f*** you to all other religions. If you want to claim the Christians may be right on the origins of the universe, then you have to say the Hindus, Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, Mahayanna Buddhists, Theravada Buddhists, Jainists, Bahai's, Taoists, Shintoists, Zorastrians, Neopagans, Scientologists, Pastafarians, Voudouists, and all the millions of lesser known theologies may be right, too. To give one religion a preference would be to declare it an official religion. Many less diverse regions of our nation are all for this, and it fits nicely into McCain's accusation that Muslims don't share "our Judeo-Christian values."

I grew up in a rural, Bible-thumping town slightly smaller than the one Palin governed as mayor. The state's job is to defend the rights of that one loner kid in class who may make up the entire non-Christian minority but needs to be guaranteed that if her personal spiritual beliefs aren't given creedence by the state curriculum, then no one else's will be either. That's why you can't teach Creationism without being in contempt of the First Amendment, Sarah Palin.

(I just started an account so I could post.)

I feel the same way that all of you feel. I couldn't watch the entire speech. I actually cried.

I am horrified that the first woman to receive this historic position stands with a party that doesn't support the rights of all women.

I have grown more and more disappointed with John McCain. He wants this election so bad, he doesn't care about anything else. He has changed his message, attacked Obama for inexperience, and has undermined his entire campaign slogan: A Leader We Can Believe In!

He isn't a leader. He waits for Obama to make the first move, then retailors his entire campaign to the same fundamentals as Obama's.... change, middle class, reform, etc.

I am surprised to read what some of you have to say about Sarah Palin. It sounds like her values and beliefs (supports SChip, universal health care) conflicts with McCain's.

The only reason Palin is on the ballot is because she has a vagina, and McCain doesn't want to be overshadowed by the historical significance of Obama's campaign. I am glad women are running for office, but this woman doesn't have the experience or the qualifications of Hillary. Hillary cracked the glass ceiling and those cracks should be respected.

In the speech today I noticed they cited the anniversery of women's suffrage. I fear that the republican convention may center and focus on that. Does anybody know if they will do such a thing?

Sarah Palin isn't Hillary Clinton.

On the issues that matter most to women, they're complete opposites.

http://www.SarahPalinISNTHillaryClinton.com

Vote smart.

Roja,

Today, I actually decided to volunteer for Obama's campaign... and I called NARAL.

I asked if they knew of any woman's rights protests at the republican convention. They said they don't know yet, because they just received the same news.

I am a little lost about what to do, how to get involved on a large scale and where to go... but I feel the same way.

We have to win this, because we have to.

I can't wait to hear what the Clintons have to say..

It's already started... the news is already introducing her as "Sarah Palin, a mother of five..." Did you ever hear Dick Cheney introduced as "Dick Cheney, the father of xx" or "John McCain, a father of xx" and so on.

Ed Rollins, the CNN Republican commentator, said it best:

"She is blunt, outspoken and charming. And don't assume she can't stand toe-to-toe with Joe Biden. She is a great debater. And she was runner-up for the Miss Alaska title, won Miss Congeniality in that contest, and plays the flute."

Woo. Hoo.

talon23, bingo.

it's both laughable and insulting. suzannah, i disagree with your analysis as far as hillary supporters jumping on board any ticket with a uterus. i think the mainstream media has blown the whole PUMA shit waaaaay out of proportion and it's kind of insulting to think that those 18 million hillary supporters would be so stupid as to effectively spit in the face of everything hillary stands for by voting for mccain just because he's got a female veep. i hope hillary hits back hard on this obvious pandering and points it out.

i also don't think obama has to answer for shit. this whole week has been about explaining why he and joe biden are the right choice right now and the clintons, both of 'em have been really at their best in advocating for obama/biden.

i know that the electorate is largely ill-informed and often largely disinterested, but i think we have engaged enough people this time to win.

and the fact is, joe biden is going to mop the floor with sarah palin in that debate. throwing palin in the ring with him is a recipe for carnage . it's not palin's fault really (well, she could have said no, so maybe a little), but she really isn't ready to be a heartbeat away from the presidency and i think a lot of undecided voters will agree.

i'm just not really worried about this choice at all for obama/biden.

What a laughable choice. I think it could actually help the Democratic cause, if people start looking at her lack of experience and her self-described "hockey mom"ness.

I think some here have been too quick to write this off as pandering, tokenism, etc. Regardless of Ms. Palin's politics, this is a notable moment for feminism. Even the CONSERVATIVE party in this country has nominated a female for the 2nd highest office in the nation. In some ways, this is a victory for feminism.

I am somewhat offended that people are assuming that she's an unqualified token "affirmative action" nomination. It doesn't seem particularly feminist for the kneejerk reaction to a female VP nomination to be a declaration that she is clearly unqualified, and merely got the nomination because she possesses a vagina. She has almost as much experience as Barack Obama, whose Senate career is only slightly longer than Sarah Palin's governorship. And, her 2 years as governor of Alaska gives her more executive experience than John McCain, Barack Obama and Joe Biden combined. I don't hear anyone here declaring Obama "an unqualified affirmative action nominee".

I was similarly appalled at the insinuation that she should be home with her 4-month-old child. Really?

Look, I don't agree with her politically. She's a conservative -- I am not. I won't be voting for her. But, I'll not fall into the trap of assuming that women with different political beliefs than I are unqualified, affirmative-action beneficiaries. As we often point out here, "women" are not a monolithic entity. We each have our own minds, our own experience, our own opinions, and our own politics. Sarah Palin is an anti-choice, pro-gun, tax-cutting, hawkish conservative. She has the right to have her own mind on such things.

My version of feminism does not state that women must be monolithically progressive for their accomplishments to have meaning.

kbz

I hope Biden does mop the floor with Palin. I just also hope that that doesn't mean that everyone watching takes that as proof that women can't cut it in politics and instead takes it for what it actually means, which is that McCain picked a weak candidate. I don't find this ploy makes voting for McCain at all enticing. I firmly believe in voting on the issues and for who I believe will be the best for this country regardless of gender. If I had two candidates running who I believed were equal on all of the issues then I would vote for the female but that would be the only time gender would factor into my decision. By the way, I don't think that the sarcasm used on Catherine_M was fair. She brought up a valid point which also gave me pause which was why after stating that Palin is anti-choice did the post then add in parenthesis that she has five children, one with Downs Syndrome? I am sure there is a valid reason, but it did make me wonder.

Are we feminists really OK with a respected female politician being called "stroke material for the rabid right" and a "political blowup doll" on a FEMINIST BLOG!?!?

Is it acceptable to refer to her as “batshit crazy” for being a “woman […] who would leave a special-needs infant plus four other children to do such an unbelievably difficult and time-consuming job”?

Come on!

Why are such epithets any more acceptable when directed at a conservative woman than they would be when directed at a progressive? This is not an acceptable way to refer to any woman.

So much for the radical idea that women are people too ... even conservative women.

kbz

Julia:

I think that part of the mention is that Palin has spoken about her choice not to get an abortion after finding out that her child had down's while pregnant as part of her continued pro-life credentials.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=64876

"Ending the pregnancy, however, was never an option for the Palins. On April 18, Sarah Palin gave birth to a 6-pound, 2-ounce son, Trig Paxson Van Palin.

"We've both been very vocal about being pro-life," Palin told the Associated Press, speaking of herself and her husband, Todd. "We understand that every innocent life has wonderful potential."

The day after the birth, the Palins released the following statement: "Trig is beautiful and already adored by us. We knew through early testing he would face special challenges, and we feel privileged that God would entrust us with this gift and allow us unspeakable joy as he entered our lives. We have faith that every baby is created for good purpose and has potential to make this world a better place. We are truly blessed."

Several people have brought up the fact that Palin has a 4 month old baby with down syndrome and have criticized her for taking this on because of that situation. You've also stated your not saying that women with children shouldn't work, but however unintentional, you pretty much are.

Can we just not even go there? I guess it's good to talk about, but it's also good to recognize why you think that and that you would NOT be mentioning or thinking about that if she were a male candidate. I believe she has a partner that I'm sure is just as capable of taking care of their child if she can't.

See what happens? I find myself coming to the defense of Palin! Scary!

That's why we should just not go there!

Just as reminder, Palin was not the first woman on a ticket for Veep. The first woman was Geraldine Ferraro. So McCain isn't breaking any new ground at all for giving the nod to Palin.

And by first I meant first viable candidate for Vice President. I really need to do a better job of qualifying my statements.

"She has almost as much experience as Barack Obama, whose Senate career is only slightly longer than Sarah Palin's governorship."

This will definitely be a GOP talking point, but it's important to squash it right away. Palin pales in comparison to Obama's accomplishments.

She stood on the city council and was mayor of a town of around 7500 people, and has been governor of Alaska for only about a year.

Obama spent two terms in the Illinois Senate, and is partway through his first US Senate term.

Obama holds a doctorate in law from Harvard Law School, and was the first Black President of Harvard Law.

Palin has a bachelors degree in Journalism from the University of Idaho.

This is most definitely a poor attempt at pandering. How did this woman get selected, when Condoleeza wasn't even in the running? I may disagree wholly with Condoleeza's politics, but experience is something I'd never say she didn't have. What about Christine Whitman, for that matter? There were any number of experienced, well educated VP choices that McCain could have made.

I turned on CNN right after the news broke and my first thought was 'Well, shit, I didn't expect this'. I'd pretty much accepted that McCain would pick Romney, so this came totally out of left field for me. My second thought was 'Does he really think we're this stupid?'. Seriously. I wanted HRC. But does that mean I am going to support Republicans because McCain presented us with a women?

Sarah Palin is not Hillary, not even remotely. And it's pretty plain to see WHY he picked her: he needs her to counteract the 'McCain is too rich to understand Middle Class America' argument, and, of course, to try and attract disgruntled Hillary supporters. It's a cheap shot.

But watching her and McCain speak, I was actually going back and forth between laughing out loud and swearing at the screen. McCain trying to sell someone as politically experienced and ready to essentially be understudy for the President who has nothing to show for themselves but two years as governor was just too ridiculous. C'mon. The upside is that he'll NEVER be able to use the experience card on Obama.

What had me yelling and screaming was Palin paying lip-service to feminism by referring to Hillary and the glass ceiling. Seriously! If she becomes president, it's because an old white guy who chose her to attract female voters became sick or died. How is that fighting against the 'good old boys network'?? And how can she talk about cracking the glass ceiling when she supports anti-woman, anti-choice, and anti-gay policies?

And then part of me just feels crap because she IS a woman in a pretty powerful place now, and it's really hard to get there.

Michael,

All of that is true. The GOP response will be, to acknowledge that Palin is less experienced than Obama -- but John McCain is not. Obama's running for the highest office -- she's running for #2. There is a difference.

This is a campaign that we cannot win if it becomes a debate on experience.

kbz

The notion that any Democrats, let alone feminist, Hillary supporting Democrats were ever thinking of voting McCain or Republican in general is pure B.S.- hype.

If any who were considering voting Hillary are now considering McCain, it is the Republicans and on the fense, swing votes.

Not Dems.
let's not propagate B.S. about Dem. women- ok?

Next,
women who think other women should be forced to keep pregnancy (as a punishment or gift) were never going to vote Democrat, never will and we do not need to concern ourselves with them.

We can concern ourselves with those who do not usually vote.
Making sure liberals get out and vote, overcoming cynicism and whatever other excuses exist, is our challenge.

Obama can win if we focus on our strengths, rather than on what the opposing party (in a country of 2 parties) is doing.

Except of course when we blatantly tell them, loud and clear, "Enough!"
and you don't "get it"!

I am a woman and a feminist. I voted for Hillary in the Primaries because i do not have health insurance, though i do have a chroni health issue.
And I am a single mother.
And I would appreciate equal rights for me and my GLBTQ friends and family.

But, I am a Democrat
and I did appreciate Obama's speech. During the primaries I admit I was excited to see him run based on his physicality and the fact that he too is "mixed", that he represents Chicago, etc.
But, based on foreign policy, GLBTQ rights and health care - Hillary got my vote.

I'm taking her advice to keep going and still working with the party.
I think there are a lot of women who share my position.

Polin is not after my vote. I'm a baby killer to her.

Mother fucker!

Goddammit!

I knew he'd pull a stunt like this when Obama chose Biden. McCain obviously doesn't give a shit about women, one glance at his stance on fair pay would tell anyone that, but, here, he's playing to the most ignorant fuckers in the audience to make it seem like he bought a clue.

People don't pay enough fucking attention. And now I'm fucking paranoid that stupid assholes will elect this dumbass and his vagina owning tool of a VP candidate.

This is so glaringly transparent and condescending. My initial reaction was the same as Adam's. The Republicans really think that little of women?

Apparently Palin is proud to be compared to Margaret Thatcher, and calls herself "The Iron Lady of the North. "It's on her website.

I feel sick.

The sad part about all this is... of course the mainstream media is already falling for McCain's tricks.. I just heard Wolf Blitzer saying, "Is the Obama campaign now regretting not choosing Clinton after seeing the Republican VP nomination?" Ugh.

Well, hoo-fucking-ray for the McPander. I can't wait to see Joe Biden make mooseburgers out of her. She signed on for a tough race, and I hope she gets one.

Not that I expected anything moral or respectable out of the McCain campaign, but this is a supremely low blow, as most other comments have already pointed out. As a voter who takes the time to learn about the issues and candidates, I'm insulted to think that a politician thinks his voters are so low-information that they won't do their own armchair vetting of his VP pick.

I heard on NPR that the FBI is gearing up to do a formal investigation on her firing of the safety commissioner, due to start in October. I hope they do it, and I hope it knocks her out of the race, even if it's just out of sheer embarrassment.

Honestly, 18 months actually serving as governor somehow trumps Obama's time in the Illinois state legislature, and the US Senate? Yikes. For that, why didn't McCain just pluck someone out of a high school student council?

I have heard republicans and journalists refer to her as a FEMINIST on TV!

Okay so I don't think the majority of Hillary supporters will vote for her, just the really intense ones that we're already voting for McCain cause they were already superly pissed. (http://hillarysupportersformccain.blogspot.com/)

Of course none of us will fall for this trickery and I think most people are much more concentrated on the issues of this election not just the people.

Now what I really wanted to say is that its making me very sad that some commentators on here are making attacks against Palin based on her mothering decisions, and her past beauty pageant stuff. If you're going to attack her at least make it about her views (which for all of us are truly terrifying) and leave her looks and children out of it.

Apart from the fact that listening to Sarah Palin talk about the issues (as I've been doing on youtube for a part of the afternoon) is going to make me want to drive a screwdriver through my temple, I think this is an incredibly stupid choice for the GOP, and that makes me very happy.

The idea that Sarah Palin is going to help him get disenfranchised Hilary-ites is ridiculous. The fact that Hilary is going to campaign for Obama will, in the coming months, win that group back over.

It's not as though Palin is a wonderful feminist, progressive candidate. She compares herself to Margaret Thatcher, and I don't think that's really fair (after all, Margaret Thatcher is the Michael Jordan of anti-feminist-women). Realistically, Palin delivers a swing state with three electoral votes. Frankly, I don't think the election is going to come down to Alaska, and I don't think that she bolsters him on any of the issues.

I mean, realistically, she has nothing to offer a candidate like McCain, from what I can see, and when she stands up in a VP debate next to Joe Biden, who's served in the Senate for thirty years and is on two of the most important committee in Congress (and runs one of them).

I understand that Biden is not well liked in the feminist community (and I have misgivings about him too, that's for sure), but Palin is a lot worse. The fact that she's a woman doesn't mean she's gong to attract women to the camp. In fact, it seems almost sexist that people think that.

Do politicians seriously think that the entire female population is going to see a woman and go "Well, I'm a woman too, I must agree with her." After scanning through these comments, I think not.

Here Hear!
Take the sexism out of the attacks on her.
Make it about the issues.

You can't defend Michelle Obama for being a "proud wife and mother"
then deny another women the right to claim the same.

We can not make this about her physical appearance or whether she worked in the beauty industry, film industry or sex industry, for that matter, and still claim to be adhering to the highest feminist standards.

It's about the issues.

One in particular being the right to a safe, legal abortion.

You know what really irks me? Even here, we're insulting our own intelligence.

I don't think Hillary supporters are going to start flocking to McCain just because his running mate has a vagina. Really, come on guys. Obama doesn't owe anyone an "explanation." Hillary supporters fought for her becuase they like what she was saying, not because she had ovaries. Women can actually (gasp!) think for themselves on issues that are important to them.

What kills me is that, as with Ann Coulter and way too many others, we're going to have to defend her from misogynist attacks, when she's obviously not interested in doing the same for other women.

But ah, well. That's feminism! *cue theme song*

Misspelled, I disagree. By joining the Republican party, they've basically signed on for all kinds of ugly things. I don't think we "owe" them any kind of protection as feminists when they actively work to undermine our cause.

If they don't like the stereotypical Republican badge, maybe they should identify as Independents, and pick their battles more carefully.

Hard-hearted stance, I know, but why should I try to advance their cause while they stomp on mine? I'd rather work to advance myself and my cause, and let the Ann Coulters of the world work themselves into a lather over whatever it is that ticks them off.

It doesn't advance their cause. It advances our cause. In the face of their stomping on it, no less.

Pip,

So you support women's right to make up their own mind about the issues -- just so long as they agree with you? If they choose the wrong side, then they're fair game for hateful sexist attacks?

Pathetic. Feminism is not a facade to protect the left. Feminism is not merely a means of beating conservatives over the head (though they certainly deserve it). Sexist epithets or humor are unacceptable regardless of the ideology of the female recipient.

We fight for the acknowledgment that women are sovereign beings, free to make up their own minds about abortion, gun control, foreign affairs, taxes, or any of a thousand other issues. Women are free to be conservative, and should be free to do so without threat of sexist attacks. Your "feminism" is quite shallow.

kbz

I think this was not a good decision for McCain.

He can no longer criticize Obama for his inexperience, and that is good for Obama. McCain also failed to pick a VP that compensates for his admitted lack of understanding of macro-economics, which is also good for Obama.

Hopefully Obama will start hitting McCain hard on the issue of economics and foreign policy (remember McCain doesn't know who America is fighting in Iraq).

I think this is good for Obama, and unlike McCain Obama has covered all his bases with his VP pick.

KBZ - I guess I just don't see the point in helping someone who deliberately won't appreciate it. It's time I could spend doing something more productive.

That's not to say that I find everything fair game. When people call her "Mann" Coulter, I think it's disgraceful. When people think it's fair to attack Palin's beauty pageant participation, I think that's pointless and ridiculous, and irrelevant to just about everything.

But when it comes to someone who is so hell-bent on destroying everything I stand for, no, I don't think I owe them a damn thing. As much as I would like to think that a good sit-down talk about certain issues would help convert anti-feminists, I see no reason to let them spit in my face afterward.

As long as McCain and the ridiculous right continue to use Palin's motherhood-- especially of this infant-- as ammo in the anti-abortion fight, and as long as Palin continues to use it, I think it's completely fair to ask questions.

Because as we've seen over and over, anti-abortion people don't really care what happens to that kid once it makes it out of the womb. They're in the business of protecting fetuses, and thus controlling women's reproductive systems.

Sarah Palin enjoys a certain amount of privilege, and that privilege lets her have both a newborn baby (with a disability) and still run for office. I challenge the notion that we shouldn't be allowed to question her choices when they're being held up as an example. They are an example, and right now they're an example of the right's refusal to look at the reality of raising these children once they're born.

I would like to add that the choice of Palin is sad because (I'm pretty sure) she will inevitably fail and make mistakes and show her lack of experience, and then people will say "see a woman can't do this job" and there will be some who will say they are glad Hillary didn't get picked because she would have ultimately failed too. It is the old problem--they pick a woman that's not qualified just to have a "woman" and then when she blows it, the really qualified women suffer.

P.S. I have a special needs child who could not be put in day care and I had to go on part-time from my job as an an english professor to care for him properly. That poor kid.

Dude, I'm sure the kid will be fine. He has a dad and siblings (though they shouldn't have to be parents) and I'm sure the family can afford all the best services.

Which doesn't detract from there still being a viable issue or two there.

Check this out:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/08/29/boxer-palin-will-not-win-clinton-supporters/

They make a good point: If he was looking for a woman, why didn't he pick someone like Olympia Snowe?

Heh. I just started laughing when I found out what his choice was. Race and gender have not been issues to me in this race--I supported Obama because I believe in his message, not because he's black, and I didn't support Hillary because I don't like the way she does things, not because I'm anti-woman (I'm a woman myself, after all). I almost thought McChain (this is my name for 'McCain') would choose Kay Bailey Hutchinson, who is a strong woman--not one I agree with--but a formidable woman who actually used her power to help my husband while he had medical problems in Iraq.

But... Sarah Palin? Seriously? Miss not-quite-Alaska, mayor of Nowhere, barely governor? Miss gets pregnant at like 43, finds out it's going to have down syndrome, and makes it live? Not to mention she FLEW ON A PLANE WHILE IN LABOR because she didn't want it born in Texas, she wanted it in Alaska. That sound irresponsible to.. anyone? I mean, I don't care that she's not a stay at home mom, but in a plane while in labor and knowingly putting a child at risk for down syndrome when she already has 4 of them? I don't understand it. I don't understand choosing someone with so little understanding of anything.

Oh, well. Not my candidate's VP pick, not my problem.

I've been furious ever since I read that McCain chose Palin as his running-mate. He NEVER would have picked a woman had it been a man who lost to Obama. I would love to see a woman VP but not her and not for the reasons she was chosen. I don't think this is a step forward for women. In fact I think it's a step backwards. She is being used and displayed to make McCain look appealing to Clinton supporters.

I've been furious ever since I read that McCain chose Palin as his running-mate. He NEVER would have picked a woman had it been a man who lost to Obama. I would love to see a woman VP but not her and not for the reasons she was chosen. I don't think this is a step forward for women. In fact I think it's a step backwards. She is being used and displayed to make McCain look appealing to Clinton supporters.

I've been furious ever since I read that McCain chose Palin as his running-mate. He NEVER would have picked a woman had it been a man who lost to Obama. I would love to see a woman VP but not her and not for the reasons she was chosen. I don't think this is a step forward for women. In fact I think it's a step backwards. She is being used and displayed to make McCain look appealing to Clinton supporters.

Oops! Sorry for that showing up three times. It wasn't going through so I clicked submit a couple more times.

What the flying goddamn unholy fuck?!

"...finds out it's going to have down syndrome, and makes it live..."

I'm speechless. I have no goddamn words.

I still have almost no fucking words.

Ableism.

That's all.

I think that looking at the credentials actually make Palin a great VP candidate. Every one is overlooking the fact that no one in the race as of yesterday had any executive experience. No one has to run a city or state government. No body has administered an operating budget. I kept hoping Obama would pick a governor to add some executive experience. Add to executive experience that Palin was the most popular elected official in the country, and on credentials you have a good candidate.

Palin manages to be a maverick while still appealing to the base. She stepped down from the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission citing ethical problems with the Republican, and lo and behold we have trials and convictions aplenty from the Veco Scandal(maverick). She is pro-life (base).

She also has a credentials in the energy crisis. The democratic rebuttal to offshore drilling before flipping like a pancake was “we hold lessees that we haven’t developed.” Palin supports ANWR drilling which democrats have blocked. Palin has instigated law suit against oil companies for not developing leases.

She does have some failing. Her AGIA proposal is problematic in that Trans-Canada’s bid was non-conforming. She also botched saving the Matanuska Dairy. Her firing of Monegan has been her biggest scandal. Look up Andrew Halcro’s blog to get all the bloody details. Her spin was that motivated staffers acted independently on this issue. She would complain here and there and motivators wanted to get some chips.

Also, with the Obama lead narrowing if McCain can pick some one who gets him just a few percentage points, that could turn into major electoral votes.

Don’t look to Biden to rip her apart either. In the Murkowski, Palin, Binkley debate for governor Palin held her own. I’d give the debate to Murkowski; but he was so curmudgeonly he ended up being the loser. Biden can’t just crush her. Crying helped Clinton stay alive.

I wonder what the response would have been if Palin had been male with the same accomplishments. I think McCain had the same problem with Romeny that Obama had McCain. The VP candidate is a wildly popular governor in race with no one with executive experience. The VP candidate has a history of fighting big oil and a reputation for clean government. She has some dirty laundry. But Obama has his shady real-estate dealings, the Clintons as a family have a slew, and McCain had a failed marriage and the Keating Five Scandal. As a candidate she has legs to stand on.

Ditto, katemoore- Focused, that was TOTALLY out of line. I am astounded. How disgusting.

This Sarah Palin thing is just tiring to me. I'm bored already. It's a transparent decision, one that barely needs to have its flaws articulated out loud. It isn't going to fool anyone who doesn't want to be fooled.

I am less worried when it comes to substance, but I do think the Democratic party is going to have to bust out the facts and break down the issues on this one. On paper Palin looks like a formidable choice and a good move on McCain's part. In reality, this isn't the case. We'll need Obama, Biden, Clinton and everyone else with a mouth and some visibility making public exactly WHY Palin is not an acceptable stand-in for a Clinton presidency or vice-presidency.

As for her record on gay rights/same sex marriage, there is something that needs to be said in response to this statement:

"As for being pro life and anti gay marriage to be honest I don't know to much on how far right she is. She did VETO a reform that would have denied same sex partner benefits to state employees and while it may not be marriage its a step in the right direction and it shouldn't be ignored."

SHE VETOED THAT REFORM BECAUSE SHE HAD TO. She had NO OTHER choice, other than to sign legislation that had been found to be unconstitutional. She didn't do it because she is an ally to the LGBT community, she did it because she was in a corner.

DO NOT BELIEVE that this woman is better on "gay issues" than McCain or the Republican party at large. Having a gay friend does not mean you are an ally or that you support equality.

It's definitely a condescending ploy, but I'm guessig it has more to do with the one thing Palin is known for--forcing a small tax increase on the oil companies in Alaska--than her gender. I'd say the Republicans want to pit her against Biden (who's branded in the media as the senator from MBNA) as "proof" that the Republicans are not corporate stooges. Obama's done a great job of pointing out just how indebted to the industries Republicans are, and McCain coincidentally finds the one Republican with a tiny shred of anti-corporate cred? I'm betting any votes they hope to pick up from women would just be an extra bonus.

McCain picked a woman for his VP candidate who is willing to fight against womans rights no matter what it takes. She is a member of Feminist for Life (possibly the strongest anti-choice organization) and will probably continue to fight against women's reproductive rights if elected. This is seriously frightening. Not to mention she is nothing like Hillary and only an idiot would even group them in similar categories.

"...finds out it's going to have down syndrome, and makes it live..."

Good thing she didn't find out her child was going to be gay or trans, or she'd have had a real crisis on her hands.....

I mostly just lurk, but had to post, because I find this pick extremely insulting. If McCain had chosen a man with this resume, the media and the Democrats would have torn him to shreads. as Rachel Maddow pointed out, this is the person that MCCain feels is the second best choice in the country to be president? If he wanted to pick a woman, there are women, such as Kay Bailey Hutchison who have impressive resumes, but he had to go far and wide to fins a woman who is a "true conservative" and more hard line on choice than he is, so he threw things like education and solid experience out the window. I can admire Governor Palin for accomplishing all she has, but in no way does she have the resume of a Vice President, and it's an insult that of all the brilliant, qualified women in the country she is on the ticket.

Kay Bailey-Hutchison is my senator.

IMO, Palin's political resumé is far more impressive than Kay's. And it's not even close. I've phoned Kay's office many times to ask her to fight against the big oil companies special interests in Texas. Still waiting. Palin has done it Alaska after a couple of months in power.

I think she was not picked only because she's a woman.

What is it with you women?? Why is gender only relevant when the woman in politics is a liberal?? Can't you see the hypocrisy in your comments? If women vote for Hillary they are progressive and they are voting for the person not the woman. But, if someone like Condi Rice gets appointed to high office or Sarah Palin gets support as a VEEP candidate then those who appointed them are just pandering to the "cunt vote" not the quality of the person. How vulgar and narrow. With that same logic then when most African Americans vote for Barack Obama, they are all voting for him only because he is black not the most qualified candidate. Of course, some people are voting for Obama strictly because he is black and some will vote for Paling strictly because she is a woman. But, most will also look at substance. Also, you criticize Palin for talking about her husband but it is normal and perfectly fine for Obama, Biden and McCain to have paraded their spouses and families all over the country with them to demonstrate that they are family men. What a double standard! For men, you say they are family centered, but for Palin she is considered as pandering to the Christian right. Those are such sexist remarks and views.

I am an independent and I am trying to look at the issues for both candidates. Obama and McCain are both courting the Hillary supporters. I think that McCain made a bold move in choosing Sarah Palin as his running mate. It was strategic not hypocritical. You and women like you are the hypocrits!!!

I found your "lovely" site, by trying to find something negative about Gov Palin. All that I have so far found is her conservative social views, her lack of experience, and her occasional abuse of power.

I consider myself conservative, so I love her views. Her lack of experience concerns me less then Sen Obama's. As for her abusing her office by firing someone for personal reasons... nobody is perfect.

To be honest, at first I was really amused by the spitting and sputtering of everyone who feels offended by Gov Palin being picked for VP. However, the more I think about it the more it saddens me. You are burning her at the stake, just because she does not believe the same as you. You are so hard hearted that you are unable to even consider her a strong woman and a good choice.

I know you will roast this post. But do not worry, you will not offend me in the slightest. I never plan to visit your hateful little site again.

I would like to leave with a couple questions.
why do you fight so hard for abortions ?
Why do you not fight for the rights of prostitutes? If a woman wants to have sex for money, does she not have right ? After all it is her body.
Why do you not fight for the rights of drug users? If a woman wants to pollute her body with poisons, does she not have the right ? After all it is her body.

Now, before anyone screams at the screen "abortions are not harmful you pig"
You are killing a Human Life, You are killing a Child, You are killing Your Child !

the Bible says "it is appointed to man once to die, and then the judgement"
you may never be held accountable this side of eternity, but what will you say when you stand before a Holy and Just God? Will you try to justify it or will you hang your head knowing that you can not.

with all my love and prayers
Mike

one thing that is interesting to me is how this will effect, in a very small way, people who say we need 50 or 52% of all representatives at all levels to be women. If there was another conservative renaissance and they took over a lot of congressional spots and 50% of congress became female, with views that echoed those of Palin would that be progress? I don't see how there can be no gender litmus test and how a lot of us will defend Biden during this process and on the other hand say that 50+% of reprsentatives need to be women or that men are not capable of representing women. A small thing but it will be interesting to see how it plays out.

mike,
Very interesting. Lack of experience is no problem for you, lack of higher level education is no problem for you and you say as far as abuse of power "nobody is perfect". Really? Is that how you want to approach this? What if I flipped the script and Obama picked someone to the left of him, with very little experience, only a BA, and so on. Would you only attack that person and that choice on idealogical grounds or would you also attack all the other stuff? Amazing how much of a pass someone can get if theyre on your side.

What worries me most about this pick is that, besides being a blatant pander, it's probably an attempt to re-inject "values voters" into the race. In 2004 the economy wasn't doing well and the war was just as hopeless, but the Republicans won by distracting the religious right with the reminders that Democrats want to kill your unborn babies and convert the others to homosexuality. People can become so emotional about those issues and that emotion can displace any logic they feel about what's best for the economy or world security. Obama's got to keep going with his unity claim that "It's American let gays visit their partners in the ER" and "It's American to focus on preventing unwanted pregnancies," because it seems that Palin will be trotting her five children out every time she can't answer a question on foreign policy, just as McCain brings up his POW memories whenever he's asked about the economy. They have won with xenophobia before and they're going to try it again.

LMAO at Mike. "I came to this liberal site and found everybody criticizing her conservative views! Can you believe that? Plus they were getting all bent out of shape just because before being elected governor she was mayor of a town the size of my living room, and because there's a good chance that once elected, she placed the full power of the governor's office behind a cheap ploy to get revenge on an ex-family member! Bunch of godless bitches. Also, abortion abortion abortion hookers abortion."

Thanks to shfreereleesti for reminding everyone about Geraldine Ferraro, Walter Mondale's VP choice way back in 1984. After Hillary's run for president, Palin as a VP candidate is a mere anticlimax.

My other initial reaction to Palin is that she's pushing the "hockey mom" image hard enough to arouse my suspicions. She says that prior to her 1992 entry into politics, she was "just your average hockey mom in Alaska." I wonder: 1. how many average hockey moms are TV sportscasters, and 2. how much of a three-year-old child's life is devoted to hockey? What is Palin trying to hide behind the "hockey mom" facade?

Any woman who owns a rifle, enjoys moose stew, takes care of her family, is anti-abortion, and loves her country is okay with me.

Rather surprised at McCain's pick--didn't even know who she was. Listened to her acceptance "speech" and, sure, it was opportunistic (the "glass ceiling"), but so what else is new? Don't all politicians play to win? Truthfully, I didn't think McCain had it in him. I think it would have been best for Obama to pick Hillary as his VP; that would seem to be an unbeatable ticket. But too much history (hostility) between the two of them. I think he listened to McCain, et al., saying he wasn't experienced enough in international affairs, so he picked Biden. Then what does McCain do? He turns around before the convention is even digested and picks a woman VP, one who is lacking experience in international affairs, but has more experience than the three of them in management. It was a real "gotcha" move. It says, "Okay, Obama, you have acquire this huge following despite the fact that you are a virtual unknown, based on the fact that you have charisma, good looks, and fantastic presentation (and phenomenal financial support of the Move On folks, etc.) Obviously, experience doesn't mean that much in terms of votes in a prez, so why should it mean anything in a Vice-prez? You think I'm too old? Well, let's get some youth going on. Ha, ha. Actually, McCain's choice would have been someone like Leiberman or Ridge, who are both pro-choice. But that would have doomed him with the conservative base. She, now that I think about it, is actually a good pick. Besides, Presidents and VP's really don't have that much say over abortion rights, anyway (unless they get to stack the Court). This is a game, folks. McCain is no more sneaky than Obama. They both want to win (god only knows why). Maybe McCain is somewhat of a maverick after all and not just a stodgy old man, playing it safe. This could make or break his candidacy; it is really too soon to tell.

P.S. It really is so "on the reservation" to vote for someone based on their race, sex, political party, stance on one issue, etc. Or to NOT vote for someone based on those factors. Seems prudent to do the research on the individual in depth and to not take the media's (or other interested parties') word for it. It seems the tendency these days is to be a "true believer," to succumb to group think. We see the outcome in the two main parties, which are essentially at war with each other. They have each developed dogmas and,if you stray on even one issue, you get branded a reprobate. People are even willing to sacrifice long-term friendships over political views (which, in the last analysis, are really only abstractions). I think it is sad and eventually could result, if this trend continues unabated, in a breakup of our country. (I suppose there are those who wouldn't mind that, as long as they get the coast.)

Mike:

1. Because we believe the rights of a person to control their body outweigh the rights of something that can only be called a person from a religious viewpoint.

2. Feminists fight pretty hard for the rights and protection of prostitutes. There is some disagreement about the best way to do this, but very very few advocate removing rights from women in this position.

3. Not a feminist issue. Though I think you'll find that many feminists are pretty big on personal/social freedoms.

4. The only reference to abortion in the Bible AFAIK is when it talks about a man striking a pregnant women so she loses the child/fetus. And IIRC it simply says the woman's husband can press charges if he chooses. Which would indicate that unmarried women get a free pass at abortion. Other than that it's strangely silent on the issue. If it was remotely as important to God as it is to Social Conservatives then you'd think the Bible would make a much bigger mention of it.

I'm a little surprised at the posted reactions, although I guess at my age I shouldn't be.

While I may not agree with any of the women on some issues, I celebrate the fact they can be an inspiration to all girls and young women. First Geraldine, then Hillary, now Sarah. I am so proud for my Granddaughter, her future is limitless.

I believe that also, that for my daughter, she will not be as limited by her gender than women were when I was her age. But this is not the way for women to shatter the "glass ceiling".

I have supported Republican politics for many years because I believed they were more favorable to small businesses: I voted my "career as a businessperson" policies and beliefs.

I have reached the tipping point.

My personal convictions now must override all other factors. I can not and will not support a party that is willing to hastily and desperately add to the ticket "Evangelical Barbie" and tout her as equal to Hillary Clinton because she has a vagina. Sarah may be popular in her state and may be highly talented in what she does, at her level, but she is no Senator Clinton. To suggest a comparison is insulting to all Hillary supporters, grossly unfair to Senator Clinton, and condescending to women.

I do not believe in legislating morality and I do not want to live in a country where "Evangelical Barbie" can succeed McCain and fight to criminalize abortion and defy the constitution by teaching religion in school.

Read what the international community thinks about this "brilliant pick":

Quote at the end of an article from "The Austrailian" September 1, 2008 under the heading

Reckless pick bad news for Australia

"But as an ally who has fought alongside the US forces in every conflict America has been involved in for the past 100 years, there is reason to be worried. As an ally, we deserved better than this from McCain."

Read the entire article. I have nothing more to say. McCain has done nothing for women except make thinking women wonder whether he has any judgement left or whether he "just doesn't get it".

My only comment would be that I disagree that he picked her because he was pandering.

I believe the pick was made because John McCain believes that Sarah has the same maverick spirit he has. John McCain has never been one to go along, and/or take the popular route. You can choose to "buy into" the spin that Sarah was chosen only because she was a 'fe'male instead of a candidate with experience at the local and state level. It does make one wonder what experience Obama has that Sarah doesn't. A community leader (hmm), a state senator, and 1 year US Senator (1 of 100 no decision making needed) prior to running for President...now that is "real" experience. Perhaps it is because he is a male that we aren't finding him wanting?

Hillary was robbed, but this isn't a comparison of two women. Sarah seems to be able to stand on her own record, and to suggest otherwise sounds both bias and demeaning of a Governor.

I really can't believe the things I have been reading here. One person referred to her as "Jezebel." Where did that come from? Because she chose (I know you're big on choice) to have 5 children with her husband? And why does it matter that she spoke of her husband and children? I've seen Hillary go on about her husband many times during her speeches, so how does that make her a "stronger woman," especially after what she put up with from her husband? Also, Wendell's post went on about how low income people do not research the issues because they are too busy putting their kids to bed and discussing lack of money. Well, my husband and I have four children and not a lot of money but we are both struggling to obtain higher education while raising a family and we DO research the issues. I find it insulting that you imply that low income = low knowledge. By the way, Republicans are not just rich men. Like I said, we don't have much money ourselves but we don't expect the government to support us.

You people call yourselves "pro-woman" yet you are roasting a woman who is trying to achieve great things and who could be a role model to young girls, showing them what women can accomplish. YOU are the ones saying she was only chosen because of her gender. How sexist is that? All this just because you don't agree with her views.

If you were really pro-woman, you would want EVERY woman to strive to reach the goals in life that will make her happy whether that means she is a lawyer, a waitress, or a housewife. Wanting to raise children does not mean a woman is weak or submissive. It takes a strong woman to be a good mom. It seems you only want to support women if they support your views on social issues.

I find it curious that Ms. Palin poses with her baby and younger children in ads for a new job that will propel her away from that very family.

As a feminist and a mother of two, I realized early on the importance of steering myself into a career that allowed me some latitude to be with my children. Being in the Executive Branch of the U.S. government is not a job that would seemingly lend itself to someone doing double duty as a mother, nor should it. Both of these are demanding jobs. If a mother chooses to hand over her children to surrogates, so be it, but don't campaign for the office using motherhood as a theme. And don't imagine all Americans think a former beauty queen and "hockey mom" is going to be intimidating to al Qaida. Just saying....

Thus far she has taken both of her last two babies with her to work. I also believe the Father is who she hands the children over to. As for the very cute snide remark about being a former beauty queen...she tried out to help with college funds. She hasn't been a beauty queen nor a hockey mom in years, but don't think for a moment that she isn't tough as nails. I think we might truly have a pioneer woman. Anyone going hunting for Caribou at 3:00 am I think would find little to intimidate her.

Okay this one is for Mike and you too Melissa,

We do not fight for abortions... we fight for women to have a choice...Sarah Palin made a choice to have a child or have her daughter have a child who would be born with special needs (sorry but check out current.com for the 411). Roe v Wade is not only about abortion it is about choice... Choosing to never have children, choosing to prevent having children till a more appropriate time in your life and choosing to terminate an unwanted pregnancy if needed. Prevention and contraceptive options are also being targeted for elimination by the pro-lifers. So are we as women to return to a time where childbearing was not a choice but an unevetable result of marriage or sex? Believe it or not even some married women want to decide when they become parents or expand thier families. Because some want to pursue education, careers, and other goals prior to having children. Yes, Roe V Wade has taught us that we can have it all or not at all. That is what choice is about.

Melissa, I am a mom and I have felt like we as women have to do a better job of respecting each other's choices. In my naive opinion all women would be pro-choice even if most of us would never have an abortion. See we would then be respecting each other's choices. I have long felt that there is sometimes a level of elitism in our community... because feminists are very likely to have at least a college degree. We have to bridge the gap to include working class women and women of color.

I do agree with you the GOP has made history, bus aside from gender she has very little in common with Geraldine or Hillary. So for many of us who care about issues affecting all women, this is a lot less of a victory.

In terms of her experience, she herself said that she didn't know what a vice president does... there is footage of this. How do you argue with that? She is a big fish in a very small tank... remember total population of Alaska is less than 650K. Is that about the size of Austin TX. She has less in common with me than if she were a moose. No higher education? Please, you don't really believe that she was the most prominent female member of the GOP. These are women with law degrees who have been in public service for years... how does it feel to see the pretty girl with less qualifications get the nod from the party they have served faithfully for years?

I agree with you Melissa, that we should try to contain our outrage at McCain's choice... because she is a woman doesn't mean she was meant to represent many of us who are pro-choice and, not oil affiliated etc... She was meant to secure the right wing conservatives who had lost faith in McCain.

Pardon me but maybe he has a very limited view of women. Or does the GOP not have any experienced politicians, with higher education, a working knowledge of what the VP does who also happens to be a woman.

It's interesting that in fighting for a women to succeed at her chosen profession and life-choices, you're all so quick to diss Palin. The opportunity to vote for someone who is outside of Washington, her own person vs. beholden to lobbyists of either party and conservative is what is most appealing; the fact that Palin is a women is all the better - its time. Why is it that only liberal democratic-affiliated George Soros funded women are appropriate for public office. I'll take a VP with 2 years of executive experiance over a PRES with 1 year of floor voting in washington. What will you do when Obama calls her "sweetie" ???. You're characterizations of republicans and conservatives are way off. Many of us can't wait to get rid of Bush, but would never have voted for McCain. I was staying home until the Palin pick. Now I'm back in the game - and that should be your BIGGER fear, because there were a lot of MEN like me until Fridy.

Monique, you comment that she chose to have a child with special needs, as though this is a negative thing. Surely you are not implying that this child has any less value because it has special needs, are you?

Trish, like you, I personally would not chose to make such a career move if I still had young children at home, but since you guys are all about choice here, how can you put that down? Don't "feminists" typically tout that women shouldn't have to give up their careers for motherhood? And does the fact that she has made such a choice mean that it's no longer appropriate to be photographed publicly with her children? I'm sorry, but I'm really not following your argument. You say she is "using motherhood as a theme" of her campaign. When Bill Clinton was running when his daughter was a preteen, was he not often photographed with her and did he not speak of her often, regardless of the fact that he was campaigning for a position that would make him less available to her? Why was this appropriate for him but not for Sarah? Is it because he's a man and she's a woman? If so, then YOU are being sexist and "anti-woman." If that's not the reason, then I guess you must just be nit-picking at her parenting just because you don't share her political views. It doesn't sound like you REALLY believe in a woman's right to make her own life choices.

melissa commented at August 31, 2008 11:57 PM: "If you were really pro-woman, you would want EVERY woman to strive to reach the goals in life that will make her happy whether that means she is a lawyer, a waitress, or a housewife."

...and that's exactly why I'm not voting for McCain and Palin. Their policies are worse than Obama and Biden's policies at letting every woman and man strive to reach the goals in life that will make her or him happy.

Monique commented at September 1, 2008 3:43 AM: "I agree with you Melissa, that we should try to contain our outrage at McCain's choice... because she is a woman doesn't mean she was meant to represent many of us who are pro-choice and, not oil affiliated etc..."

Exactly! It doesn't men she was meant to represent us and it doesn't mean we should vote for her.

O commented at September 1, 2008 8:44 AM: "her own person vs. beholden to lobbyists of either party"

Of course she's her own person. The person she is happens to favor policies that are worse for the nation, so I'm still not voting for her.

This actually reminds me of a few comments I saw back when Ron Paul was running for president, which were along the lines of "I don't agree with his policy on X but he's really sincere about it so that's OK."

As a voter, I have a chance to help the policies I want get enacted in government by voting for the candidates and referendum options I agree with. That goes for every other voter too. Your vote is your chance to help your favorite policies get enacted. In general, choosing candidates just because they are sincere and consistent about their policies, no matter if the voter agree with their policies or not, is wasting one's votes.

Hey actually I did not ever intend to say that her choice to have Trig was a negative choice. What I am saying is that she had multiple choices yet if given her way she will limit choices for all of us... How that part is confusing is a bit of a mystery.

The problem is that her choice to have the baby when knowing his condition, is used by the party to play up her ultraconservatism. Making little Trig somewhat of a political object.

I have posted on this site under the tag Roe V Wade worked for Sarah Palin... That was before I saw some things on other sites like current, and you tube, which point to some serious inconsistencies in the Sarah is Triggs mom theory. Like her leaking amnio fluid 3 hours before giving a keynote address...waiting to give such address, then flying back to Alaska from TX to give birth ( 8 hr flight)... then 45 minute drive to a hospital in a remote area near Wasilla. Ohh and goes back to work in 3 days after his birth. Nothing wrong with adopting your grandchild... hey I 'm all for protecting my family and doing what may be best for my daughter. But then maybe try to be a little low key about Trig.

Don't have your party wave him like a flag to your conservatism if you haven't been completely honest from the start. I don't know, maybe announce that you are adopting instead of that you a 7 months pregnant and no one around you can tell. Or you are in labor on an 8 hour flight and the airline goes on record saying they had no idea of your condition. This stuff is all posted in cites & newspaper articles that were written at the time... long before the nomination.

I know many of you will hate me for mentioning this scandal... but I'm a grown up... so I can handle healthy discourse and hearing alternative viewpoints...

Monique said:
"I know many of you will hate me for mentioning this scandal... but I'm a grown up... so I can handle healthy discourse and hearing alternative viewpoints..."

Monique, I don't hate you for it...I don't waste my emotions on stupidity. That you would promote the spreading of rumor is both distasteful and shows your true colors. It doesn't matter that you are coyly putting rumor "out there"...what matters is that you ensure others know. High school behavior at best on a feminist site... sadly. No wonder women can't break the glass ceiling. Instead of just voicing an opinion you resort to the tactics of despicable behavior.

I would expect this from the Daily Kos...I didn't expect this from another woman. I'm sure you will find a way to excuse your behavior...go for it. As an older female I must admit to expecting more of other women, shame on me.

Hey Debbie, no love lost but how about this for a thought... SP is on the cusp of taking away our reproductive rights... anything that points to a candidate somehow misleading the public and also benefitting politiacally is should be looked at. Period

How many people were criticized for raising concerns about John Edwards, at the time when it was just a rumor. Maybe this rumor is baseless I don't know... but she just had CNN announce that her daughter is pregnant and expected to marry the father. Interesting timing... I would say... more childish behavior on my part you are probably thinking.... so be it!

BTW what exactly are my true colors (NO PUN ON RACE INTENDED)... the color that doesn't just listen to feminist voices... the color that lets me speak for my self and shoot from the hip... the color of that lets me take in and express opinions on a variety of issues... many of them distasteful....

My favorite is "no wonder women cant break the glass ceiling" Where exactly is the ceiling... please tell me... Is it the presidency? Because I don't really like the analogy of a ceiling but rather chipping away at walls that are used to narrowly define women and box us in. I think many women are able to chip away at walls in their personal realities everyday. SP has already made great strides for American women... that point is indisputable.

So by all means paint me with whatever colors you choose...just dont try to paint me into a box ....

Like most of you, I would love to see a woman in the White House. However, like most of you, I would never vote for a woman JUST BECAUSE she is a woman if she didn't stand for what I believe in. I think any woman who would is guilty of being just what many men think we are - mindless followers. That said, I am SO happy there is finally a woman candidate I can vote for. From what I know of her so far, Sarah Palin represents my key beliefs and am looking forward to hearing more from her. Everyone who has said that it's insulting to compare her to Hillary is right - it's an insult to Sarah. I wouldn't have voted for Hillary Clinton if you'd offered me money.

By the way Monique, please explain to me how someone is "on the cusp of taking away our reproductive rights." Those are rights that can be taken away from you only at the hands of a man - a rapist. I feel for woman who have experienced that tragedy, but we all know that abortions performed of rape victims are a very low percentage of the total number of abortions performed. If you haven't been raped, you will ALWAYS have the right to choose. We all know how babies are made and we all make our own choices in that regard. Period. By the way, what does the fact that her daughter is pregnant and expected to marry have to do with anything? And as far as the son supposedly not being hers, you are living up to the catty, gossipy reputation woman already have to deal with. Thanks a lot for perpetuating that stereotype.

Monique, having faced the "real" glass ceiling I assure you I would never paint you into a box. The rationalization that John Edwards rumor was true therefore it's okay to spread another rumor is ridiculous.

Again, high school behavior at best. You make it easy to dismiss any "real" argument you might have with your continuous mindless statements.

Hopefully, in your case, maturity will come with age.

Very interesting reading so far. From my perspective, there is a lot of emotion regarding Sarah Palin but no real substance. Some key points:
1. SP has been quoted as saying that no woman should have to choose between her career, education and her child. She is pro-contraception and said she's a member of a pro-woman but anti-abortion group called Feminists for Life. "I believe in the strength and the power of women, and the potential of every human life," The bottom line is that she believes from a moral position that abortion should not be used as a means of birth control.

2. One must also consider that the Executive branch does not determine the fate of Roe Vs Wade. The legislature ( Congress) does. With a Democratic Congress, what are the chances of any change in that regard?

I think that emotion is getting in the way of the real big issue hear for women. A milestone that has never been reached before by women in the US has been reached. Regardless or the emotional or political view, women should proudly acknowledge that fact as being overall good for women.

Yeah Debbie, when I heard about Feminists for Life, I looked around on thier site. Not sure that feminsm and anti-choice really mix very well. This is still about people defining those choices for us and taking abortion out of the mix... which is a limit being placed on our choices...

I am aware that the judicial branch actually decides the future of RvW but it is the executive branch that controls who those individuals will be. It is the executive office that has a great deal of control over funding for pregnancy prevention programs. At this point abstinence only programs are receiving more and more funding at the expense of other programs that have higher success rates.

Saying that women should not have to choose between her child, career and education, is somewhat of a fallicy. Lets consider, some of the choices that working class mothers have to make. I myself am a professional (education was taken care of before I chose to have a child), I feel the pull in the workplace when I take steps to balance career and motherhood.

Honestly, does "no woman should have to choose between her career, education and her child" include all women? Think about where we stand in this country on pay equity, access to affordable childcare, and access to affordable healthcare. Then answer honestly if poor women are making the same choices as the Sarah Palin and many of the women represented by FFL. I just met a young woman who is a soldier, who has to send her son to live with his grandmother for 3 years because her responsibilities to her unit take her away from her son from 4:30 - 6pm. Is she not being put in a position to make a choice on some level? Or do we alienate her and blame her for being a single mom?

Rather than call me names, which I am sure is mature on some level... talk to me about where Palin stands on the issues that will really allow make sure that nol women will be forced to choose between, family, education and career.

Her record on the environment is questionable, troopergate is a concern, her possible support of oil interests is also a big question.

Monique, Monique, Monique.

Perhaps I'm not the best female to speak with regarding the example you provided.

Veteran, single mother, college graduate (worked my way through college while a single mother), professional, author, and now retired. Additionally, I don't believe that I was an exception during my generation.

Please don't attempt to lecture this old lady on what a young woman must deal with.

By the way there are always going to be sacrifices we have to make...always. To suggest otherwise is either insincere or naive.

I think the real TINA FAY is more qualified for VP!!

I think the real TINA FAY is more qualified for VP!!

Offensive post at best.

Please explain to me the qualifications of Obama for President? By the way, do we know who watched Joe Biden's children while he was working everyday in the Senate (remember he traveled four hours a day to Delaware)? Is he a bad father? Should he have found some way to stay home...or just married a "fe"male to take care of his kids...

You can disagree with Sarah as much as you want on policy, but personal attacks? Some of the above comments are sexist and elitist.

So sad, we always manage to eat our own.

>> Yeah Debbie, when I heard about Feminists for Life, I looked around on thier site. Not sure that feminsm and anti-choice really mix very well. This is still about people defining those choices for us and taking abortion out of the mix... which is a limit being placed on our choices...

I'm not so sure about this. Some feminists may genuinely see a fetus as a human life, and thus prioritize the right of the fetus to survive over the right of the mother to choose.

In a civilized society, each individual has her choices limited in countless ways. We cannot choose to steal that which does not belong to us. We cannot choose to kill without legal justification. We cannot choose to not pay taxes. We cannot choose to drive while intoxicated. Our choices are already limited.

The question isn't one of choice. The question is when does a fetus's right to bodily integrity vest? We're weighing the rights of two individuals here ... the question is, whose rights are controlling?

I simply don't see it as inherently anti-woman to come to the conclusion that the right of the fetus to live supersedes the right of the mother to terminate her pregnancy. I simply do not see why a true feminist could not arrive at the conclusion that a mother does not have the right to terminate life of her child, even if that child is inside her uterus.

I am pro-choice, because I do not think a fetus's rights vest at conception. But, I do not believe that prioritizing the rights of the fetus is inherently anti-woman (as many fetuses are women). I can certainly see how someone -- even a feminist -- might disagree with me.

kbz

Greetings!

My name is Michelle, a proud American Democrat.

Sarah Palin is a JOKE and a TOKEN choice for V.P.
John McCain choosing Palin was merely to get the Hillary supporters.

One problem is, Sarah Palin is AGAINST EVERYTHING HILLARY IS FOR. SARAH PALIN IS ANTI-WOMEN.

We as Americans,have a CHOICE, Elect BARACK OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT or JOHN MCCAIN AND SARAH PALIN FOR FOUR MORE YEARS OF BUSH POLICIES.

WE CANNOT AFFORD MORE OF THE SAME.

NOVEMBER 4TH, 2008, I URGE YOU TO VOTE FOR
(BARACK OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT)

GOD BLESS AMERICA

OBAMA/BIDEN 08

For those of you "Feminist" women, please take the time to read an article from a respected democratic female journalist and woman's right activist, Susan Estrich...

"But what is just as troubling to me as Palin's willingness to impose her choices on others is the stupid and mean-spirited commentary from some of my liberal friends, attacking her for the choices she's made, attacking her diligence in securing prenatal care in her latest pregnancy, suggesting that the child was really her grandchild and not her son.

Since her selection last Friday, liberal blogs have been on the attack against Palin and her family. They have assumed the right to second-guess her choices in precisely the same way we criticize conservatives when they presume to second-guess ours. How dare she leave her infant at home and return so quickly to her job as governor? How dare she entrust the care of her baby, especially a baby with special needs, to someone as unqualified as, say, her husband? Maybe the baby wasn't really hers in the first instance. Maybe it was really her daughter's. And, most appallingly of all, maybe she didn't seek adequate prenatal care for her son — a post so loaded with the implication that she might somehow be at fault for her son's Down's Syndrome that its author ultimately claimed he was merely questioning her "judgment" in deciding to give a speech in her seventh month of pregnancy before heading directly home (she also consulted her obstetrician by phone). How dare he?

There is an old saying that it's never the crime, it's the cover-up. So, too, I often think with women candidates: It's not about sex, but sexism. If you say to a group of women, you should support Mary or Jane, or Hillary or Sarah, because she is a woman, the majority will be offended. We women like to believe that we make our decisions on the merits, on the basis of policy and experience, not anatomy.

But if that woman candidate should come under what is plainly sexist attack, if her opponent or the media treat her in the sort of patronizing way that every girl and woman in America is more familiar with than we should be (as Hillary's Senate opponent did in 2000 and as many in the media did in 2008), women rally."

Agree or disagree regarding Sarah Palin's positions, but do not lower yourselves to the same type of sexist rants and slandering that your fellow Democrats and Obama leaning media waged against Hillary. Consider that if the media had focused as much time and resources on the Obama-Ayers relationship in which thousands of documents are open to the public, Hillary would be the Democratic Presidential nomination!

Intelligent, sincere women who want to be treated fairly by all should praise Palin for her accomplishments as a mother and political office holder as another example of how women can be successful in today's world. Agree to respectfully disagree on her issues. Remember that any and all sexist comments demean all women!

Joe Biden tells us that he is personally opposed to abortion -- that he accepts "on faith" that human life begins at conception -- and yet because we live in a "heterogenious society" the best compromise between everyone's views is to accept Roe v. Wade.

This appeals to many of our instincts as Americans and members of a democratic society. We all recognize that it is often necessary, in a diverse and democratic society, to compromise and allow other people to live as they believe is best. And so there is a surface-level reasonableness to someone saying, "I believe this, but because we need to respect everyone's beliefs, I understand that I can't hold everyone else to that belief."

However, there some some issues that we all recognize are not open to compromise, even if not everyone shares our beliefs. We abolished slavery, and a hundred years later abolished segregation, despite the fact that many people in the country wanted to keep these evils. We have made spousal abuse a crime, despite that fact that some cultures believe it is entirely permissable for a man to beat his wife.

What those issues have in common is that they cause grevious harm to innocent human beings whom it is the duty of the state to protect through the workings of civil law and justice. If one believes, as Senator Biden claims to, that an unborn child represents innocent human life then to insist that it's necessary to "compromise" on the protection of that life is completely without moral integrity.

If Biden and Obama were willing to assert that they definitely did not believe that embryos and fetuses are human beings, they would at least have a consistent moral position. But as it stands, their position is nonsensical, and morally repulsive.

Good post kbz. I think you made some valid points and I can understand how you came to your conclusion. I once believed exactly as you did, that its my body and my right to choose. And, for the most part I still mostly do. One fact bothers me though and its something I think all self-described feminists should be concerned about as future generations of feminists are under attack.

This was taken from the following we site: http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/12/12/news/girls.php
"...an estimated 7,000 fewer girls born every day because of the spread of cheap, prenatal sex-determination technology."

The article goes on to say:

"In 80 percent of India's districts, a higher proportion of boys are born every year than a decade ago as a result of the growing availability of fetal sex- testing services, the study showed."

It probably happens here too, but maybe not on as grand of a scale as in India or China, but something we should still be concerned about. Should we support unborn female rights too? I'm still trying to figure out the answer for this question myself.

I suppose that's why I don't immediately dismiss Sarah Palin and other pro-life feminists.

What Oprah has to say about Sarah Palin.....

"There has been absolutely no discussion about having Sarah Palin on my show. At the beginning of this Presidential campaign when I decided that I was going to take my first public stance in support of a candidate, I made the decision not to use my show as a platform for any of the candidates. I agree that Sarah Palin would be a fantastic interview, and I would love to have her on after the campaign is over."

FACT
Oprah, who has endorsed Obama wholeheartedly, has hosted Obama twice -- in January, 2005 and again in October, 2006.

First off, let me comment on your comments:
"First up, she's super anti-choice. The forced-pregnancy crowd is thrilled today! (She recently had her fifth child, who has Down's syndrome.) She's against marriage equality and supports a federal gay-marriage ban, but has made sure to note that she "has gay friends." Though she has signed on to same-sex partner benefits. She believes schools should teach creationism. She's also pretty terrible on environmental issues, and is a huge advocate of drilling in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge. Plus, she's embroiled in a scandal:"

To be completely honest, I don't know where the few brain cells you have are. On permanent vacation? We have been so brainwashed by the liberals to believe and depend on them no matter what they say. Palin is super anti-choice, yes, so am I. God creates life for a reason. That's right, I said God. Not science and "accidental one-night stands". Perhaps many women who just screw around get pregnant because God possibly wants them to take some sort of responsibility in their life. Instead they just take some money they get from stripping and toss it toward a back-alley abortionist to get rid of their little "life-problem" Who are we to play God when it comes to children? Yes, they are people. Not fetuses. As Palin said in her speech, we live in a world where people say there are many children by very few of a certain species of insect. Let's throw all our money to save the insect, there will always be more children. What kind of sick thinking is this? In a world where we strive so hard to get laws passed to ban our rights to kill the insects and the fish but we work so hard to give people rights to take lives. Their own children's lives at that!!! So what if her child has Down’s syndrome? Is that a crime? Should the child be punished due to something outside of his control? I stand and applaud Palin for making the CHOICE to keep her child with the knowledge of difficulty, danger and heartache involved in this boy’s future. She could have made a decision like some other women and choose not to care for that child and give him the special love he deserves. She could have chosen NOT to carry around that extra weight of stress in life but she’s accepted her decisions and choices, even taking on this huge responsibility as future VP. Now that is a TRUE woman! Take notes and learn from her, sweetheart.

I'm against gay-marriage as well. Good for her! And I think it's terrific that she has gay friends which shows she's not against who they are as people but the lifestyle they choose to live. As you said she signed on to same-sex benefits because they ARE people who need them. She isn’t going to treat them like illegal immigrants or undeserving cretins. Open your eyes. Just because you don’t accept what someone chooses or believes, doesn’t mean you can’t help them any way you can. She’s making them equal in the laws, but marriage is a sacred act created by God meant for a male and a female. Maybe you should speak with her gay friends and find out just what they think of her views on that. Do you understand her background and beliefs? I'm Christian and have a few gay friends. It doesn't mean I support their lifestyle but I'm not going to do everything I can to fight for their rights. I love them and they're awesome people but I have no obligation to help their cause if I'm against it morally.

Have we forgotten that this country was founded on religion? When did we forget that? When was that taken from our schools? Look how far we've come. God isn't even allowed to be mentioned in school anymore but Darwin is. Children are going to believe what they believe but this began as a Christian nation and whether people want to believe in God or not, I think Creationism SHOULD be taught. It's the ONLY thing that ISN'T being taught in schools today!!! How ironic that the only truth now becomes the only lie? No. People are afraid of the truth so they've come up with scientific notions and difficult explanations to explain something so simple and yet so difficult to understand. The Bible. Read it. All the answers to all your questions are in there. Give it a try.

As far as the environmental issues go, I think she's on the right track. She's the only person I've heard talk who actually has ideas. REAL IDEAS. Real plans. Real strategies. She is a breath of fresh air in the polluted world of politics. I have never been a huge fan of politics simply because I couldn't stand listening to the democrats drone on and on about their empty promises and lies, promising change then turning around and voting against it in congress. Where Obama and Biden have stumbled, Palin has trod victorious. Obama has campaigned for 18 months. Palin, 5 days. Yet look at the national welcome to her. Democrats are now scared to death because they know they're done for. Hillary could never hold a candle to Sarah. Hillary is full of muck and scum and the only thing clean about her is her hair. She's for socialized medicine and who the wants that!? First come first serve and a waiting list for medication? No. Goodbye Hillary. You won't ever be president as long as Sarah Palin is around. I believe Palin will be the first female president. You can put a period on that.

The time has come to screw the wildlife refuge. Move them somewhere else because honey, we need that oil. It's OUR oil. And no animal is going to stand in our way! We've become so dependent on foreign power that we, ourselves have been rendered powerless without them. We freak out saying, "What will we do if they cut our oil? Oh no!!" This is God's good country! He has given us an ABUNDANCE of natural resources to keep us going. Let's use it! As Palin said in her speech, once again, we need to be self-dependent with American made energy and oil from American factories. Do you understand just how cheap gas will be if we have our own oil? We need to open the reserves while we wait to drill so that we don't depend on any other country for one more day! GOOD FOR PALIN!!! DRILL DRILL DRILL!!!

As far as the scandal goes, no. Read up on the actual factual truth instead of reading a one-sided story. The democrats are just running around like chickens with their heads cut off looking for dirt on Palin and will stoop to nothing to smear her good name. Look at her. Listen to her. She's the mother all mothers look to. Perhaps her brother-in-law did something that needed to be resulted in losing his job? I don't know. But she would never be involved in scandals involving wrong-doing. A God-fearing and respecting woman does not do those things. Just because the liberals do, doesn't mean she does.

Back in college my photography teachers would tell us that during a critique, when they start nit-picking at little details, that's when you know your work is absolutely beautiful and virtually flawless. And that's what I see with Palin. From the attack on Palin during her speech with the teleprompter "mishap" to the little jabs at things like her daughters and things as minute as her hair-do (which I thought was absolutely adorable on her, democrats have tried and tried again to pick little things from this beautiful woman because they can't find any major fault with her. So they must resort to the little things and try to blow them way out of proportion. Notice how she did not miss a beat during her speech? She was well prepared, had notes and is so incredibly comfortable in front of a microphone it's ridiculous.

By the way, I loved her hair. It shows that she doesn't have to try to impress anybody and she still looks beautiful.

Now, I'm a feminist of some sort but come on people. Get your heads out of your butts and take a whiff of Palin's fresh air for once. She's bringing something to the table and it's not just an entree, it's an entire 6 course meal!!! So let's enjoy!!! WOOT!!!

I am pro-choice -- I think abortion is wrong but don't want the government to force a woman to do something they don't want to.

I love my two daughters and would never do anything to harm them.

I am an atheist.

I am for gay marriages.

I am for equal pay for equal work among men and women.

I am independent.

I am fiscally responsible.

I am against socialism.

I am for energy independence.

I believe we are responsible for our own lives and do not need the government to take care of us.

I am a moral person.

I do not need the Democratic party to tell me how to think.

Once a supporter for Hillary but now she is not in the race I am voting for McCain/Palin.

Sarah Palin is the most interesting person in this entire presidential year. A breath of fresh air. A politician who has been many things - mostly not political - in her lifetime. Mother of five. Journalist. Worked with her husband as a commercial fisherman. City council member. Mayor. Governor.

Obama and Biden are lawyers who have been feeding at the public trough most of their lives. Michelle Obama is a lawyer. I don't see what these people know about the real world, or people who MAKE things - real, physical things - for a living. They think the word is the reality. They speak about helping working people, but I doubt they know many. Sarah Palin is married to a member of the Steelworkers Union.

I look for real people to identify with Sarah.

Isn't is enough ladies that a WOMAN for the FIRST TIME in AMERICAN history is one heartbeat away from the presidency? Obama fucked up big time when he dissed Hillary! Biden is an idiot and cannot keep his big mouth shut, he is going to cost him the election. Obama screwed up big time when he chose not to make the obvious choice and BEG Hillary Clinton to be his running mate. She has the experience, the know-how, the BALLS that a lot of these men do not have and McCain has just gone out and found the Republican equivalent. God save us all!!

The only thing that I unequivocally cannot tolerate about Sarah Palin is the fact that she is pro-life and anti-gay rights. But enough pressure from her sisters, maybe that could be changed, who knows?

Biden will be Obama's down fall, you watch. You should all stand behind a woman with conviction, morals and the know how that pulled herself up from PTA mom to Governor, that is quite an accomplishment that I guarantee no one else on this post is making. By the way, not all feminists need to be democrats, by any far means. Sincerity and love to all my sisters in the fight for equality!! We fight still in the year 2008. Why?

Hillary had it SEALED for us! Otherwise, I would vote for the democratic ticket.

It's pretty disheartening to come to a so called feminist website and find disparaging comments on a woman who has done it all and may very well succeed to one of the highest offices in this country. I guess it only counts if you're a liberal and not a woman who believes in Christian values. Thank goodness that most Americans love her and know that this kind of cat calling is just sour grapes. Ya'll that are bad mouthing her are hypocrites. I was once a liberal democrat, but have woken up and decided to think for myself, and am very glad that I left the party. You people disgust me.

Sarah is a breathe of fresh air. I'm so tired of the media distorting news about her and her family. This woman is a fantastic role model. Thank goodness McCain found her.

Ooh, yeah- let's all get behind a woman that would take away our reproductive rights! Oh boy! That's so keen, so novel, SO REBELLIOUS!

*yark*

NO. It's not enough that she's a woman... I'm not that stupid! I am not bound by one gender, party, religion, etc. I try my best to support those that would have the courtesy to at least nod to the greater (social) good. Taking away (or attempting to) rights from citizens doesn't benefit the greater good.

That is why there is no way in hell I would even dream of supporting this woman. The idea that we should respect her daughters "choice" when she wouldn't afford us the same luxury is just the last nail in the coffin.

My jaw dropped when I heard McCain announce Palin. If they are elected this country will go farther down hill then it already is. First off in their speeches they gave not only did they distort and flat out lie about themselves, but about where Obama stands on certain issues. Palin couldn't seem to say one sentence without slamming on Obama/Biden. I have talked with others and they said she looked very arrogant. As mayor and Govenor she has fired officials for not agreeing with her. Right now there is an investigation pending on her misuse of power. But she through a fit about jurisdiction and then the only person who could decide jurisdiction went on admin leave with pay with no return date, so now the investigation is on hold. She spent $400,000 of state money on promoting aerial hunting of wolves and bears even it they have babies. Which brings up another investigation about 5 wolf puppies that were murdered because of her. Not only that but she tried to pass a law allowing her to pay hunters $150 for each wolf they killed as long as they brought her a leg. SICK!!! She also told children at their school during a speech that the pipeline was "God's Will" and they need to pray for it. Isn't that what fanticals use for their excuse to commit atrocities. I don't think God would pray for a pipeline that would cause extinction of his own animals and destroy more land. Not only that but the drilling wouldn't make much if any of a differnece. I am very scared that if McCain is elected we are all SCREWED!!! There are many more issues that McCain/Palin stand on that scare the hell out of me. If they do win, My kids and I will probably end up on the streets cuz we ain't rich enough. I am so thankful that women in this country are not blinded by the fact that she has boobs!!!

This is a information post related to a post by MONI who supports Palin. If you have done any research regarding the drilling in the wildlife refuge then you really wouldn't of stated what you stated. First of all if the drilling happened in Alaska we wouldn't see oil for at least 10 years. Second it would only lower the gas prices by a max of 3.5cents a gallon and only account for 7% of our usage, which wouldn't happen for a minimum of 10 YEARS.. Not only that but the oil companies already have 40 million acres of offshore leases and are only using appx. 4 of those at about 10%. So why don't they get off their butts and use the other 36 MILLION ACRES they already have. And as far as the refuge.... ARE YOU FREAKIN KIDDING ME!!! There is no where else for these animals to go and its our responsiblity as humans to protect them. There are only 350 buluga whales left in the wild and you can't just move them. Polar Bears are dying rapidly due to habitat destruction and melting. I would like them to be around for my grand children. For you to make a comment about screw the refuge just shows what a low level thinking person would support such a savage, idiotic, heinous politician as this. As far as her child having down dyndrome, so what..... I have a child with a rare auto immune disease and I don't go toting her around the globe and flaunting her in front of millions to get a vote!! OH and last I don't side with a party, I side with the human race and The American people.. and McCain/Palin would be a disaster. This has nothing to do with being feminist as much as it has to do with having a brain and common sense........

Hello fellow feminists. This is my first time posting on a blog. With all the events of this election campaign, I simply cannot help myself. I have to say that if this race was McCain vs. Clinton, I would have trouble deciding which one to vote for. However, now that it is McCain vs. Obama, my vote is going to McCain. I believe MCCain is an honorable man, and although I don't agree with him on all the issues, I believe he will try to work with all factions in this country, excluding the extreme right and the extreme left. I also trust his judgment regarding national security, not Obama's. I think Hillary would have been tougher than Obama, and would have made better decisions. But now that it is McCain vs. Obama, McCain is the one I want "answering the phone at 3 a.m." Also, I admire Ms. Palin. She is a reformer. She got rid of the Governor's jet, and the personal chef. If that isn't proof that she doesn;'t believe in wasting the taxpayer's money, then I don't know what is. As far as drilling for oil, alternative technologies are not ready yet. We need energy now. Gas prices are already coming down just because we are talking about drilling. I really don't believe that Palin would let her beautiful state be trashed during the process of drilling. Also, she boats, fishes and hunts. Boaters happen to love the environment and believe in preserving it -- while also letting people enjoy the use of it. I know, because I boat and I vote. Another point, who says you cannot be pro-life and a feminist as well? Does this mean that if you are a staunch Catholic or Christian you cannot be a feminist? Or Muslim, Hindu or whatever faith? Most religions believe in the sanctity of human life, and for the most part, that it begins at conception. As far as I'm concerned government should help women keep their babies, not help them to destroy them. Partial birth abortion is a horror, and should only be done to save the life of the mother. Why would anyone defend this barbaric practice? There are plenty of people out there willing to adopt. What's next, infanticide? We could follow China's example in that if we elect Obama, since he admires them so much. I believe and I hope that the McCain/Palin ticket is elected. Since I work 2 jobs, and am therefore considered "rich" by the liberals, I am going to vote for the person who lets me keep more of MY money to use for MY family. Since I also own a home, and when I retire I wish to use the equity in it to help support myself, I am going to vote for the person who will only tax that money at 15% not 35% as the liberals propose. I would like to know what makes them (the liberals) think that they know how to spend MY money better than I know how to spend MY money. With all the entitlement programs in this country, I myself have not benefited from them since I have almost always worked 2 jobs -- in order to provide for myself and my family. On the rare occasions when I have asked for help, I have always been told "you make too much money" regardless of the fact that that money was going on the bare necessities and bills. My concern is also that the Democrats have not given us their definition of the "middle class." At one point I heard the figure $40,000 for a family. Since the average American family right now makes $59,000 per year, that means the average American family is considered wealthy and would need to be taxed more to help those making less than $40,000. With the cost of living the way it is, $59,000 a year doesn't go very far and the average family will bring home even less the higher taxes are. I also find it difficult to understand why people think government should have its finger in every pie. My view is that the government should be doing things that have to be done collectively, like maintaining an armed force and national defense, maintaining a national highway system and interior infrastructure (which would include ensuring a clean environment, water and food supplies), negotiating trade with foreign countries and other foreign policy. I think that we as a country need to decide if we want to retain free markets, private enterprise and private property ownership, or head towards communism or socialism? The original experiment in this country with socialism was done by the Pilgrims and it failed. It failed because some of the Pilgrims worked harder than the others, and got angry that they were working while others were laying around. This brings me back to the point that I work 2 jobs and wish to keep most of my money, otherwise what is the point of working so hard? Also, private property rights. I bet most people in this country don't know that the principle of eminent domain was expanded by the liberals on the Supreme Court (a few of them were appointed by Clinton). This means that the liberals expanded the original concept of eminent domain (where the government could seize your property to build a highway or something benefiting the public) to mean that now your local township could seize your property and sell it to a developer in order to increase the tax base in the town or county. I don't know about you, but I want fair market value (meaning what the developer would sell it for, not some arbitrary figure) for my house when I sell it -- and I don't want an already rich developer making money off my private property. There have been a number of examples of this recently -- a whole town in Florida along the intracoastal waterway -- they were middle class people, it was a mixed neighborhood, mostly small ranchers, people had lived there 20 years and up -- the local township declared it "blighted" so that the houses could be taken and razed by a developer and turned into condos (vacation homes for rich people) and a marina in order to increase the tax base. This is just one example of the middle class in this country having their assets taken away in order to support the government, which would then decide how to spend these people's hard-earned money (the equity in their homes) since the people are never offered what their property is actually worth. McCain wants smaller government, which means lower taxes. I would think most women would want to keep more of what they earn, the same as I do. One more point -- McCain is for school choice. This means you could send your child to the school YOU pick, using a voucher system, you wouldn't have to send your child to the public school in your area. Many families are being taxed to death to support a broken school system, while still paying to send their own children to a parochial or private school, without any financial assistance from the government. Unfortunately, less and less people can afford to do this. And since I work in a public school, no I don't believe the system can be fixed just by throwing more money (taxpayer's dollars) at it. Many public schools already spend more than the parochial schools do, and are still doing a lousy job. I think this election is about whether we, as women, actually trust the government and bureaucrats to take our money and redistribute it as they see fit, or if we are willing to think for ourselves, as true feminists, raising our families while keeping most of our hard-earned money and spending it as we see fit.

I started reading all of the previous posts again just to get a better perspective of all the rants and raves. One post that I read triggered and interesting historical comparison.

In response to OKRA's post on Aug 29th - 12;27PM
She writes..
"I truly believe John McCain will be the next President. And I suspect that at least once during his presidency (e.g. a heart "episode"), Palin will be considered to be about to step into the Presidency herself. It reminds me of the all times in history women have stepped into the shoes of male predecessors or relatives and gained power in that way. It's a strange world."

Looking back on history, I think FDR and Eleanor during WWII. It is widely accepted that Eleanor was instrumental in assisting FDR and many believe she was actually making important decisions when FDR was not able to due to illness. And with no previous political experience.

Character, fortitude, commitment,morals, and ethhics are traits that allow us to rise to meet any challenge that arises.

Just something to consider.

Obama Campaign Attacks Palin's Parenting - http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/09/obama-campaign.html

"They put their family above their career," Gutman said. "Your responsibility is to put your family first.", said Howard Gutman -- an original member of the national finance committee for Sen. Barack Obama.

Apparently if you have children and you have a career it makes you a bad mom! I DON'T THINK SO!

How many of these types of criticisms are coming out from inside the Obama's camp after he was praised by MSNBC for being so classy after standing up to the media about attacking her family? In my opinion Obama "pretended" to take the high road and is using his flunkies in the media and on his staff to do his attack work for him. I'm not too surprised, he and his subordinates made several sexist comments when he was up against Hillary.

As a woman why should I vote for Obama again? Change? The only thing he has shown to me is that he changes his mind daily about the issues as it meets his political needs.

Being a former Hillary supporter, I am not trying to delude myself that McCain was after my vote when he chose Palin and I was very skeptical of her. At first I was offended that he would think that he could get my vote simply because he had a woman on the ticket. Now, having learned a little more about her and seen her speak, I don't feel that way anymore. Don't get me wrong, I think her gender was definitely a factor in why she was chosen, but she's not just some bimbo (or mom) off the street. She's earned my respect and my vote in November.

Regarding the post from ilovepalin, I have a hard time believing you are a feminist because you open by saying "Hello fellow feminists....if this race was McCain vs. Clinton, I would have trouble deciding which one to vote for."

YOU WOULD HAVE TROUBLE DECIDING WHICH TO VOTE FOR???!!!! that shows you are fake.

lol. freaking femi-nazis."forced pregnancy"?!?! lol, who forced you to have sex? you "guys" crack me up. Wake up, Palin should be your idol.

Here are some facts taken from CNN.money. According to EXPERTS not just politicians, McCains plan would help upper-class and businesses with no relief for Middle or lower class citizers. Sounds more like the ole sayins.. Keep the rich rich and the poor poor. Also according to EXPERTS McCain's tax issues would not effect appx 150 million Americans. Obama's tax issues would raises taxes for those making $150,000 or more, big businesses, and oil compaines. His ideas would help and lower taxes for middle and lower class americans to help them provide for their families and get on top of things. See factual details below and you decide. Also you can go to CNN.money to see both sides on each issue.

DEMOCRATS
Barack Obama
Would pump $75 billion into the economy via tax cuts and direct spending targeted to working families, seniors, homeowners and the unemployed. The plan also includes $45 billion in reserves that can be injected into the economy quickly in the future if the economy continues to deteriorate. Would provide an immediate $250 tax cut for workers and their families and an immediate, temporary $250 bonus to seniors in their Social Security checks. Would provide an additional $250 tax cut to workers and an additional $250 to seniors if the economy continues to worsen. Would extend and expand unemployment insurance. CNNMoney
Taxes on oil companies
Advocates a windfall profits tax on oil companies.
Has received millions and millions of dollars less then McCain's campaign.
Offshore drilling
Previously was against lifting federal government restrictions on offshore drilling, but appeared to modify his position in an August 1 statement that supported a bipartisan legislative effort that would expand offshore oil drilling. Part of the statement read: "I remain skeptical that new offshore drilling will bring down gas prices in the short-term or significantly reduce our oil dependence in the long-term, though I do welcome the establishment of a process that will allow us to make future drilling decisions based on science and fact."

REPUBLICANS
John McCain
Would lower the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent. Would allow first-year deduction of equipment and technology investments and establish a permanent research and development tax credit equal to 10 percent of wages spent on R&D. CNNMoney
opposes a windfall profits tax on oil companies.
has received millions and millions of dollars from oil company employees to his campaign

I do agree that a few things McCain says makes sense, but there are many more views on issues from him that scare the hell out of me and would totally screw a normal person like myself, not only that but his running mate and her ego and her hypocritical views are so twisted that I know she was a horrible choice. I think McCain waited to the last possible minute to choose her so that people would not get the whole truth or info they need on her to make an informative decision instead of a "oh she is female" decision. To many questions keep popping up with not enough answers. That in itself should scare the hell out of everyone. Some of you said she doesn't spend friviously.. what do you call spending $400,000 of state money to advertise Aerial Hunting? Or authorize an attorney to spend $95,000 to defend her against any accusations. Why would an attorney need that if she is such an Angel fighting corruption? People please use your brains not your ears or your sex!!

One last thing.... I do apologize for some spelling and grammar issues, my children were asking questions and we were playing around while I was trying to proof read. So I am off to go play monopoly with them while I can still afford to. And please please do the research before making uninformed decision that will effect all Americans dramatically. Oh also I read someone said that they were sure Palin wouldn't do anything to destroy the land in Alaska... you have heard of oil spills haven't you? How much has that cost Americans to clean up and how much destruction have they caused in the past and how much destruction will they cause in the future. How many animals have to die before people open their eyes? And don't sit there and say that won't happen because it has many many many times before. That is fact!!

Wow, this is a lot. It's interesting that even anti-abortion guys choose to comment on this site. Interesting.

I have a few comments - actually a ton of comments, Debbie, you don't see how true feminists (as defined by you) could see the rights of the mother overriding the rights of the fetus. I find that interesting because there are always extenuating circumstances. Would you, for instance, choose to let a mother of 2 or 4 or 5 children die to save a fetus? Just wondering. I mean, safe and legal abortions exist because so many women died prior to R v W. And you can pray to your God to save you, but my God wants me to stay alive to take care of my kids who are currently living and walking around. Just a thought.

Second, Moni, you say this country was "founded on religion." This is patently wrong. It was in fact founded on FREEDOM of religion. Better drag out your history texts again and review a little. You wonder who we are to play god? Indeed. Who are we to implant half a dozen eggs into an infertile woman and then call that God's miracle. Sounds like wonderful, modern science to me. I love it. But you can't have it both ways. God is in us. You also say that the dems drone on and on and you want to drill, drill, drill. Hopefully, you know enough about climate science to realize that the burning of coal and fossil fuels is killing the planet. You might believe like Palin that it is really just God's plan. I happen to believe that if the Reeps find a way to drill ANWR which I really think is the true reason they chose Palin in the first place, then all efforts to find alternative fuels will come to a screeching halt. You say that we fight so hard to preserve animal life, but not human life - in fact, it is an ecosystem, an interdependent system. I know, I know, the bible says that we can "use" animals for our own good - what it is, we have dominion over them, right. But, it seems to me, without them, we are diminished. You can't see that. It doesn't matter THAT much to me, I will probably be gone before all hell breaks loose. I don't know about you. Get out your bible and read Genesis I guess.

vandawn. You think SP is a breath of fresh air? Wow. Is it the air from LA after it hasn't rained in about a month? I've seen that brown crap rise from the valley floors. It's ugly and it stinks. Why exactly is she a breath of fresh air? Because she's a woman? Personally, I see her as the perfect Reep candidate. She's pro-gun, anti-abortion, anti-environment, pro-oil, and like the last 8 years of Bush, she has no experience for the position they're putting herr up to. She's unethical (she's abused her power to try to fire her brother in law and a local librarian who refused to ban the books she found objectionable), she's snide (yah, like community service is a bad thing), and I feel she uses her family as pawns to further her own goals. Family values? I cannot, in my wildest dreams, imagine even considering even leaving my infant son for a job - I mean really, the kid needs her, really needs her - that is not sexist, it's reality. Anyway, I think the Reeps got the perfect person to carry on their irresponsible and unethical party into the next 4 years. I just hope that people are smart enough to really look at her and the Bush/Rove/Cheney/etc., etc., etc., ad nauseum policies. I kept think that our country would hit rock bottom. But, like an alcoholic, we haven't even acknowledged we have a problem yet.

ilovepalin. Look back in history. Yes FDR and Eleanor were perhaps the best most philanthropic pair to ever grace the whitehouse. BUT, remember that when Reagan lost his mind (and it was earlier than the politicos let on), we were being run by Nancy and that was no fun at all. I mean, if the First Dude has a good astrologer, we might have a chance. But, Palin or her first Dude are SO FAR away from the Roosevelts, they may as well live on the moon. In fact, Eleanor had plenty of experience - community service experience - that Palin so snidely brushed aside when speaking about Obama. Palin should be so giving of herself. But she is already a part of the republican machine. We don't have a chance with her in there - and grandpa McCain with one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel. It has nothing to do with sexism. Huston, we have a problem. Please don't tell me that Palin has morals and ethics. She has character and fortitude. But she is in it for herself and the party. She might already have the chip implanted.

Sorry for my post attributing to the wrong writers. I am new to the site. Please forgive me.

Still did a great job on your post boojygirl. Also you made some very good points. I totally forgot about her wanting to ban books and threatening to fire the librarian if she didn't side with her. That makes three people so far that we know of. Can't wait till she starts wanting ban or censor movies and other type things that she doesn't like or she feels is inappropriate instead of letting us make the decision for ourselves. I wonder what she thinks bout "Wizard of Oz" because it has witches in it. I know my sister who is from Alaska and a Christian is the same way she won't even consider letting her kids watch that movie. She is manipulative, condescending, and will preach Christian views but can't follow them herself, but will judge others for the same thing.

Still did a great job on your post boojygirl. Also you made some very good points. I totally forgot about her wanting to ban books and threatening to fire the librarian if she didn't side with her. That makes three people so far that we know of. Can't wait till she starts wanting ban or censor movies and other type things that she doesn't like or she feels is inappropriate instead of letting us make the decision for ourselves. I wonder what she thinks bout "Wizard of Oz" because it has witches in it. I know my sister who is from Alaska and a Christian is the same way she won't even consider letting her kids watch that movie. She is manipulative, condescending, and will preach Christian views but can't follow them herself, but will judge others for the same thing.

"lol, who forced you to have sex?"

*Stamps anti-choice bingo card*

Actually, Sarah Palin doesn't believe that rape survivors should have access to abortion. So... you were saying?

Sarah Palin does not have an agenda to restrict your choices. To start, she and I believe that you have a choice to prevent an unwanted pregnancy by using redundant measures upfront. I would venture to say she would not want to contain your choice any more than mine---that is, I don't want to have one cent of my federal or state tax money go toward abortion. If you will honor that, I will honor your rights as a mother. One thing to consider in the argument that it's a mother's body, so she has the right to do whatever she wants: Is the fetus at any point part of the mother's body? Answer: NO. The fetus is a separate living organism that feeds and lives in the mother, but does not contain her exact DNA or structures. It is therefore a separate being and has unique rights. If you could argue that it was the mother's body instead of just occupying her womb, I would stand with you that you had full rights to dump it into a sink. But, again, it is entirely separate, a unique living (as defined by scientific definition) organism, completely intact Day 1, with every cell and DNA strand that it will ever have.

"I don't want to have one cent of my federal or state tax money go toward abortion."

So, RW, are you willing to pay to support the offspring of that 40-something percent of unplanned pregnancies? We know Palin isn't.

Are you willing to support education programs giving kids accurate and age-appropriate sexual information? Are you willing to support widespread access to contraception? Both of these are proven to help people prevent pregnancy in the first place, but Palin doesn't like those either.

Last of all, RW, are you willing to pay the hospital bills of those unfortunate women who couldn't afford a safe abortion and saw no other option but to try it themselves?

Please read Frank Rich's article on Palin in the New York Times. Most of what she said in her speech was smarmy lies. But the truth is she didn't write that speech. It was written by Rove-republicans before she was selected. We really don't know what she would say if they would let her speak without a script.

Sarah Palin is entertaining, but that's it. Is she intellectually up to the job?

Vote for Obama if you want:
- abortion to stay legal
- national healthcare for all
- less wars (McCain is ready to go to war in Georgia and Iran)

ShifterCat and Nkwari, Yes, yes, yes. I think people need to really understand that anti-abortionists are not really about an opinion. They are about a religious belief that they think the rest of us just don't get (because, umm, maybe we are evil in their eyes). I am totally with them in their belief that they have the right to have as many kids as they want, and they can damn me to hell for my beliefs. BUT, they are scary because they don't seem to believe in equal rights - but that they are RIGHT. People need to understand that during the Bush administration, they very carefully stacked the Supreme Court with anti-abortion justices and if McCain gets in there, they will seal the deal. The Reeps were really pissed at Roosevelt in the 30s and 40s when he started into his third term and they did the same thing to them - stacked the court - it's a beautiful way to further an agenda - and the Reeps made sure that there were term limits established. So, it's not about our opinions!!! It's about rights. It's what makes this America.

Anyway, people need to remember Reagan's policies that gave people rights, not from womb to tomb, but from womb to fresh air. And people need to look at Romania and the awful things that happened there when the state declared abortion illegal. There are plenty of mentally delayed and physically abused Romanians here in the U.S. today that were adopted from the orphanages they were dumped at (and many of them have mental problems because their mothers couldn't afford to feed them). Some pro-lifers don't see a problem with this, but I, personally want to see an end to human suffering. My God doesn't give me extra credit for suffering.

As for war, man. I lived through Vietnam and I just can't stand what the Bush administration did to us here. I remember Rumsfeld saying, "What do you think we want to do, get into another Vietnam?" Uh, I guess. So, family values. Abortion is murder, but killing adults is ok as long as they are bad guys. Hmmmm. I guess I was born without that logic gene that can't make that jump.

First of all I will tell you that I am opposed to abortion based on my religious beliefs. I believe that life begins at conception.
I also am against capital punishment and I firmly believe in birth control and quality sex education.

Joe Biden tells us that he is personally opposed to abortion -- that he accepts "on faith" that human life begins at conception -- and yet because we live in a "heterogenious society" the best compromise between everyone's views is to accept Roe v. Wade.

This appeals to many of our instincts as Americans and members of a democratic society. We all recognize that it is often necessary, in a diverse and democratic society, to compromise and allow other people to live as they believe is best. And so there is a surface-level reasonableness to someone saying, "I believe this, but because we need to respect everyone's beliefs, I understand that I can't hold everyone else to that belief."

However, there some some issues that we all recognize are not open to compromise, even if not everyone shares our beliefs.

1. We abolished slavery, and a hundred years later abolished segregation, despite the fact that many people in the country wanted to keep these evils.

2. We have made spousal abuse a crime, despite that fact that some cultures believe it is entirely permissable for a man to beat his wife.

What those issues have in common is that they cause grevious harm to innocent human beings whom it is the duty of the state to protect through the workings of civil law and justice. If one believes, as Senator Biden claims to, that an unborn child represents innocent human life then to insist that it's necessary to "compromise" on the protection of that life is completely without moral integrity.

If Biden and Obama were willing to assert that they definitely did not believe that embryos and fetuses are human beings, they would at least have a consistent moral position. But as it stands, their position is nonsensical, and they are advocating that the life of the Mother is paramount over the fetus.

From my perspective, in brutal terms, abortion (the taking of a life) is equivalent to murder.
Times have changed since Roe Vs Wade and a single woman being pregnant or a single mother is not usual nor condemned in today's society. Young women have numerous support and options, financial and emotional to assist them from Churches, charitable organizations, and government organizations. More should be done to prevent unwanted pregnancies such as education with the overall goal to reduce and eliminate abortions altogether.

We are not in India where reports have been generated about females being aborted and males not. We are not Romania where assistance is limited if not non-existent so let's not get extreme.

If we can agree that a woman should have a choice, why not work together to provide the best choices for her and her baby. Abortion should not be used as a method of birth control.

BTW ...
Some significant births that would not have been born under todays' society....

1. Confucius
According to the first complete biography of Confucius, the Shiji, his dad, a warlord named Shu Liang He, and his mom, a member of the Yan clan, “came roughly together,” indicating either a rape, concubinage, or some other sort of extramarital shenanigan.

2. Leonardo da Vinci
The son of a notary, Ser Piero, and a peasant girl of somewhat “easy virtue.”

3. Thomas Paine
Result of an extra-marital affair

4. Alexander Hamilton
the illegitimate son of West Indian colonials

5. Lawrence of Arabia
The illegitimate son of a knight and his children’s nanny

6. Eva Perón
Daughter of an adulterous relationship between two villagers in an impoverished part of Argentina

Just something to consider......