The blog Women Against Sarah Palin was only created a week ago and is not only starting to get some media attention but has received nearly 100,000 responses from women across the country expressing their frustrations with the VP pick and all that's come from it.
Lyra Kilston and Quinn Latimer, the New York-based founders, use the blog to post women's emails who write about why they think Palin is the wrong choice for the vice presidency, and the wrong choice for American women.
On a random side note, you sort of have to love the quote they include by McCain the night he introduced Palin in Dayton, Ohio:
"And I am especially proud to say in the week we celebrate the anniversary of women's suffrage [that she is] a devoted, a devoted wife and mother of five."
Oh McCain, when will you ever learn? [*crickets*]
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Awesome Blog Watch: Women Against Sarah Palin .
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/9253
excellent initiative!
Love it! Oh, and on my way back from lunch I saw a bumpersticker that said "Jesus was a community organizer; Pontius Pilate was a governor." Ha!
Awesome blog indeed.
I almost just cried reading those letters.
i love the acronym. lol.
I guess being a devoted wife and a mother of four is now a prerequisite for women to vote. Dangit, and I thought it was just an inherent human right. Well, time to get back to cooking and cleaning! Tralalala *calls on forest friends*
Just thought I'd share this for your consideration. Pink being fairly badass again
http://www.popeater.com/music/article/pink-sarah-palin-hates-women/172323?icid=100214839x1209505393x1200548081
I can not stand Palin's policies, but this is too much. Its like Feministing was against Hillary Clinton and now they are against Sarah Palin. Is there a woman they would support. Its like the Madonna complex. She must be virginal and perfect, she has to be the right woman. I can not figure what the right woman is. I mean can you be a feminist and vote for Palin? Also, can you be a feminist and vote against Hillary? Which is it, cause I am confused. I mean this honestly by the way.
"I mean can you be a feminist and vote for Palin?"
No, considering all her policies are so UN-feminist.
hellotampon, then can you be a feminist voting againt Hillary for a candidate who morally opposes abortion, but is for choice kinda of against his will? I mean his feelings on late term abortions is troubling. However, we respect women who voted for him over Hillary; and we can agree they can still be feminist. Which they can be, so I just do not agree.
Um, kind of new here. Is it ok to put a link on the W.A.S.P blog for "No Way, No How, NO Sarah Palin!"
petition to McCain? They're trying to get 20,000 signatures.
I'm sure that the petition would only be a symbolic gesture, but it couldn't hurt.
Lee
Um, oops. This the link:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/NO-Sarah-Palin
This is a fabulous blog, thank you SO much!
After the softball Charlie Gibson interview on ABC last night, with the attempt to paint her as some kinda feminist pioneer?????? ARGH!!!!!!
(((pulls hair out, by bushels))))
We are handling the Palin situation wrong and just helping her and helping the Republicans. We should not be attacking her in any way related to her being a woman. It is good that she is a candidate and is a woman. But we disagree with her. When we disagree with a man we do not attack him for his gender; we just disagree with him.
Feminism and feminists should not appear to be monolithic fascists with an "exactly my way or you are scum" attitude.
Respect her as a woman and for getting into the fray. Attack her because she is wrong, wrong, wrong in most of her politics.
And when we seem to misunderstand the issue by silly nonsense like the "Jesus was a community organizer; Pontius Pilate was a governor." bumpersticker we help the Republicans. We must give SENSIBLE arguments.
The Republicans weren't attacking community organizers. They were attacking Obama for saying Palin's executive experience as a small town mayor and governor of Alaska was somehow outweighed by Obama's community organizing experience. HUH?! We just look stupid trying to make that argument an argument that only holds water with those who are already voting for Obama.
We need Obama in the White House not just that (again!) empty sense that we won the argument but lost the election. When we attack Palin's experience level we raise Obama's experience level and to regular folks -- that important 10-15% of the electorate that swing to make an election winner -- Obama looks a lot less experienced than Palin.
And what is Obama doing suddenly appearing as if he is running against Palin???? He should concentrate on McCain.
ThinkingClearly, Obama is focusing his efforts on John McCain:
"He barely mentioned the newest figure in the race, the one who has sharply changed the political dynamic — Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska — as he tried to turn the contest back into a one-on-one fight with Mr. McCain."
From the NY Times.
I don't like Sarah Palin is prepared enough for the role of VP and I also disagree with her views. It has nothing to do with her being a woman. I would love to see a woman president or vp.
xtine:
Thanks for the update. But Obama's re-concentration on McCain is just that... a RE-concentration. And thank God! Forget about Palin and run against McCain.
Problematically if you think Palin isn't "prepared enough" then you certainly can't logically argue Obama is. Drop the experience arguments; they just help the Republicans.
Remember: In 2003 Obama ran for the management committee at the tiny law firm he was working at then and the other partners rejected him saying he didn't have any managment experience.
Obama needs to argue issues and vision, the experience argument in any form is a HUGE loser.
Thanks for the site. However, I do struggle with some of these sites and the media focusing too much on her sex as opposed to just who she is and what she stands for. Considering the US only has about 16% of all elected officials being women - it is great that a woman is on the ticket - MORE women should run (regardless if I agree with their politics) - but Palin's politics are just wrong for me as a woman.
DaisyDeadHead,
I agree that we should not use gender based attacks against Palin on issues that do not concern women's rights. And I'll give her a pass on part of her anti-choice stance, because I know that a lot of women truly believe that abortion is murder.
However, when I see a woman who would deny abortions to rape and incest victims, charge women for rape kits, and run for VP with a man who voted against equal pay, my mind may tell me to ignore her gender and stick to the issues, but in my heart I can't help feeling she's a traitor.
ThinkingClearly....
Finally, a Democrat that has seen the light!
To all Democrats, let's get this straight: Your party has just nominated for PRESIDENT a fellow who has been elected exactly once to the United States Senate, in an uncompetitive race with Chicago dirty politics wriiten all over it, following a garden-variety stint in a state legislature. And your response to the GOP nominee's choice for VICE PRESIDENT --someone who has been elected once as governor following a stint as a small town mayor--is to decry the lack of experience? Nobody ever said Barack Obama was unqualified for the No. 2 spot on the ticket.
Had Hillary Clinton won the nomination and selected Obama as her running mate--which, being a savvy politician,
she would certainly have done, in order to fire up his 18 million primary supporters--Obama would have been perfectly positioned. Either he would be preparing himself as vice president for his run for the Oval Office eight years hence. Or he would be experienced and tested in a national campaign that he would never be held responsible for losing, with a fundraising base beyond the imagination of Croesus. Instead, it's McCain-Palin with the wind at their backs, and Palin who is being prepared as the outstanding future prospect for her party.
Now, you might think it hypocritical to criticize the inexperience of a vice presidential nominee who has similar experience to your presidential nominee, but that's just a failure of the imagination. Indeed, hypocrisy was the strange charge Democrats decided to make against McCain and Palin: Having run against Obama all summer for his lack of experience and accomplishment, how dare John McCain pick as his running mate someone with (ahem) experience comparable to that of the Democratic candidate for president McCain had been criticizing?
This election is Obama's to lose and he is doing a great job of doing it. Obama believed all of the press clippings and assumed that the Oval Office was his after he got rid of Hillary. Big mistake. Blame anyone and everyone that you want, rant and rave about Palin and the Republicans but the only person that really deserves the blame is Obama himself.
ALASKA AGAINST SARAH
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_4GfAsKvGU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGvKy-5yFz8&feature=related
PLEASE FORWARD!!!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_4GfAsKvGU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGvKy-5yFz8&feature=related
ALASKA DOES NOT WANT SARAH!!!!!!!
"Drop the experience arguments; they just help the Republicans."
Exactly. I've read some of Obama's essays, and of course heard his speech about race. The man thinks, and he understands complexity and nuance -- something too few politicians are willing to do right now.
Palin is a creationist. That right there is an indictment of her critical-thinking skills.
EQUAL PAY FOR WOMEN!
Obama's campaign website is even more specific. Under the heading "Fighting for Pay Equity," the women's issues page laments that, "Despite decades of progress, women still make only 77 cents for every dollar a man makes. A recent study estimates it will take another 47 years for women to close the wage gap with men at Fortune 500 corporate offices. Barack Obama believes the government needs to take steps to better enforce the Equal Pay Act..."
A watchdog group called LegiStorm posts online the salaries for Capitol Hill staffers. "We have no political affiliations and no political purpose except to make the workings of Congress as transparent as possible," its website explains.
Findings:
Based on these calculations, Obama's 28 male staffers divided among themselves total payroll expenditures of $1,523,120. Thus, Obama's average male employee earned $54,397.
Obama's 30 female employees split $1,354,580 among themselves, or $45,152, on average.
Among Obama's five best-paid advisors, only one was a woman. Among his top 20, seven were women.
McCain's 17 male staffers split $916,914, thus averaging $53,936.
His 25 female employees divided $1,396,958 and averaged $55,878.
How could this be?
One explanation could be that women compose a majority of McCain's highest-paid aides. Among his top-five best-compensated staffers, three are women. Of his 20-highest-salaried employees, 13 are women. The Republican presidential nominee relies on women -- much more than men -- for advice at the highest, and thus, best-paid levels.
Food for thought.
Yes, Moni, we know McCain loves women who have the same politics he does. But pay equity would help all women, and he opposes that.
ShifterCat,
don't buy the Rupert Murdoch statistical analysis right off the bat, though...
http://trishwilson.typepad.com/blog/2008/09/a-study-of-the.html
I guess I don't see how this is attacking her because of her gender. I interpret it as setting the record straight. Since the McCain camp and the media expected all women to immediately embrace Palin, assumably because she has a vagina, women who don't agree with her politics have to stand up and state that they do not support her. Sad but true. How is this a gendered attack on her?
Agreed - the key is setting the record straight. How do we reach women who don't know it? I've started a PRACTICAL brainstorm on this at: http://notmyglassceiling.blogspot.com/
I am the editor-in-chief of a news site for business women. We recently posted an article which rates the media's arguments against Sarah Palin in the eyes of a disenchanted Hillary supporter. I just found your blog, would love any of your readers' feedback on the strengths/weaknesses of these arguments, and any arguments we may have missed:
http://vjournal.com/inside-the-mind-of-disenchanted-hillary-supporter
We appreciate it and glad I found you.
Natalee Roan
editor-in-chief
www.Vjournal.com
In order for us to be aware where the government funds are going, we can have an access on a searchable database known as the LegiStorm. LegiStorm may be too hard for certain people to weather. LegiStorm, the website that tracks Congressional compensation, keeps track of things like salary, foreign gifts received, and also Congressional travel. "Fact finding trips" have been lampooned as wasteful spending for years, as they don't always reveal anything, and its not like the funds used are a personal loan – the funds come from the taxpayers. The only people protesting it so far are the people whose information is posted, and doubtless they would get a personal loan to quash LegiStorm and go back to their secrecy.