Of course, Palin probably sees nothing wrong with this. *shrug*
It is sort of creepy though. You can tell that not even Sen. McCain respects her. It's like she's a little girl dressing up in Mummy and Daddy's clothes and playing Veep, and everyone thinks it's so cute, but not for real.

Yeah, my husband and I shared a "WTF?" look when that came up. It's like he's reassuring people who aren't sure about a woman in a leadership role that her husband still wears the pants. Ridiculous.

My husband and I were also shocked by that one. Not "I'm proud to have her on my side," but "I'm proud of her?!?" That's just so, so odd.

And what the fuck does her husband have to do with anything? The fact that he is always there (and was apparently always there in Alaska) and always mentioned (along with that Iron Dog crap that has nothing to do with her or the election) really bothers me. I just keep wondering what, exactly, his place is in this campaign.

Yeah, I've been thinking that for a long time, too. "I'm proud of her" sounds like he's talking about his daughter or something. Maybe to reassure the over-60 Republican men who might have daughters (or neices) her age? To make them think it's OK for women to be VP because they'd want their daughters to have that opportunity?

Also, in interest of fairness, I remember Obama saying stuff about being "proud" of Hillary Clinton, after he'd won the nomination. I got a little of the same feeling with that, whatever his intention actually was. Usually when you're "proud" of someone, you're in a mentoring, parenting, or otherwise superior role. It's different than "taking pride in someone's accomplishments", even though they are technically the same thing.

Honestly that wasn't even his worst gaff of the night. How about when he decided that it was okay to use her baby as a political tool? Or when he contradicted himself and admitted that he would use Roe vs Wade for a litmus test. He is simply anti-woman but then his colluding VP doesn't care if she is just a tool.

Not only was it an exceedingly bizarre thing to say, it's probably also countereffective because Todd Palin was deeply involved with the intimidation and wrangling in the Troopergate scandal.

What a weird, weird thing to say.

I don't think she gets it. This woman is a self proclaimed "feminist" who cares nothing about women's rights, with the exception of motherhood, and with the whole UN fiasco, she was actually flirting back with the Iranian(?) ambassador when he was all like, "WOW! You're prettier in person, can I get a hug???" If that had been Hillary, she would have put him right in his place and reminded him that they were there to discuss issues, not to flirt. This 'woman' giggled and blushed and acted "cutesy", to coin the SNL Katie Couric skit.

BTW, did anyone else get were McCain was talking about Supreme Court justices where he said something to the extent of "I'm not going go appoint using a litmus test, I would appoint by intelligence, but any justice who would support Roe v. Wade is clearly not qualified"?? Out of everything that man said about abortion, that was the one that pissed me off the most. To me it relays that he feels that those who would allow women the right to their own decisions regarding their bodies are clearly morons for thinking their capable of it.

I'd be pretty pissed to be Palin, too.

Renee:

It's silly anyway that McCain used Palin's kid as a tool to bring up autism - but that's despite the fact that her baby has down syndrome, not autism.

ahem, Down's syndrome. oops.

That was irritating, Lissette, but I thought the most offensive thing he said about abortion was the whole "health" in scare-quotes thing. I mean, you know they feel that way, but you don't really expect them to say it on TV.

Obama's said he's proud of Biden. It's the sort of thing you say about your running mate. The shout out to Todd was a little weird, but not half so creepy as McCain meeting Bristol's fiance.

As for McCain not respecting Palin, well no kidding: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6EsJChJ9Ro

how about "Sarah Palin is a role model for women?" I almost choked on my cereal.

grumpgirl.blogspot.com

PS Did McCain say that Palin was a top expert on special needs children? I couldn't hear too well over the yakkers I watched with.

Yeah, aleks, I thought that was bizarre. She's had a special needs kid for what, 9 months now? And he kept talking about autism. Why is she supposed to be an expert on autism? The only thing she's proven to be expert at so far is cutting funding for special needs children.

Rachel in WY:

I was still numb from that statement to really feel the shock of the "health" of the woman thing. It wasn't until later that it actually sank in how snide and condescending that remark actually was. My boyfriend took both remarks really badly. He was pissed! He's so great! *swoon*

I'm glad that I wasn't the only one who noticed how patronizing McCain's description of Palin was! It really made me angry.

I did find that a little strange. But did anyone else notice that McCain didn't actually say "Yes, I think she will make a good president"? Obama said it about Biden.

And yeah, I did notice that Roe/litmus test thing. And then the autism/Down's syndrome.

If Obama doesn't win, then I clearly don't know anything about politics. He seems to me to be winning on all front, except amongst the "crazy racist" voting pool- which NO ONE wants.

Every time he talks about her, it comes off as really condescending and patronizing. Like he always just knew she could do it, she just had to prove it to everyone. Except that's the sort of thing that should be limited to giving your first speech, not being the vice president.

What McCain was "trying" to say is that the health-of-the-mother exemption basically allows all abortions. This is true. Why it would seem productive to him to put scare-quotes around health and say it with a sneer is beyond me, but then again he did the same thing when he said that nuclear safety was an extremist fringe concern. He chose some time ago to lose without honor or dignity.

Yeah, aleks, I thought that was bizarre. She's had a special needs kid for what, 9 months now? Posted by Rachel_in_WY October 16, 2008 11:48 AM

Trig is four or five months old I think. He also thinks she's the most knowledgeable person (you can start snickering there!) in the country on energy because she's been Governor of a Saudi-style production state for less than two years.

Overall though, I think McCain had a good night. He found his chair right away this time, and he remembered "that one's" name every time. He got a little lost at the end trying to circumnavigate the table, but overall I think he really helped his chances. His grandson had some good points to make and obviously cared, in his calm dispassionate way, but I think he made a good case that he's qualified to stay out of the assisted living home.

What McCain was "trying" to say is that the health-of-the-mother exemption basically allows all abortions. This is true.

Why is this true? Because unless you believe that the doctor isn’t capable of determining that what is harmful to the woman’s health or if you believe that the doctor would be willing to lie about why they were performing abortions, it most certainly is not true.

What McCain was "trying" to say is that the health-of-the-mother exemption basically allows all abortions. This is true.

Why is this true? Because unless you believe that the doctor isn’t capable of determining that what is harmful to the woman’s health or if you believe that the doctor would be willing to lie about why they were performing abortions, it most certainly is not true.
Posted by ShelbyWoo Author Profile Page | October 16, 2008 1:32 PM

Are you asserting that women asking for abortions are unable to obtain them on the grounds that they haven't proven their health is in danger?

By the way, I'm surprised more people aren't mentioning Ledbetter. Obama was eloquent on making equal pay laws enforceable and thus meaningful, and McCain just dismissed it without even acknowledging the problem.

And what the fuck does her husband have to do with anything? The fact that he is always there (and was apparently always there in Alaska) and always mentioned (along with that Iron Dog crap that has nothing to do with her or the election) really bothers me. I just keep wondering what, exactly, his place is in this campaign.
Posted by AlmostAmanda | October 16, 2008 10:08 AM

The Toddster was very involved in her running the Governor's office, and he took the lead (under her authority) in harassing Alaska officials to fire her sister's ex-husband.

aleks:

I was responding to your comment about medical exemptions.You asserted that medical exemptions don’t mean anything anyway and that all abortions would still be preformed. I was disagreeing with your assertion. Outlawing abortions or specific abortion procedures but allowing for medical exemptions would most certainly NOT allow all abortions to be done. What part of that confused you?

He has often talked like a glowing father about how "proud" he is of her. It is horribly dismissive, as though they are not equals at all. Your post is the only thing I have found on the web addressing this odd sexist language he is using.

aleks wrote "The Toddster was very involved in her running the Governor's office, and he took the lead (under her authority) in harassing Alaska officials to fire her sister's ex-husband."

Its a lot more than just Troopergate. She CCd him on all kinds of emails for all kinds of issues related to the gas pipeline deal and other stuff.

The anchorage daily news has a full section on all the dirty stuff she and the First Dude have been up to.

He has been butt deep in running our state so he will be just as deep in the national issues that a VP would be working on. I don't think the WH staffers would let that happen, but you never know.

Aleks said: "Are you asserting that women asking for abortions are unable to obtain them on the grounds that they haven't proven their health is in danger?"

Yes. I think that was exactly what she was asserting. Why, Aleks, do you ask this question as though there is any ambiguity in the possible answer. If a woman can only obtain an abortion if her doctor believes having a baby would be hazardous to her health, then it up to the doctor's discretion to determine what constitutes 'health'.

If she has a straight-up condition that means carrying to term could be physically dangerous for her, then fine, there would be nothing a doctor could do to deny her a referral to an abortion provider. But potential mental/emotional health and stability are very hard to determine empirically. If a woman doesn't feel like she is emotionally ready to raise a child, this is no assurance that she could get the abortion should have a right to. Financial matters come into it as well, because it's a fact that people in a very low income bracket are more likely to get depressed or have mental problems (and raising a child is an expensive endeavour). Yet if a poor woman goes to a doctor who doesn't believe this would constitute a potential threat to her mental health, it's unlikely that her "right" to an abortion could be enforced, because he/she can simply say that many poor women raise children just fine. Plus, anti-abortion doctors could simply say that these things only constitute possible threats after birth, so the women in question should carry to term and then adopt out.

So NO, Aleks, having a clause that says a woman can only get an abortion if carrying to term would endanger her health does NOT equal "basically allowing all abortions".