Friday, February 18, 2011

Sarah Palin

During a recent Q & A session for the Long Island Association, a business group, Sarah Palin further hinted that she may run for president in 2012 with comments including "a woman, a mom" would be perfect for the role of leader of the free world and she's considering a man-on-the-street campaign. After reading this, many thoughts flooded my mind ...
Are there people who honestly think she would make a good president or is it all a gimmick?
Why are people willing to listen to her?
What has she done to earn status?
Is this the best the female gender can do for such an important position?
No wonder the world hates us and the battle between the sexes is still a big issue in the workplace and everywhere. I have so much to say I don't know where to begin, so I will start at the beginning.
Government in general has never been flux with women. Humans lived in a male ruled world for the better part of history. The 19th amendment allowing women to vote wasn't passed by Congress until 1920 and the first woman in Congress, Jeannette Rankin, was elected in 1916 so we haven't even gone 100 years with women being allowed to be involved (no girls allowed!) -- also, for the better part of the years following these monumental women's rights moments, women were still put down and ignored. Yeah, men will let you vote and let you join Congress but they still don't think you're equal and to this day there is still a battle between the sexes.
If you don't think so then what about stay-at-home-dads? Why is that largely seen as feminine and not socially acceptable in broad terms? What about presidents/CEOs of companies being female? Not a lot out there. There is pressure from men and women alike, as well as a historical pressure, for women to be mothers and take care of their family, not climb the corporate ladder. From sports to work to everything in between, women are not seen as equal. I'm not a feminist in the least but this is what I can see from our history and current times.
So, a woman running for vice president or president is going to ruffle feathers as well as draw attention. Same thing for a black man running for president. It has not been done and with a large history of oppression and opposition to black people as well as women, it's a big deal. The first female vice president nominee of the Republican Party was Sarah Palin in 2008. This drew a lot of attention, as the first for anything will do, and set up standards for women in such high power positions. There may be attention made to the second or third or so on, but not as much as the first, and as the trend becomes more of a standard, it eventually is accepted for the most part.
I'm all for a woman holding a position such as vice president or president but I was very disappointed that it was her. The world is waiting to see the first female vice presidential nominee, waiting to judge and examine her, like giving a baby its first taste of real food. You don't start with something gross, you start with peaches or something yummy. A first impression. And what do we get? A woman who went to three colleges before leaving to compete in beauty pageants (nothing wrong with beauty pageants but shouldn't be featured on the resume of a future world leader) and then returning to two colleges and finally getting a degree in communications to be a sportscaster. She was on the city council and then began her reign as Mayor of Wasilla. Not the breeding I want for vp or prez.
What do you know about Alaska? Honestly. What do you know? I will be honest and tell you, when I think of Alaska I think of snow, Eskimos and dogs pulling sleds. Icebergs, whale watching, cold temperatures. Obviously there is more to it than that but what would she know about any other parts of the country? Alaska is similar to no other state and is often forgotten as being part of the U.S. Not to mention her reign as mayor and when she wasn't mayor, but still heavily involved with politics, featured a lot of questionable ethics, including checking out city department heads to find out if they were loyal to her and, if not, forcing resignation. Boo hoo nobody likes me!
The only reason she was John McCain's running mate was because he was afraid of Hilary Clinton. Everyone got all hot about equal opportunity and if he was going to go up against Hilary, he needed some estrogen. He knew all the people who didn't like Hilary would like Sarah -- she's pretty, approachable and acts like an every-woman. It was all about show, just like her beauty pageants.
OK, so I get this part of it, the smoke and mirrors to get John McCain elected before he dies, but why on Earth is she going after the presidency in 2012. I don't get it.
It reminds me of when you ask someone about politics and they give you a run-of-the-mill answer, i.e. I like Sarah Palin. Then, you start digging, getting to the bottom of their stance. Typically what you get is "I just do, OK" and nothing concrete like I liked how she votes for this or for that or I think she would be a great president because of her experience with ...
Instead you get these empty responses. She's a maverick! She's a hockey mom! She's f-ing hot! She is anti-abortion like me.
Maybe that's what politics is all about. We don't want to research and figure out who the best candidate is, isn't that why we have politicians in the first place? To do the work we don't want to think or worry about? We want to go about our lives buying Starbucks, getting the kids to soccer practice and making time for romantic dinners with our wandering-eye spouse instead of worrying about the unrest in the Middle East or what we will do when all the oil is gone -- because we can bitch and moan about it but, at the end of the day, don't have to solve these problems. We are removed from our state problems, national problems, international problems. We are in the "safe zone." We want to go to our happy place instead of migraine city! Save that shit for city hall!
We put Barack Obama in office and expected him to save the f-ing world! Overnight! Now, a couple years in, we still have problems and we aren't happy about this! Weren't you supposed to be our hero? Our knight in shining armor? We don't want to see movements in the right direction, we don't want to see what actually happens when dealing with monumental issues, we want instant satisfaction!
Maybe politics turned into reality TV. We don't want the best candidate, some snooze-alert Harvard grad, we want the drama! We want Sarah Palin and her slutty daughter who got knocked up by some dude named Levi (maybe his parents really liked jeans) and then went on the fame bus to hell (Dancing with the Stars anyone?). Isn't that what the Palin's are about -- reality shows (Sarah Palin's Alaska & DWTS), writing books, drama (teenage pregnancy with a unwed mom, baby-daddies, a first dude named Mud Monkey, the Tea Party movement). Sarah Palin wants money! When did America stop wanting someone educated and experienced and instead want hysteria?
We are never happy. When a Democrat is in power, the Republicans wait until their next chance in four years and put a negative spin on everything accomplished, waiting to undo all that has been changed. This is not an equation for progress. The same is true for Democrats. No one wants to work together. Instead they want to spread lies that the average Joe eats up like Raisinets at the movies. Obama is a Socialist. Does anyone honestly know what it means to be a Socialist? They use these words that the average person won't waste time trying to learn. Do you know what a Socialist is? Oh yeah, of course I do, it's a terrible thing!
So, in conclusion (as I used to write at the end of my reports in high school), who is Sarah Palin? What do Sarah Palin supporters know about her? Why are we obsessed with her? For those people planning to vote for her in 2012, why?

5 comments:

  1. you are a feminist... you just gave the feminist argument

    ReplyDelete
  2. I argued from what I have seen in our history and current times. It is the feminist argument but I am not a feminist. I feel the woman's place is in the home and children are becoming worse and worse because instead of one parent at work, both parents are at work. I know that times changed and the dual income is needed to support a home but still, I don't agree with this. However it's similar to my stance on abortion -- I would never have an abortion because I think it's wrong but who am I to tell other people what to do?

    ReplyDelete
  3. It is scary that people are into the politics of Sarah Palin, Bill O'Reilly and Glen Beck. It is all manufactured and is only serving to empower rubes and people who like there politics like they like their reality TV... in quick, easy to digest portions. It is a scary time in America... if you can smell what The Rock is cookin'.

    ReplyDelete
  4. i see your point. Not all feminists think that women should work, and not stay at home. Naomi Wolf, for example, argues that there should be better systems in place to allow a woman to stay at home with her children if she so chooses, and that it should be easier for fathers to participate in their children's upbringing. That's what I meant about your post and the feminist argument.

    BTW, that rush limbaugh thing it crazy.. what an idiot. "Hi, I'm fat. But you, who manages your weight and exercises, can't eat out while on vacation".

    As you can see, I am procrastinating on my school work by reading your blog... haha.

    ReplyDelete
  5. oh, and why does my name show up as K to the J? I just realized that... weird

    ReplyDelete