Tuesday, September 9, 2008


I was pleasantly suprised when I learned that McCain picked a woman to be his running mate. I quickly got worried though, that this would sway swing voters, the more liberal ones, to vote for McCain because of this fact. My pleasant surprise turned to dred. My dred is turning into disgust. As time progresses, I learn more and more about Sarah Palin that just infuriates me. I can't really bash her lack of experience, for obvious reasons, but there are certain things that bug me. These reasons include her teen daughter's pregnancy joined with her stance on abstanence only sex ed, and the issues she had with her own pregnancy. I don't like the fact that she didn't tell ANYONE, even her own children, that she was pregnant til her third trimester. I also don't like that she didn't tell her husband he had down syndrome until long after she knew herself.

I know she's "only the VP nominee and not the Presidential nominee", but it's not too logical of a thought that she is closer to the position of being commander in chief than most other VP nominees, that being because of McCain's age. I think it's bad enough that she has a 4 month old while trying to run for VP, and it would be even worse if she were the president trying to raise a 4 month old. This woman needs to be this special boys mother, not Vice President. Sarah Palin is not ready to lead.

Also, while blog surfing, I came across this information:

"Apparently, as a mayor, she approached the town's librarian to find out how to ban books. Then, it seems, she fired the librarian when said librarian didn't offer support for Palin's campaign to ban certain books that had "inappropriate language." Then, after a show of support from the locals, the librarian got her job back. Read about it in a TIME magazine article here. The American Library Association promotes the Freedom to Read and I wholeheartedly embrace their statement on the issue -- which is just another reason I can't support the McCain/Palin ticket."

Me too.


Janee said...

Me too!

Kellen said...

I agree here.... sorry I've never commented but I read this page semi-often.

The whole idea of women's rights is centered around the fact that we shouldn't hold women to different standards than men. If Obama had a special needs child, would we also say that he doesn't deserve to be in the race? I'm pretty sure not. Women and men should share parenting responsibility, so I don't think that this is a fair thing to judge Palin on. She has plenty of other perfectly fine things that can be judged: like her refusal to consider anything besides abstinence education, her two-facedness on ear marks, her views on public schools teaching creationism, her stance on stem cell research (especially considering that she has a child who could benefit), her stance on drilling, her real lack of experience (the entire state of alaska only has about 600,000 people: her executive experience is that of a small city mayor), her stance on limiting government, her stance on guns, etc.

But saying that she should stay home with her kid is something that Palin would say about a Democrat, we shouldn't put it the other way around. I'm glad for the pick because I think it takes away some of the conservative dogma concerning women and power. I just hope that her and McCain won't win.

Just my two cents.

The Terrys said...

I am very liberal, but I know the difference between men and women. Although I full heartedly believe that women should be farely respected and treated equally to men, there are certain things men can do that women can't, and certain things women can do that men can't. Men can't have children. Women can. And after a woman has a child, she inherits natural instincts of motherly nurture that men just can't measure up to. I fully feel that no one can truely replace a childs birth mother, and for this boy with down syndrome, the biggest thing he needs is a full time mom. Granted, I'm sure he'll find the care he needs to thrive, but his mother should be the one to do it. A special needs child needs far more care than a normal child, and his mother should be the one to do it. I probably wouldn't be saying this if the child didn't have down syndrome.

This may sound "conservative" but I'm still as liberal as they come.

I also don't think that people should have their gun rights taken away.

Kellen said...

I don't think people should have gun rights taken away. I just think they should have less of a right to assault rifles and unbridled access to guns in crime-rampant areas.

On motherhood - I agree that mothers are better child raisers...I would suck at it if I did it by myself. But I don't think that its a valid criticism of Palin, especially because its a typical conservative talking point, and it takes away from the real, pressing problems with her issues.

While Palin's decision to take the nomination raises issues of her judgement for me, considering her small son, and her pregnant daughter and all of the media attention, saying that she shouldn't have taken it because of her son equates to saying that she is a bad mother (at least for me), which is an ad hominem attack; a character attack, that has nothing to do with policy.

But.... we can agree to disagree...

Good blog BTW

The Terrys said...

EXACTLY! It's only a judgment on her character. I'm not saying that her not being their full time for her son is by any means direct proof that she'll be a bad president, only that it shows bad character, for me anyways.

I don't necessarily vote or pull for a nominee by what they promise to accomplish during their term, by their experience, and not even by all of their policies. In the past, not many presidents fulfilled their promises they made while campaining. I think judging how good someone will be as president simply depends on their character. How are they going to handle situations, how are they going to make decisions? That's what it's based off of, and really not much else.

Besides, there are a whole slew of things wrong with Palin. That specifically was just bugging me at the time.

The Terrys said...

I watched Palin's interview today. She seems too much like Bush. She, like Bush, is very into idealistic comments that are intended to generate a "hell yeah, can I get an amen to that." I prefer more thought out realistic answers.

And I too have a problem with the fact that she has so many young children at home. If Barack Obama had a new born mentally retarded child, I wouldn't feel comfortable with him in office.

It would be like me working a full time job and studying for the bar exam with a 4 month old mentally retarded baby. It's just too much.

For me, its not about her gender role. It's about her having too much on her plate.

But regardless, I think she is too bush like. I mean, she is ok with banning books. WTF!?