Palin: wrong woman, wrong message
Sarah Palin shares nothing but a chromosome with Hillary Clinton. She is Phyllis Schlafly, only younger.
By Gloria Steinem
September 4, 2008
Here's the good news: Women have become so politically powerful that even the anti-feminist right wing -- the folks with a headlock on the Republican Party -- are trying to appease the gender gap with a first-ever female vice president. We owe this to women -- and to many men too -- who have picketed, gone on hunger strikes or confronted violence at the polls so women can vote. We owe it to Shirley Chisholm, who first took the "white-male-only" sign off the White House, and to Hillary Rodham Clinton, who hung in there through ridicule and misogyny to win 18 million votes.

But here is even better news: It won't work. This isn't the first time a boss has picked an unqualified woman just because she agrees with him and opposes everything most other women want and need. Feminism has never been about getting a job for one woman. It's about making life more fair for women everywhere. It's not about a piece of the existing pie; there are too many of us for that. It's about baking a new pie.



Selecting Sarah Palin, who was touted all summer by Rush Limbaugh, is no way to attract most women, including die-hard Clinton supporters. Palin shares nothing but a chromosome with Clinton. Her down-home, divisive and deceptive speech did nothing to cosmeticize a Republican convention that has more than twice as many male delegates as female, a presidential candidate who is owned and operated by the right wing and a platform that opposes pretty much everything Clinton's candidacy stood for -- and that Barack Obama's still does. To vote in protest for McCain/Palin would be like saying, "Somebody stole my shoes, so I'll amputate my legs."

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oe-steinem4-2008sep04,0,1290251.story

Well, somebody out there gets it anyway.

I just stepped in something.....wait, was that a pile of "Oh Please......."

Thirty years ago, Sarah Palin was what "in the day" feminism was all about creating. The champion of the movement, Gloria Steinem argued that a woman should be able to have both--a career (and by career she did not mean simply putting a man's food on the table at a specified nightly time) but in fact a "power" career. Empowerment was about being able to have kids and have a the career and the only that that has the almost irrelevant Ms. Steinem bothered is that this particular woman (Mrs. Palin) carries and (R) after her name.

It was Gloria and her work of yesteryear that has produced women like Sarah Palin. In fact, Gloria is right when she asserts that Palin is the wrong woman with the wrong message in that the right woman (Senator Clinton) has been cast to the side, the bitter little cheerleader for Mr. Obama.

Women like Gov. Palin drive women like Ms. Steinem crazy because Palin does not consider herself a victim of anything or anyone. That is, she has earned what she has. But she failed to pay the toll that fringe feminism instituted long ago. Palin isn't a bitter angry victim that felt like she had to fight the establishment in order to flip it the bird. She's not run by the shrill likes of Ms. Steinem and THAT is why she's the wrong woman.

Drew

I do not agree. I see nothing of the "greatness" you have stated at all. Sorry.

I think she is Awesome, McCain picked a great VP running mate..

She brings absolutely nothing to the table, nothing.

Her speeches were empty words of rhetoric that meant absolutely nothing other than trouble for all average Americans.

She is right in line with McCain and he is about the corporations and war. Not for the average joe at all.

I was very excited to see a Woman selected to run as Vice President and as much as I want to like her everytime I listen to her speak my dislike for her grows.

She sounds more like an uninspiring Mccain cheerleader ra ra ra McCains her man and all that jazz, doesn't seem to bring a load of good things to the table.

Obama brings even less, what has he done since he has been a senator? He is Inexperienced, even for a senator...


Can you tell me what makes him capable to run the US?

I agree wholeheartedly. Just because she is a woman doesn't make her every woman's woman.

Obama has inspiration, enthusiasm, gumshion, a plan, a vision of possitivity, just for a few of the things he has to offer.

McCain, in my opinion, appeals to the racists in this country, that is his only selling point. He has nothing to offer except more of the same and we know what the "same" has gotten us and it ain't good.

He is a good talker but to me inspiration, enthusiasm, a plan, when your taxes go up and gas hits $10.00 a gallon before any liberal will even think of drilling for our own oil. That doesnt sound like a good plan to me

Obama has a Act. He is going to need more than that to run the country. Now, you didn't answer my question, what has mr Inspiration and Enthusiasm done in the Senate besides Nothing.

I don't think McCain appeals to the NeoNazis, they hate everyone...

I love liberal propaganda.

McCain's and Obama's plans on the taxes were analyzed by a couple of universities and Obama's plan will give more tax cuts to the average joe than McCains. I posted the article so it is on here somewhere.

Nope neos ain't havin' no black folks in office so McCain is their choice. Plus the republican party has stood for alot of their ideals of late anyway so they are all for more republican leadership.

I don't call myself liberal so I guess you must be referring to other posters.

Right. Obama is just SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO great! He has the freaking midas touch. Everything he touches turns to gold. Everything he says is golden. I'm really growing tired of this being shoved down my throat.

By the way, I looked at both tax plans, and I don't like either of them. Obama's is not so great, and neither is McCains.

Oh i know, voted for the Bridge to Nowhere over Katrina victimes.

BTW, Palin went after her own party in Alaska for corruption. We need someone who will attack the corruption in politics in both parties. She started with her own party, very noble.

"Neos don't want no black folks in office?" Huh, so just because they are republicans, Obviously they are a Racist.... Thank god highways are not as narrow as your mind, we would have one hell of a traffic Jam...

But I do love how you avoid my question on "What has Obama accomplished in the Senate?", Why not just admit he did NOTHING? That would be the Truth....

But she did say he is inspiring and has enthusiasm, Oh he did write 2 memuors I think his plan is ITS ALL ABOUT ME even tho his strings are being pulled by the do nothing congress

Lets play "Who was more Racist, Republicans or Democrats?"

Votes on the Civil Rights in "Yea-Nay" format

By party
The original House version:[9]

Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)
The Senate version:[9]

Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%-31%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)
The Senate version, voted on by the House:[9]

Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%-37%)
Republican Party: 136-35 (80%-20%)


Seems like the Dems didn't like Civil Rights

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964#By_party