Everyone’s talking about McCain’s choice for VP candidate, MILF Sarah Palin of Alaska. His motivations are transparent, and were within seconds being widely discussed on all the hottest blog comment threads. Everyone knows why she was picked, the question is, will it work?
If the opinion of Vision Forum is any indication, I’m going to have to guess, no.
The selection of a feminist, pro-life mother of five with four children, seventeen and under, including a newborn Down’s syndrome baby, to fulfill the post of vice president is without precedent in American history. What Democratic vice presidential candidate Geraldine Ferraro was unable to accomplish for the feminist cause in 1984 may now be handed as a fait accompli to America through the hands of evangelicals and conservatives. After decades of Christian leaders fighting against the feminstic vision of the working supermom, Republicans are now showcasing the vision in the most high profile election in the world.
It was from this post that I learned Palin returned to work a mere three days after having her latest child, who is afflicted with Down’s Syndrome. From this, I infer two things: first, god damn, there’s a woman used to working at least twice, if not six or seven times, as hard to be considered half as good. I mean, just, damn. And second: someone’s got a lot of help at home. A lot. Of really trustworthy help, because who besides your own mother do you leave a special-needs newborn with? At any rate, she’s clearly figured out how to have the mythical feminist dream of having it all, so it’s a damn pity that this perfect specimen of a strawfeminist is in fact there to balance out a perception that John McCain is just too soft on women’s issues.
But she chose her side, and unfortunately for her that side has spent the last two decades or so pandering to a base that thinks “Feminists for Life” is actually comprised of a bunch of feminists, and so she just might fail as a token. Could you imagine if she became president in the event of Old Man McCain’s death? How can a president have children? It’s just too much work! Who will take care of them while she’s presidenting? There’s no guidance about this situation in the Bible, so the whole damn situation is unthinkable. Back to the kitchen you go, Mrs Palin!
I am confident that Mrs. Palin is a delightful, sincere, thoughtful, and capable woman with many commendable virtues. But in fairness, there is nothing “traditional” about mothers of young children becoming career moms, chief magistrates, and leading nations of three hundred million, nor is this pattern the biblical ideal to which young women should aspire.
Of course, Palin’s nomination means it’s again time to think about the unthinkable:
With more and more women entering the political sphere and running for political office, the conscientious, biblically oriented Christian is confronted with the question of whether or not he should give his support and vote to a woman. This question becomes more pressing for many when the “best candidate,” i.e., the most conservative, pro-life candidate in a particular race is a woman.
Short answer: No.
…is it biblically proper for a woman to hold political office, and thus rule over men? Has God ordained women to be civil leaders, or has He reserved this authority for men only? I believe that the Bible gives a definitive answer to this question: women are not permitted by God to hold political office and rule over men in the political sphere.
That’s right, you Serena Joy wanna-bes. No power for you, no matter how good you are at turning your loathing of those sinful daughters of Eve into policy. True Christians are apparently required to vote for a be-penised man who will uphold the unbiblical rights currently given to wayward harlots over a more theologically-minded cuntsack. The parts of the Bible William Einwechter cares to include in his analysis say so. Every mention of women holding authority states that this is wrong, except for that story of that woman who held some authority, which doesn’t count.
The example of Deborah does not give sufficient evidence to prove that she held the office of civil ruler or to overturn the biblical doctrine that men alone are called of God to the office of civil magistrate. Therefore, Christians should not support a woman for the office of civil magistrate.
I do believe that by this logic the Religious Right will have to vote for Barack Obama, with his stylish, more traditional wife and his betesticled running mate. And we on the left welcome our new swing voters. Please, make yourselves at home, take a look at the platform. Have some coffee before we start screaming at each other about abortion.
“It was from this post that I learned Palin returned to work a mere three days after having her latest child, who is afflicted with Down’s Syndrome. From this, I infer two things: first, god damn, there’s a woman used to working at least twice, if not six or seven times, as hard to be considered half as good. I mean, just, damn. And second: someone’s got a lot of help at home. A lot. Of really trustworthy help, because who besides your own mother do you leave a special-needs newborn with?”
Most states won’t certify caregivers, whether a center or in-home, for infants younger than six weeks, nevermind whether or not they’re special needs–so if you’re going back to work sooner than that, you’re either leaving the kid with friends or family or you’re using somebody borderline-shady to say the least. Also, Sarah clearly didn’t have any health issues of her own resulting from pregnancy and childbirth–those of us who, say, suffered from pre-eclampsia were still on bedrest and anticonvulsant meds three days after childbirth.
I read the link, though, and I am excited to announce that women CAN be prophetesses!
Why wouldn’t the new kid’s dad take care of him?
So, a lot of the talk about Palin that I’ve heard is how McCain apparently thinks die hard Clinton supporters are too stupid to tell one a woman from another. And I have to admit, the choice of Palin feels a lot like an attempt to be all like “hey we have a cool young ground breaking candidate on this ticket too! And she’s female just like the Hillary woman you’re all going on about”
But really? I think that there are a lot more of the religious (and plain ol’ secular sexist) right who will go “OMG vagina! Do not want!” than there are PUMAs. I mean, right?
Rabbit – not so. 538 have noted that women view Palin less favourably than men do.
Um, I wasn’t saying that women would prefer Palin. In fact that’s kind of the opposite of what I was saying.
There is a lot of speculation on various blogs that McCain picked Palin because she is a woman, perhaps to woo some disenchanted Clinton supporters. But that seems unlikely because, well, it’s a shitty strategy (as illustrated by the quotes Kyso K provided).
Therefore either McCain et al picked a shit strategy or that isn’t their strategy at all.
I am surprised and intrigued by McCain’s VP choice and unlike many others, I did not see this one coming. Be interesting to see how this plays out. Right now the fundies are not taking it too well, but give it a few days– maybe they’ll start rationalizing and find a way to accept her the way that the “Hope and change” crowd has rationalized and accepted war-cheerleader-cum-crusader-for-the-rights-of-MBNA-execs-everywhere Biden.
One thing I know, Mike Huckabee sure is pissed right now.
Rabbit, I thought you were saying the converse – that men would not favour Palin because, vagina, do not want.
I don’t think that men as a whole would not favor Palin but I do think that men who belong to the religious right may hesitate to vote for Palin because she is a woman, as illustrated by the excerpts posted by Kyso.
As noted in the site you linked to, the higher approval for Palin among men may be simply be due to the fact that men as a whole tend to be more conservative than women.