Monday, September 01, 2008

Sexist Attacks on Palin

Over the past few days, I"ve seen plenty of attacks on Sarah Palin. I've got to admit, I don't like her, and I think it's a terrible choice for McCain to have made. On the other hand, I thank McCain for this choice as it's an obvious and blatant ploy for Hillary's supporters. In fact, I giggled most of the day on Friday when I heard. And it wasn't just because Friday was the first day I was able to smile or eat solid food (mouth infection last week...Mother warned me that it would happen if I keep saying dirty words).

But one item that concerns me is that there have been a number of sexist attacks on her over the past few days.
I know you've seen the allegations that her youngest child is actually the offspring of her daughter. There have also been attacks saying that, with a young Down Syndrome child at home, she should be taking care of him.

I have just one question. If Sarah Palin were Seth Palin, would these questions still come up? I don't think so. Is anyone asking who is taking care of Barack Obama's children? Or who is taking care of Jenna and Barbara? Or Chelsea Clinton? Nope, didn't think so. When we attack a woman on a topic that we wouldn't even think of attacking a man on, that's sexist.

"but Laurel, Obama has been subjected to racist and xenophobic comments for months!" some may say. And that's right. But I expect a higher standard from us. We know evil and injustice when we see it, and we fight against it in any instance we see. We don't perpetrate it. (In this case, WE=fair-minded individuals who haven't drunk the Republican Kool-Ade and actually have two firing neurons. Which means most of the folks who read my blog.)

Besides, attacking family lives indicates that there's nothing else for us to attack, and that's just not true. Take a look at this 2006 Gubernatorial Candidate Questionnaire and especially Palin's responses. There is so much there to attack. As a matter of fact, last night my Honey and I sat here and picked apart these answers. Try it. It's fun!!

I'll get you started:

11. Are you offended by the phrase “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance? Why or why not?

SP: Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me and I’ll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance.

OK, fact check here. Let's take a look at the history of the Pledge, shall we? The first thing you'll notice is that the pledge was written in 1852. That's a good 50 years after the Founding Fathers had passed. What did they do, dictate it by Ouji board?

But even then, that pledge didn't include the phrase "under God." That was added in the McCarthy era. And boy, oh boy, if there's a time that the Republicans love and would like to return to, it's the McCarthy era.

And funny, I've read the Constitution, but I didn't see McCarthy's name on it anywhere.

I'd like for my leaders to have at least a glimmer of an idea about the history of the US and our most important documents.

Your turn. Pick a ridiculous position and pick it apart. it's easy and fun!!

Crossposted at Appalachian Greens.

8 comments:

Ruppie said...

Very interesting history of the Pledge. I wonder if Palin, or any other right winger would support it if they realized it was written not by Thomas Jefferson but by a minister with SOCIALIST leanings.
Sweet irony!

Muze Euterpe said...

Laurel -- See, I felt similarly about the attacks on Hillary. I'm not a supporter of her's but I think she was shafted. I think she was set up and drilled at the Dem Convention.

Now, about this Pledge thing ... there are plenty of us "right wingers" who know that 'under God' wasn't part of the original writing.

Thanks for stopping by my place. Just goes to show there's room for a diversity of opinions in this world and we CAN express them without being nasty, hateful, and mean.

MountainLaurel said...

I'll agree about the sexist comments on Hillary. though I voted for Obama, I thought they were uncalled for.

That's one reason that I read and comment on your blog. To remind myself that there are folks on the other side of the political spectrum who are able to discuss and debate the issues in a civilized fashion. Watching the cable news shows with the hateful commentators (on both sides), you'd never know it.

I hope I'll continue to see you around here, too!

MountainLaurel said...

Oh, and on the pledge, again, it wasn't a comment on all right-wingers...just the one who's on the Republican ticket for vice president. I think anyone who is a candidate for even a statewide office should know better. And I've slammed ol'Joe on not knowing what he should as well.

Lara, the Neurotic Att'y said...

I don't feel too badly for her...apparently, she got a kick out of it when a radio shock jock leveled the same "bad mother" innuendos against one of her political rivals: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/31/palin-laughs-as-opponent_n_122776.html

MountainLaurel said...

Welcome, Lara! And thanks for the link. I hadn't heard that before. Reaffirms my impression that Gov. Palin isn't a nice person at all, and that I don't want someone with that kind of petty attitude a heartbeat away.

I still hate to hear sexist commentary against any candidate. Maybe I'm an idealist, but I'm hoping for the day in which the attacks may be the same regardless of gender or race.

Anonymous said...

Check again on "under God".... I believe that movement was begun by President Eisenhower.

But none the less.... what's the matter with that anyway? Who cares?

Is it the words or the thought that there may actually be a higher power, whom some call "GOD" that everything is under that bothers you?

MountainLaurel said...

Anonymous, the concern is not the phrase. I know that God is there (read other posts). My concern is that she is so unaware of the basic tenets on which our country was founded. I hold our national leaders to a higher standard on those topics than I do the average citizen.