![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
So I watched the debate and thought many things throughout it that I've discussed elsewhere but there was one weird moment that I haven't seen brought up yet. I found myself thinking about it after the debate and this morning. It was when the candidates were asked how they felt about their running mate being president if something were to happen to him. Obviously that question was there to address the many things said about Palin.
Here's the transcript.
So he says, "I'm proud of her" and "And I can't tell you how proud I am of her and her family."
It's that particular use of "I'm proud of her/her and her family." It just sounds like how you talk about a child. I can understand using "proud" to talk about your running mate, but I'd expect it more as a "I'm proud to be running with her" way. It may sound like nit-picking but he said it twice the same way...it was just incredibly paternalistic-sounding. I didn't think it was an intended insult at Palin, of course. He's proud of her and her family--iow, her children. And one could maybe take it that he's saying that he's proud of all American families and this is one of them, but that still puts him in a position of responsibility *over* those families as president.
It was just a little troubling to me what that seemed to say about how he viewed her. I couldn't imagine Obama or Biden speaking that way about the other. I just...can you imagine Obama saying how proud he is of how Biden's done as a candidate? Even worse if Biden said it about Obama? Without something that put them on the same level, like "He makes me proud to be a Democrat" or some such? I'm probably not explaining it well, but that phrase and the way it was said just came across as completely but casually setting up a clear inequality between the two.
And that went along with "[Americans] know that she's a role model to women and other[s]..."
Again, that raised my hackles. You don't tell me that she's a role model to women--therefore me (in some ways she's the exact opposite). I know there's probably a very easy response to this, that he's not really saying that, he's just saying that some women, perhaps many women, look up to her as a role model. If you're a woman and running for vice president you're going to be described as a role model at some point. And I get that since Palin's main appeal is as a character--the feisty hockey straight-talking hockey mom who plays with the big boys and wins, she's a "breath of fresh air"--that's the kind of thing he's going to talk about in praising her.
But it just to me felt like it revealed the cynicism in the choice of her, like he has this vague notion of women liking Hilary Clinton because she was a woman so, you know, here's that role model that you wanted. That's part of her job as vice president. He's looking down on her with approval and pride; the man says I should look up at her for what I want to be. That's the hierarchy.
Then he rounds out the thing with the completely bizarre "Her husband's a pretty tough guy, by the way, too."
Um...so? Yeah, I know that it's not unheard of to say something about a candidate's wife with regards to his presidency. But not when you've got 90 seconds to sum up why he'd be a good president. And usually only when the wife in question is understood to be a professional of equal standing who's going to do some specific thing for the job. Otherwise she's just a gracious first lady--which can be a fine thing, but it's not really considered part of the job of president. It's hard to not get the impression that he just didn't have enough of substance to say about the woman in the short time he was given so had to start talking about other members of her family in a way that went beyond just showing how they reflect the way she would govern.
Given the history of women's rights bringing up a woman's husband in her job qualifications has a totally different weight. Men haven't historically had to fight to be taken seriously on their own. To bring up Todd Palin (heh--I always want to call him Todd Packer) in a way that implies that he's part of the deal because Sarah Palin is a family unit...it's hard for me not to see Todd as the de facto head of the family as the "tough" husband. I don't think McCain was throwing him in as a winking implication that it's really Todd who's going to be v.p. or anything, but I was sure reminded of times when that would be a given listening to this answer.
I feel like I still haven't explained this well, but that there are probably people who could zero in on exactly what I'm describing and explain it better!
ETA: THANK YOU JON STEWART: "You're proud of her? What is she, your daughter?"
Here's the transcript.
Well, Americans have gotten to know Sarah Palin (see photo). They know that she's a role model to women and other -- and reformers all over America. She's a reformer. She is -- she took on a governor who was a member of her own party when she ran for governor. When she was the head of their energy and natural resources board, she saw corruption, she resigned and said, "This can't go on."
She's given money back to the taxpayers. She's cut the size of government. She negotiated with the oil companies and faced them down, a $40 billion pipeline of natural gas that's going to relieve the energy needs of the United -- of what they call the lower 48.
She's a reformer through and through. And it's time we had that bresh of freth air (sic) -- breath of fresh air coming into our nation's capital and sweep out the old-boy network and the cronyism that's been so much a part of it that I've fought against for all these years.
She'll be my partner. She understands reform. And, by the way, she also understands special-needs families. She understands that autism is on the rise, that we've got to find out what's causing it, and we've got to reach out to these families, and help them, and give them the help they need as they raise these very special needs children.
She understands that better than almost any American that I know. I'm proud of her.
And she has ignited our party and people all over America that have never been involved in the political process. And I can't tell you how proud I am of her and her family.
Her husband's a pretty tough guy, by the way, too.
So he says, "I'm proud of her" and "And I can't tell you how proud I am of her and her family."
It's that particular use of "I'm proud of her/her and her family." It just sounds like how you talk about a child. I can understand using "proud" to talk about your running mate, but I'd expect it more as a "I'm proud to be running with her" way. It may sound like nit-picking but he said it twice the same way...it was just incredibly paternalistic-sounding. I didn't think it was an intended insult at Palin, of course. He's proud of her and her family--iow, her children. And one could maybe take it that he's saying that he's proud of all American families and this is one of them, but that still puts him in a position of responsibility *over* those families as president.
It was just a little troubling to me what that seemed to say about how he viewed her. I couldn't imagine Obama or Biden speaking that way about the other. I just...can you imagine Obama saying how proud he is of how Biden's done as a candidate? Even worse if Biden said it about Obama? Without something that put them on the same level, like "He makes me proud to be a Democrat" or some such? I'm probably not explaining it well, but that phrase and the way it was said just came across as completely but casually setting up a clear inequality between the two.
And that went along with "[Americans] know that she's a role model to women and other[s]..."
Again, that raised my hackles. You don't tell me that she's a role model to women--therefore me (in some ways she's the exact opposite). I know there's probably a very easy response to this, that he's not really saying that, he's just saying that some women, perhaps many women, look up to her as a role model. If you're a woman and running for vice president you're going to be described as a role model at some point. And I get that since Palin's main appeal is as a character--the feisty hockey straight-talking hockey mom who plays with the big boys and wins, she's a "breath of fresh air"--that's the kind of thing he's going to talk about in praising her.
But it just to me felt like it revealed the cynicism in the choice of her, like he has this vague notion of women liking Hilary Clinton because she was a woman so, you know, here's that role model that you wanted. That's part of her job as vice president. He's looking down on her with approval and pride; the man says I should look up at her for what I want to be. That's the hierarchy.
Then he rounds out the thing with the completely bizarre "Her husband's a pretty tough guy, by the way, too."
Um...so? Yeah, I know that it's not unheard of to say something about a candidate's wife with regards to his presidency. But not when you've got 90 seconds to sum up why he'd be a good president. And usually only when the wife in question is understood to be a professional of equal standing who's going to do some specific thing for the job. Otherwise she's just a gracious first lady--which can be a fine thing, but it's not really considered part of the job of president. It's hard to not get the impression that he just didn't have enough of substance to say about the woman in the short time he was given so had to start talking about other members of her family in a way that went beyond just showing how they reflect the way she would govern.
Given the history of women's rights bringing up a woman's husband in her job qualifications has a totally different weight. Men haven't historically had to fight to be taken seriously on their own. To bring up Todd Palin (heh--I always want to call him Todd Packer) in a way that implies that he's part of the deal because Sarah Palin is a family unit...it's hard for me not to see Todd as the de facto head of the family as the "tough" husband. I don't think McCain was throwing him in as a winking implication that it's really Todd who's going to be v.p. or anything, but I was sure reminded of times when that would be a given listening to this answer.
I feel like I still haven't explained this well, but that there are probably people who could zero in on exactly what I'm describing and explain it better!
ETA: THANK YOU JON STEWART: "You're proud of her? What is she, your daughter?"
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
From:
no subject
I agree, McCain's tribute to Palin is bizarre and paternalistic. But the Palin phenomenon is bizarre anyway. Palin can make rousing speeches but there is no substance to her whatsoever.
She would be massacred by our media, I can tell you, not treated with kid gloves.
From:
no subject
(no subject)
From:From:
no subject
I am personally offended by the continued reference to her knowledge of autism. What? Is that a buzzword I've missed because things certainly started tearing off in that direction. Palin's baby has Down's syndrome. Did I miss some report somewhere about another of her kids being autistic. I'll give her "she understands what it's like to have a special needs child" but having a child with a problem does NOT make you an expert on the problems of OTHER PEOPLE'S children.
From:
no subject
Although I was even suspicious of this claim since I'm not sure how much her experience will totally be like other families of kids with Down's Syndrome. Not just because her son is so young so there's a lot of things she hasn't dealt with yet but just...since we're talking about stuff like health care I don't know if she'll be fighting the same battles as someone else.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:From:
no subject
"she took on a governor who was a member of her own party when she ran for governor."
And you took on a lot of Republicans when you ran for President. That's called an "election". Ever heard of it? We still need to have one before you become President... which isn't likely.
"She's cut the size of government."
Mainly by being so frustrated with TWO sets of laws, federal and state, that she's been trying to turn her state into a country so she can be the President of a country... because she's sure not going to be President of this one.
"And, by the way, she also understands special-needs families."
She asked her parents what it was like to raise her. (Low blow, but he makes it so easy!)
"And she has ignited our party and people all over America that have never been involved in the political process."
Yes... she's made many people even more determined to vote for Obama.
"Her husband's a pretty tough guy, by the way, too."
Why didn't I pick HIM for my running mate?
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
I'm surprised he didn't say, "She's got a lot of great experience...she was on the PTA....she's a mom...she's been a babysitter....she helped an old lady across the street once....she was on the PTA....did I mention she's a mom?"
The "her husband is pretty tough" struck me as kind of comical especially coming days after the Troopergate report in Alaska seems to indicate that Todd Palin apparently sticks his nose into places in state business where he shouldn't.
There were a lot of things that bothered me about what McCain said last night. The whole Joe the Plumber thing....the way he dismissed "women's health" as a reason for an abortion (I'm not an abortion rights person but just the way McCain dismissed "women's health" jolted me a bit)....and his weird creepy facial expressions throughout just made me very concerned for him.
I commented to a friend last night that every time Obama spoke, I felt like there should be some cool relaxing jazz music....and every time McCain spoke, I felt like there should be a frenzied violin playing faster and faster.
Overall, I felt like I was watching a debate between William Powell and Grandpa Simpson.
From:
no subject
Where as McCain's "health" statement would probably more appeal to people who assume that that's just a way the other side tries to trick people into giving everybody easy late-term abortions. As if nobody who's right-to-life could believe a woman's health is an important consideration.
LOL! William Powell and Grandpa Simpson--perfect! I think I've seen some references to Bugs Bunny and Elmer Fudd too.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
On the subject of spouses, do anyone else notice how he never refered to Michelle Obama by name?
From:
no subject
(no subject)
From:From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
It bothers me far more that, if the original questions was how she's fit to be president, he listed absolutely nothing that proves she is in fact ready to step into the Oval Office.
And Todd Palin .... I'm not clear how all those people who hated the idea of Hilary being involved in policy work for Pres. Clinton don't seem worried that Todd's hand is apparently in a whole lot of Gov. Palin's work.
From:
no subject
But yeah, the biggest thing about the answer is how much it had to dance around how little of substance there was without admitting the shortcoming and then just explaining how it really wasn't bad. You would never ever know from that answer that the question was how qualified she'd be in the very possible situation where she became president.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
Ooon the other hand, it's not like he was going to convince anyone either way at this point, so the only value was to gain insight into how he thinks of her. In many ways I still don't know, 'cause he just talks in such a buzz-word heavy way, it's not as if he's honest. Is he genuinely pleased with her 'performance' and potential, if in a paternalistic way, or is he totally stone-cold calculating? His character doesn't lend itself to that, y'know. Obama's more the 'stone-cold' one, according to people, at least, haha. I think he simultaneously treats her as his own 'breath of fresh air' (for his own campaign-- energizing it, bringing him relevancy, exposure, etc, a 'partner') and tries to back down on that and put her in her place in viewing her as a bit of a showhorse. It must sting that she's almost overtaken him in terms of public/media interest and response; he can't be entirely comfortable with that. I wonder if he really thinks she can overcome the 'old boys network' in any way, shape or form. Somehow I think he's in fact counting on her being inefficient at that, just likely to put on a good show, because the whole paternalistic approach implies he justifies it by thinking she'll be 'under control' and basically harmless. This is a guess though; I just don't think he'd willingly put a serious wild-card into play so close to his own home fire, so to speak. He's reckless but not that stupid, in the sense that he must have justifications or ideas about 'safeguards' in place.
I'm pretty sure Palin doesn't know about any of those, though. I read an article somewhere that compared him to the tragedy of McBeth, and Palin to Lady McBeth, and haha it really is a good comparison. He's huffing and puffing, but it wouldn't be difficult for her to run circles around him 'cause he doesn't take her seriously (I think) and would want to please her to keep his 'edge'.
Really, I didn't even take anything he said personally, though to be honest I didn't quite hear the bit about 'women's health' and/or it didn't fully register. He really just don't 'hear' anything outside his own index card one-dimensional understanding, as I noted in my post; it doesn't matter if it's women's health as a reason or any other contextual implication, 'cause he consistently dismissed all of them. It's really hard to believe this guy has a history of bipartisanship. For real. The only thing I can imagine is that he simply ignores aspects of people and in fact relies on the 'good old boy' vibe (ie, 'I know you, you're a fine fellow, let's shake hands and be honorable men', or whatever, unless he feels threatened or displaced).
Well, I'm sure he's a good guy. I mean, he likes literature, he does seem to have a sense of humor, and he's not dumb. Still, he doesn't listen and projects his own ideas onto people (like Palin or Obama) or complex situations (like abortion), and to me, that's clear with everything he said in the debate.
From:
no subject
Which also seems like how he sees her as v.p. She makes a lot of noise but she's supposed to be a cheerleader in the White House. For all the pitbull stuff this isn't Dick Cheney II. She's just there to be ornamentation. It's not that she isn't her own person, it's just that her own person is just about playing a character, being a mascot. Which is also why his answer about her has to be so empty. Like he's describing the character in a script he's writing about a feisty lady who becomes president rather than really talking about stuff that's going to come in handy. Just as Matt Damon first described her.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:From:
no subject
One of McCain's problems here is obvious. Palin has done absolutely nothing of substance that qualify her to become Vice President (or god forbid, President). She's barely qualified to be a governor. McCain can't talk about her record, because there is nothing there aside from a couple of glaringly bad judgment calls. Still, setting aside her lack of qualifications, there was still no justification for him to talk about her as if she were a child who'd just done something cute. "Aw, look at little Sarah. Isn't she just the cutest little maverick girl? She's married to a tough man!"
I think that when McCain wrapped up his descriptoin of her qualfications by stating that she is married to a 'tough guy,' he was revealing what he really thinks about women. Sure, they may be cute little mavericks, but what really matters is that they have a tough man around. That was bizarre and insulting.
I'll tell you what bothered me even more than this though. It was when McCain stated that he was categorically "proud of the people who come to my rallies. I am not going to stand for anybody saying that the people who come to our rallies are anything other than patriotic citizens" Yeah, he's categorically proud of the people who show up and yell "kill him" or "terrorist" about Obama. How horrifying and sad to see McCain sacrifice all of his principles --not to mention common sense and dignity -- in order to serve his ambition. If one of those lunatic fringe kooks ever actively attacks Obama, I will put the responsibility squared on McCain. He embraced the lunatic fringe and called them patriots. He should be profoundly ashamed of himself,and moderate Republicans everywhere should stop and reflect on the fact that McCain equates them with the crazy fringe.
From:
no subject
I definitely thought the same thing about his defense of the crowd. Because he didn't even acknowledge that there were things said that were unacceptable--this while demanding that Obama repudiate what Lewis said. He must know that there is a real voice in his supporters that is blatantly racist and speaks of Obama as a terrorist. It would be one thing if he said that anybody who said those things was wrong but that they didn't make up the crowd. But going out of his way to basically turn those very supporters into victims, as if it wasn't fair to say what they said was bad? That's totally condoning it.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:From:
no subject
"The dials on CNN HD were shocking and depressing. The more McCain slathered on the contempt for women’s health and rights, the more undecided women tanked for him---it might have been his lowest negatives of the night. But men were actually liking it. We were all in shock at my place to see that gender gap. Like holy shit a lot more men are still that sexist that they begrudge abortion rights kind of shock. I would have never guessed."
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
Also I predict Joe the Plumber / Sarah Palin porn. It's inevitable.
From:
no subject
(no subject)
From:From:
no subject
As someone we know once observed: I can see the wrong sort for myself, thank you very much.
From:
no subject
But yeah, it's like one of the posts on the link posted above--she's a woman. Of course she's unqualified. Why would we even discuss it?
(no subject)
From:From:
no subject
Also, I was too busy googling to see if Palin has a secret autistic child stashed away somewhere. McCain sure seems to think she does!
From:
no subject
It really was hilarious the way Obama just stuck to praising Biden and didn't touch jumping on Palin. Meanwhile McCain's blithely attacking Biden as if he's not vulnerable in that area at all. But then, that's because Obama had positive things to say about Biden. McCain was pretty much empty on Palin praise after the Todd line.
From:
no subject
Well, Americans have gotten to know Sarah Palin. They know that she's a role model to women and other -- and reformers all over America. She's a reformer. She is -- she took on a governor who was a member of her own party when she ran for governor. When she was the head of their energy and natural resources board, she saw corruption, she resigned and said, "This can't go on."
1) Since when do women need a role model? Do men need a role model? Is McCain suggesting that he is a role model for men? For that matter, can women only have female role models?
Yes, I know that he meant to say "She's a a governor *and* a parent of a child with medical issues"; but what he did say was "This is a person women in general should pattern themselves on." It's a small insight into what I think is a generational problem: McCain can't speak to women as equals, because he doesn't understand them. Hence his hardline position on abortion despite being personally moderate on so many other hot-button social issues.
2) In a week in which her home state issued a scathing report accusing its own very popular governor of ethics violations, it is foolish to call her a reformer. Here again, the insult to our intelligence seems somehow directed to women, who are lumped into the category of People Who Will Swallow This Tripe Because We Vote for Personalities, Not Policies.
She's given money back to the taxpayers. She's cut the size of government. She negotiated with the oil companies and faced them down, a $40 billion pipeline of natural gas that's going to relieve the energy needs of the United -- of what they call the lower 48.
Actually, the high price of oil gave money back to the taxpayers of Alaska, who in fact do not pay sales tax or a heap of other taxes. Alaskans all get a dividend check each year from the state's windfall profits in oil production through the Alaska Permanent Fund (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_Fund_Dividend). Since oil spiked to $100/barrel, Palin was able to increase the dividend. As for taxpayers in "what they call the lower 48"? Alaska received more taxpayer pork per capita than any other state (http://services.alphaworks.ibm.com/manyeyes/view/SLinXQsOtha6WQKfxjkvQ2~). Why does Alaska get any money at all from us'ns in the lower 48, given that we are already paying for their windfall oil profits? (The answer is Sen. Ted Stevens (R), currently on trial for corruption.)
She's a reformer through and through. And it's time we had that breath of fresh air coming into our nation's capital and sweep out the old-boy network and the cronyism that's been so much a part of it that I've fought against for all these years. She'll be my partner. She understands reform.
A lot has been said about voters who vote on personality, which conveys perceived values, not policies and record, which convey actual values.
And she has ignited our party and people all over America that have never been involved in the political process. And I can't tell you how proud I am of her and her family.
Yep, the teenage daughter who carelessly got pregnant so her boyfriend is dropping out of high school and getting an apprentice job in the oilfields to support her. Good thing Alaska still has high-paying blue-collar jobs for an uneducated workforce (unlike the rest of the US). If this were a black family in Philadelphia, I wonder if McCain would see them as a proud role model.
Her husband's a pretty tough guy, by the way, too.
...And I'll be setting up his desk in the Oval Office as soon as they put in another phone line.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
Aw, that's reassuring to men! Even though his wife's trying for a more important job than him, he's still not a pussy.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
Which is just plain patronising. And, in any case, what does it matter if he's tough or as soft as a marshmallow? She's tough, he's tough - what a great pair.
I read an article about her husband, and the way he apparently behaved in relation to the brother-in-law incident. So he's not only tough, he involves himself in the day-to-day running of the office she holds as well.
I find the whole Palin package pretty scary.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
This whole thing has been bothering me since I inadvertently became a victim of this sort of thinking. I was recently told, in an extra-curricular academic setting, along with three other students, all female, that it seems as though women should support other women politically because "her issues will be more in line with ours" (though I might have the wording just a bit off - isn't it the sentiment that counts?) The speaker was referring to Hillary Clinton, juxtaposing modern politics with medieval thought where women just seemed to go along with the program even when it harmed other women.
In a minute, no more, one of the female students began to rag on Sarah Palin, talking about her clothes at some appearance, saying how she expected to see a plate of cookies, and the others laughed - without the same caveat about women shooting themselves in the foot by not taking other women seriously brought up just seconds before about Hillary. Excuse me but isn't ragging on a woman the same thing as ragging on a woman no matter what the politics?
It isn't a vague notion that women should like Hillary because she's another woman. It's being preached on university campuses. Blacks should band together and vote for a black candidate because he or she is black and for no other reason, too. Apparently, if one is not a member of the dominant dominant culture (both white and male), one automatically will have the same issues as another minority of one's own stripe just because. To me, this is demeaning anyone not a white male, removing individuality, identity, past and beliefs, in exactly the same way that people group into a single blob the people they are prejudiced against.
From:
no subject
Of course with millions of voters there are going to be people who do react to certain things about a candidate. I've seen individuals say to reporters they wouldn't vote for a black man. But with any individual person they're going to have a lot of preferences and you don't know what's going to take a priority. I love the idea of having a woman president. If that was the only difference between candidates I probably would vote woman. But there are other things that were more important to me.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:From:
no subject
Of course, Obama didn't react to the comment, except to dismiss the idea that it was offensive. I found it interesting that Obama chose Biden, and that no one thought to mention it--not because it says anything much about either man, but because those things tend to get brought up, if only to fill out a news item.
It's quite of nice how much of a non-issue that remark turned out to be.
Yes, McCain sounded patronizing when he talked about Sarah Palin. But this is the first time the Republicans are running a woman for the White House. It may take them another try to get the tone right.
It will help when they start running candidates who came of age after the sexual revolution.
From:
no subject
I totally missed Biden's comment about Obama. I'm glad it slipped under the radar the way it did. I wish this comment would too, because I think you've hit it for both men: they came of age before both the civil rights movement and the sexual revolution.
(no subject)
From:From:
no subject
Consider yourself friended. :>
From:
no subject