Mccain and Palin: A Love Story

Mccain nominated Palin. Forgive me for not dancing and beating happy percussion rythyms onto the covers of my Judith Butler and Betty Friedan books. The appointing of a woman as VP candidate might be...wait for it...anti-Feminist.

Mccain appointed Palin to pander to Clintonians. This means he thinks the women who supported Hillary would vote for a candidate whose views are the polar opposite of her own, merely because it would put a woman in the white house, albeit as VP - in other words, in the administrative assistant position, as a glorified secretary who looks pretty in front of the cameras. For Mccain's assumption to be true, either: 1. Hillary supporters only supported Hillary because she's a woman, not because of her policies or 2. Women who supported Obama will vote for Mccain because they'd rather see a woman as VP than see a man whose policies they support as president. Neither of those options implies a high opinion of women.

Furthermore, Palin has no international affairs experience and is mired in scandal. If he wanted to appoint a woman, couldn't he find a qualified woman? Did he even bother looking, or did her consider the mere fact that she had a vagina to be enough? Perhaps a vagina and a working brain are too much to ask for in one human body?

Speaking of vaginas...Palin has five kids, and Palin's 17 year old daughter is pregnant. Her daughter will not get an abortion and mill marry the father. How sweet and Juno-esque. How pro-choice. The daughter sinned, but will bear the consequences of her actions. She will be united with the father in holy Christian matrimony. So Mccain is using Palin, a woman, to attack women's rights: The right to abortion, and the right to have a baby with, and love, a man, without marrying him. The Nazis used Jewish stars to identify Jews so that they could abuse and eventually kill them. I am not comparing the Republicans to Nazis in their aims, but in their methods: the use of a symbol of a certain group to persecute that group.

As a woman, I do not want Palin to be my symbol. She stands up and talks about breaking glass ceilings. She has become a symbol of women's liberation. But she is not a symbol of my liberation: she is a symbol of a party and a platform that seeks to take away my basic liberties.

Of course, the danger of Palin's daughter being an example of pro-choice in action, is that in the eyes of many social conservatives, her daughter's pregnancy might be evidence of Palin's failure as a mother. Even Obama, the pro-choice candidate, agrees on the need to cut the number of undesired pregnancies. Of course, there are stories of mothers of accidental children who will say how much they love their babies, and how they are happy after the fact. But after the fact, the choice becomes: You have a reality. Be happy with it or be sad - and, for survival and emotional well-being's sakes, how many people choose to be sad? In other words, after the fact, your choice is limited to how you feel about the fact. But I want women to have the choice of what they want the fact to be.

I want to see a woman in the white house, but a woman who gets there through intelligence and talent, not through anatomy. I want a woman whose policies dictate that I vote for her regardless of gender. In other words, I want a woman who gets there by her brain, and not by her vagina.

Election Thoughts

It's been a while. I had to remind myself that blogging, despite its informal veneer, is a form of commitment. The C word has been a lot on my mind lately...and not just because many of my friends have been tying the knot.

America is about to commit to a new president for the next four years. Will he be Obama or Mccain? Both candidates seem to get about half the votes in polls, with them alternating between who has more and who less on a weekly basis. How kind of them to take turns.

But while I can not predict the future, I would like to share a few thoughts - or rather, counter-points to the arguments people often give me when they find out I support Obama.

1. "Don't you mean Osama?" I don't know where to start - by correcting the misconception that Obama is a Muslim (He is in fact, a Christian - hence the reverend Wright scandal, hello!) or by pointing out that, since America has separation of Church and State, a candidate's religion should not matter. What matters is whether or not a candidate's religion will influence his presidential decisions - something that seems more likely in Mccain's case. The ultimate candidate should not allow their faith to dictate their politics, thus, their faith should be irrelevant.

2. His plans are fiscally unstable....Mccain wants to continue the Bush tax cuts and low corporate tax rates that contributed to (but are by no means the sole cause of) the current recession. Neither Obama's nor Mccain's plans are perfect, but: Obama's plans actually help the middle class, while Mccain's do not. Also, a bigger deficit - ie, keeping the Bush tax cuts, means the US is borrowing money from other countries. Right now, our dollar is worth what it is because China invests in it. Should China sell its shares in the dollar tomorrow, our green bills would become toilet paper. Will China sell its shares? No. Should the world's fastest-growing economic superpower as well as supporter of regimes that violate human rights, have the type of power where it can blackmail America? No. How can the US expect any country to take it seriously when it is in so much debt? Imagine you lent me a million dollars, and then I told you to stop cursing your wife or ELSE. You would laugh at me. Obama's plans won't solve all the problems, but neither will Mccain's. The difference between the two is that Obama's helps people who desperately need help, while Mccain's doesn't.

3. Obama's aiming too high....true. No politician accomplishes all of their goals. You aim for 100 bills, and between fillibusters and political pandering, 50 are passed. Mccain is aiming for less, so he will achieve less.

4. Obama is running on his personality...Given the reality of media coverage today, personality has come to play an important role in politics. Obama and Mccain are each doing what they think they have to do to get elected - but throughout the campaign, including at the DNC, Obama stressed respect for Mccain as a person, while Mccain has issued ads, such as the infamous celebrity ad, specifically aimed at attacking Obama as a person. So which candidate is trying to use personality as political weapon?

5. He's inexperienced...First of all, Obama has shown himself willing to listen to educated advisors of different opinions. This will give him an educated and multi-faceted view of the issues facing our country. Abraham Lincoln was inexperienced, but he was one of the greatest presidents. Second of all, Joe Biden.

6. Obama is anti-Israel. His voting record, his words, and his VP choice all disprove that.

7. But I supported Hillary...Supporting Hillary means doing what she said in her speech: Voting for Obama. Also, if you believe in Hillary's policies, Obama's resemble those much more than Mccain's.

8. What do you really know about him? 1. His voting record for the past 4 years 2. His biography, his political philosophy, and the policies he advocates  - which is pretty much all I need to know 3. Between the unknown candidate and the candidate I know I disagree with, I'll take the unknown. The concept of a "dark-horse candidate" exists for a reason.

9. I'm usually a Democrat, but don't like Obama. If you're usually a Democrat, can you honestly tell me Obama's worse than Mccain? Policy-wise, no. So that leaves personality...but I thought what you hated about Obama was he buys in to the cult of personality that surrounds him...also, if you're white, are you sure this is not sub-conscious racism that's been socialized into you by society?