I am not a feminist. I'm not all screedy and anti-male. I don't think women owe it to other women to work in their chosen profession if what they really want to do is stay at home and raise their children. Or even if that's not what they want to do, but it's what they've chosen to do because it feels right to them or best or easiest or whatever. Your choice, your thing. Oh, hey I guess I am Pro-Choice! Woo woo. I trust women to make their own choices! Yay women!
So, I'm not one of those Establishment Feminists. I believe men and women should be treated fairly and more-or-less equally, although I think it is impossible to treat two separate people equally because everyone is different. So, let's stick with fairly. People should be treated fairly.
Do you know what is not fair? It is not fair to ask Sarah Palin how she will have enough time to devote to her family and children and not ask the same of Barack Obama nor John McCain, who also have minor children. She's not even running for President. The job of Vice-President is far less-taxing than that of President. She'll have gobs of time. And her husband will probably quit his job to stay home and raise their children (two of whom I assume will be out of the house in the next year...the son, Track who is leaving next week to serve in Iraq and the daughter, Bristol, who will be busy getting married and raising her own family).
I actually watched her speech last night at the RNC. I have no idea why. I am a huge politcal junkie, but I normally do not have the patience to sit through an entire speech. I got out of the shower shortly before she went on and I went to bed promptly at 10 pm, even though she wasn't done. I thought the part of her speech that I saw was great. Really great. This morning people of the chattering classes were saying that it was too negative and too sarcastic.
Huh? I didn't even notice. I didn't see any sarcasm, although I guess it was there. Perhaps I just don't see sarcasm any longer since it oozes from the tips of my fingers. And too negative? No. It was not negative. She said she loved the US of A, apple pie, children, old people, the military (and she wants us to WIN), Alaska, small towns, people who work for a living, and low taxes. She likes cutting waste (I loved the part where she said she put Alaska's executive jet on e*bay).
She also took some shots at the opposing party. I didn't find it negative. She made some substantive arguments (although, perhaps her line about the Greek columns was a little biting...but it was funny). In fact, her funniest line of the night...which all the news organizations are picking up this morning...was unscripted and improvised. The line about the Hockey Mom, The Pitbull, and Lipstick. She improvised a joke. And got a big laugh.
At one point during the introduce-your-family part of the speech, baby Trig went from Daddy's arms to the 5 or 6 year old, Piper's arms. Daddy was going to be introduced and need to stand, smile, and wave, so he needed his arms free. So the kid has the baby and she is looking at him and smoothing his hair and fawning on him. They cut back to the speech then back to the kid and back to the speech and at one point, the kid licks her hand to smooth down her (sleeping) baby brother’s hair. It was the cutest thing I have seen on TV in a month. And some people think that was gross, but seriously, moms and sisters do this to babies all-the-time. And a 5-year old doing it is just precious.
It was a good speech. She appears capable. She has at least as much, if not more, executive-level experience than Barack. And she's a woman. Which apparently, makes this a "game-changer". I'm excited to see it all play out. I don't like some of the criticism I am hearing because it makes me realize that there really is a double-standard for men and women in power. In fact, some people even criticized the earrings she wore to visit the Gulf Coast in the run-up to Gustav. She needed more-serious earrings? You have to be kidding me. Just kill me now. Certainly, she's no Suze Orman (did you know Suze only owns one pair of earrings?). But really, her earrings. Let's bash her for turning a national disaster-in-the-making into a photo-op and leave her earrings out of it, OK? And her red shoes, for that matter.
Oh hey, there are policy issues and stuff about which I disagree with Sarah Palin. For starters, abortion. She is only OK with it in the case of risk to a mother's life. A fine position to have, but one which I do not share. Rape, no? Incest, no? Health of the mother (wherein her life is not actually endangered but her health is...like oh, I don't know, need to terminate a pregnancy because you just discovered you have cancer and need chemo now and you already have 2 kids whom you do not want to orphan...talk about your heartbreaking choice!)?
I'm not really worried about the abortion thing though because with a Democratically-controlled Congress, which I do not see changing in the next 4-8 years, no legislative Roe rollback is going to happen any time soon. Sure, McCain could appoint enough justices to the court, but it would then go to the legislature or to the states, neither of which disturbs me at this point.
Palin is lukewarm on the War on Drugs. It's one war I don't think we should be fighting, so I'm OK with her position here.
She supports school-choice programs. Yay!!!
She is supposedly socially and religiously conservative, but she vetoed a bill in Alaska that would have denied health insurance to same-sex couples because it was in violation of the state constituion. You have to love someone whose personal beliefs may contradict directly with their actions because they are bound by the constitution. Unlike some people for whom the 2nd Amendment is merely window-dressing, I guess.