Sunday, September 7, 2008

A brief word about the conventions

My favorite speech during the Democratic National Convention in Denver was Bill Clinton's speech. It did what it was supposed to do: endorse Barack Obama. It also reminded me, after 7 1/2 long years, of what it's like not to have to cringe and change the channel when a president comes on. Hillary Clinton's speech the night before was not so much about Obama. She seemed to still be campaigning for herself. And Obama's speech was powerful (although as someone who has been following his career for the last 4 years, it was hard for me to tell whether it introduced him properly to the country. It probably did -- look at the numbers) . I noticed immediately though that he did not mention Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. by name but only made a reference to "a preacher" who had delivered a speech 45 years ago to the day. It's harder to be the 'black' candidate than it is to be the 'woman' candidate here.

The moment John McCain announced that Sarah Palin was to be his running mate, I turned to my husband and said, "Oh shit. We're screwed." A moment later, I shrugged and thought, "Well, you've got to hand it to him for his stategery" (as his friend Bush might call it). Well, my thoughts about it changed over the course of the next few days as it became clear who Palin was. I was, of course, outraged that he would bring in this extreme right-wing woman and think that this was going to fulfill anyone's need to have a woman in the top ranks. As I heard someone say, "Hillary did not create 18 million cracks in the glass ceiling to have someone unqualified like this go through it." I'm more confident now than I was before that the women who supported Hillary but weren't sure about supporting Obama would not, in their right minds, think that Sarah Palin was a worthwhile replacement for Hillary. She's anti-reproductive choice, a creationist, anti-gun control, confesses that she hadn't really thought much about the Iraq issue... need I go on? No surprise that the Republicans in hoisting up a woman in the wake of Hillary's departure have failed to understand even the first criterion of affirmative action: equal merit. Only in America would Caribou Barbie, as my friend Michel calls her, be nominated as as a serious vice-presidential candidate. The fact that McCain is our oldest-ever presidential candidate and would therefore need a VP who could step in for him, makes Palin all the more an irresponsible choice on his part. But you know what? It works for them. Palin is the extremist that makes the Republican support base more accepting of McCain. She's the female version of Bush: an inexperienced, and therefore ideal, puppet-in-the-making of the Republican machine. She can deliver a good speech, as proven this past week and play the attack dog (which is, as the strategists themselves admit, the Republicans' only recourse this year). But if anyone believes that Sarah Palin wrote that speech, then they deserve her as their Vice-President.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Nicely written Mona. I don't know if you've seen this bit of news, but the Florida Republican Federation of Women is asking its members to boycott Oprah because, in their words, she is "choosing to sit out the greatest political moment in the history of women since suffrage." I realize that as a man I have no place to decide what may or may not be women's great moment since suffrage, but I'm taking a wild guess that Geraldine Ferraro, Carol Moseley Braun and Shirley Chisholm may have something to say about this "claim". Un-f'in believable.

Mona said...

I had heard that Oprah had said no to Sarah Palin's request to be on the Oprah show (was she nuts even asking?!) but I hadn't heard about the boycott. So... let me get this straight: Republican women hate feminists and they deny everything feminists have done for women, but now that their strategy dictates having a woman run for VP, they not only want to spin this as a feminist event but they want OPRAH to celebrate it?!

Anonymous said...

Ironic, isn't it? What amazes me is that they actually have the audacity to claim that her nomination is the most important political moment since suffrage. Who thinks of this stuff, and better yet, who is stupid enough to actually speak these words?

Mona said...

Let's hope no one is uninformed enough to believe these words.