The Daily Beast: Should Women Back Palin in 2012?
October 5, 2009
by The New Agenda
|Read Amy Siskind’s op-ed Should Women Back Palin in 2012? at The Daily Beast.
As the Senate Finance Committee moves to pass health-care legislation this week, reproductive rights has been all but sidelined as an issue by the Obama administration. Should we therefore be surprised by a stunning Pew Research Center poll last week which revealed that 42 percent of Americans don’t know that Obama is pro-choice. Maybe it’s time that women gave Sarah Palin another look. Palin, back in the headlines for rushing out a new book ahead of schedule this fall, is fresh, open-minded, a centrist and a party noncomformist. Hey, sisters in women’s advocacy: Let’s end the decades-long cold war with Republican women candidates. If we want progress to be made on issues of importance to women, our organizations need to master a skill at which men have always been adept: negotiation.
I am a lifelong Democrat who for the first time in my life voted Republican in the 2008 elections. I did this for one reason: McCain selected a woman as his running mate. For this act, I was accused of having lost part of my mental faculty: Some circa Victorian act of “voting with my uterus.” Strange, that. The Democratic women were corralled to vote for Obama in 2008 because of one issue: reproductive rights. In other words, as my friend Cynthia Ruccia observed, ”voting with their uterus.”
Sadly, for women, things haven’t panned out all that well with this administration. Despite receiving 56 percent of women’s votes, President Obama’s record on women’s issues thus far is sparse, and suggests something that he either has a tone-deaf nature—or, if you’re inclined to a more sinister view, that he may be uncomfortable with women.
He surely hasn’t surrounded himself with many. Of his 24 Cabinet picks, only six were women. Perhaps even more telling are President Obama’s czar picks, which do not require Senate confirmation. Of the 35-40 picks he’s made to date, only three have been women. That’s less than 10 percent.
There were harbingers of the Pew poll results—starting on Day One with Rick Warren, Obama’s choice to deliver his inaugural invocation. There was also the selection of Alexia Kelley, founder of Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good to a major Department of Health and Human Services post. And there’s what Obama didn’t say in his health-care speech.
Also ignored in the health-care bills circulating are important women’s issues such as gender-based pricing and domestic violence as a pre-existing condition. The advocate for these issues could have been Valerie Jarrett, who chairs the White House Council on Women and Girls. When President Obama selected Jarrett in March, I wrote an op-ed for The Daily Beast in which I argued that we should give Jarrett a chance, even though she has a scant record on women’s issues. I received a lot of critical emails and blog traffic; mea culpa, my critics were right and I was wrong. Shortly after her selection, Jarrett took leave to focus on Chicago hosting the 2016 Olympics.
Indeed, since the glorious day on which President Obama signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act back in January (which was ushered through the Senate and House by women before it reached his desk), I’m hard-pressed to come up with much other action he’s undertaken to benefit women. Other than hosting the NCAA Champion U-Conn. women’s basketball team at the White House.
Here’s the difference: Sarah Palin played women’s basketball. That’s how she got the nickname “Sarah Barracuda.” And she’s had to maintain that same toughness and sensibility as she entered the world of politics—which is, after all, no less a contact sport.
For as we see time and time again, there is a double standard. A 2008 Brown University details the role that gender bias and sexism play for women in politics. Recall the initial objections to Sonia Sotomayor—that she was not bright enough to serve on the Supreme Court, where she begins service as an associate justice Monday. Recall that Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley, the leading contender in the race to replace the late Edward M. Kennedy in the Senate, has had to endure questioning about her merit. And remember that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was accused of becoming a presidential candidate only because of her husband’s affair.
Here’s what we know: Sarah Palin did not have a governor’s seat handed down to her, she earned it. She understands what it is to be a woman having to fight obstacles—some overt and others subtle—that only a woman can understand.
I know I’ll hear from critics who claim that Palin would not share my policy views. But what makes them so sure? As governor of Alaska, didn’t Sarah Palin appoint Justice Morgan Christen, who is pro-choice and a former board member of Planned Parenthood, to become Alaska’s second female Supreme Court justice? Granted, it’s only 2009, and we are three years away from the next presidential election. But doesn’t that give us ample time to open a dialogue and explain why women’s issues are so important to our country’s future?
Secretary of State Clinton has become a beacon of hope for women around the world in reducing violence against women and girls. Why couldn’t Palin do the same for women in the U.S.? After all, don’t the vast majority of women’s issues impact all women, regardless of political party?
As president of The New Agenda, I’ll be the first to raise my hand, and ask Palin to address two important issues: First, what will you do to increase representation of women in government: starting with your own administration if elected? And second, what concrete steps would you take to reduce violence against women and escalating teen dating violence?
Let the negotiations over the 2012 campaign—and the battle for women’s loyalties—begin!
Here here!
Let’s give Sarah Palin a chance.
I doubt she’ll have any gropers writing her speeches. And, right there we’ll have an improvement.
SYD
I don’t know. Any optimism I had over Palin has since evaporated since she stepped down as Governor. As much as I would like to see a strong woman candidate for president, I don’t think it’s Palin. I think HRC is the only woman I’ve seen so far who has the chops for it, intellectually, emotionally and politically. I’ve watched her stay the course. Palin?
Prove me wrong.
Women have been trying to gain political power by following the men’s rules, and look where it hasn’t gotten us. Rather than label Palin a “quitter”, why don’t we step back and see if she’s just decided to change the rules? The next presidential race is not next week. We have time to watch and wait. As much as I admire Hillary Clinton, what does it say about women if we believe she’s the only woman in the country qualified to be the president?
dianet,
I have my questions in regard to Sarah Palin but I admire her for stepping down – I thought, here is someone who won’t play by the boy’s books. It was a risk but she has substantially more power now that she is not bogged down by all the bogus lawsuits.
I think Sarah Palin has been grossly “underestimated” by the media, pundits and the American people simply because she comes across as “one of us” and speaks in a direct, uncomplicated manner. Everyone understand what she is saying and no one feels intimidated and more importantly, stupid, when she speaks about the issues or what she believes in. I think she is a new kind of politician that has been missing from the political scene, since Harry Truman and would be the kind of change I could believe in.
While I agree HRC is the better experienced and qualified woman to be president at this time and is my first choice, I also believe Palin is fully capable of evolving into a politician that will have a real grasp on the issues and understand what needs to be done in the best interests of the American people, instead of “special interests”. More importantly, she would never agree to be “marketed” as obama was as a “brand” that looks good on the outside, but is empty on the inside. As a result, she would be free to exhibit the best and most rare feature one can find in a politician these days – she is GENUINE. Our country is screaming for this genuine quality.
I wouldn’t write Palin off just yet. I think she knows exactly what she’s doing and I have high hopes for her to “rise”, as Hillary has done and continues to do.
Amy, thank you for writing this. It took courage—just look at all the negative comments on that site!
Amy Siskand is very brave writing that article. Mentioning that Sarah Palin might possibly be a human being is like bait to a bunch of misogynistic flies. The sheer hatred you will get in comments will be absolutely astounding. I once posted two sentences about her and watched the commentators regress back 3 centuries to the days of witch burning and dunking stools. Seriously, by the time they were finished I thought I might be living in the middle ages instead of 2009.
I am a Palin supporter. I am also a woman. However, I never pick a candidate for their gender.
Although, if you want to see what Palin will do for woman representation in government. Check out the people she surrounds herself now…Mostly women
I too am a little concerned since she resigned as Governor. However, I have noticed how powerful she has become since she stepped down. One Facebook entry sparks a very heated debate on the heatlh care bill, and a subsequent rewrite. Her book is going to fly off the shelves (and make her a great deal of money – good for her!). The 2012 election is very far away – and the 2010 mid cycle elections will set the tone for 2012. Although I think a 2012 campaign is premature, I for one am looking at what she says and does. I think Amy’s call for her to step up to the plate regarding women’s issues is a very good idea. Even if she never runs for office again, her power and ability to make change right now could do more than the Obama administration may do for the next 4 years!
Yttik,
Yes, the only time my Facebook friends ever went ballistic at this site and on me was when I linked to a “sexism against Sarah Palin” article written by Violet and wrote a few words in defense of her myself. A witch hunt it was!
Well, Palin had the choice to file for bankruptcy because of frivolous ethics complaints, all of which have been dismissed…..OR….resign in order to write a book and pay legal bills.
Bankruptcy vs Paying Legal Bills?
Political Career vs Family?
I don’t know about you, but my family comes first. Apparently, family comes first to her too. Palin made the right choice.
I don’t think I could vote for her. If the choices would be her or “brush your shoulders” Obama – I’d probably stay home this time.
But I’ll definitely continue to protest the sexism of most of the attacks of her. And all in all, welcome her presence in national politics. But that’s the limit (and the extent) of my support.
I would like to see Palin run for President. They didn’t let the media interview Palin because it was all a bunch of sexist bullshit, thinking that might help, but it didn’t. Either way it would have been pretty bad, so it wasn’t a bad decision to keep the media from interviewing her. I’d like to see Palin run for president because she can handle it, and all the sexist bullshit surrounding Palin will have to change to other sexist bullshit, because calling her stupid won’t work when she is free to give many interviews, though they will probably still be incredibly gender- biased and sexist interviews, unlike the white glove treatment given to a blabbering Obama run.
I could vote for Palin as an independant. I will never vote for Obama. I can’t imagine who the Republicans will put up but I doubt he will be in agreement with me about much.
Thanks for writing this article Amy; you are brave. I support Sarah Palin and hope she runs in 2012. She is the most honest politician I have ever known and she has exceptional political instincts. I will vote for her over Hillary because I feel Hillary put her party before her country. I could not support Hilllry again unless she is the Dem’s candidate and my other choice is anyone but Sarah Palin. Then, I would vote Hillary but I will not work for her campaign ever again. She dissed her supporters.
PUMA for Life, I thin I understand your feelings, but Hillary has done more than enough for us women to absolve anything I would dislike.
A run between the Secretary Clinton and the Ex governor Sarah Palin would be a difficult decision. They are different and pro- women in their own ways.
back to Amy, thank you so much for the article. I have only one critique. we do not want to reduce sexual violence. we want to stop sexual violence. if we don’t believe we can do it, who will? every single act of sexual violence is one too much. it is one too much, if it is a stranger on the street, a solider in a war, a college student get you intoxicated, a movie director or boss abusing his power, a husband who thinks he has got permanent access to you.
the anti lynching movement did not fight for lesser numbers, they fought for the abolishment of lynching. so we need to do.
RAPE can be stopped altogether. women and decent men can work together, this is a disgrace to humankind. thanks Hillary. there won’t be peace anywhere with men going around raping.
Marille,
I agree, rape can be stopped. If woman cared to, we could stop rape tomorrow. We are 52 percent of the population! But we must work together.
Great article- it took a great deal of courage. As a Palin supporter and gender parity advocate in public office I think your two questions are valid- however I hope that discussions of agenda type discussions do not put blinders on people. The key is parity…the resolution of other issues will flow from that. The greatest choice we in Calif are that there is a woman running on the GOP for a senate seat and of course Sen Boxer is running for re election. It is possible that we may have a run off with two women. There is also a woman running for governor, Meg Whitman, here in California.
Back in the early 70′s as the 2nd wave was getting up to speed, we were told that there should” be no difference between male and female…that we should ignore the biology and treat everyone the same”. When I started Chippendales, it was because” women should be given the same opportunity…as men”. HOWEVER, as I matured into this 50 something, grey haired, conservative, male feminist, I ad an epiphaney of sorts.
We were wrong….There are big time differences between me and women…aside for biology, there are all sorts of environmental, societal, cultural, etc differences. I will never be a girl….I am not a girl.I am not a mother..there are differences in the way we act, think, work etc.We must celebrate these. For those who say they would never vote for a woman just because she is a woman, I respectfully disagree. The attributes of female, of woman is missing in politics. Parity is absent. Irrespective of agendas, and issues, every woman brings this differential into play. We need this prospective in our society and thus parity in politics. So yes you should vote for women because they are women( not ” simply because”…just “because”)for we need that perspective NOW( no pun intended).
Bruce, I just want to say that if you really started Chippendales, you are one of the most feminist people I’ve ever encountered and I salute you for it.
A naked man says more about female sexuality than a naked woman EVER WILL. I’m sorry, but there is nothing revolutionary about women taking their clothes off. The revolution is when men take theirs off.
I’m serious. You are most definitely a feminist in my book, much more so than a lot of female I thought were feminist for years who turned into ass-kissing idiots in 2008. I’ll be blunt, I dislike and distrust men, but I salute you.
“I’m sorry, but there is nothing revolutionary about women taking their clothes off. The revolution is when men take theirs off.”
Janis, that is the best quote from you ever! ^_^
Janis, I dont really wear that as a badge of courage…just a fact that Steve Nico and I did something new, we were young,it was West LA, it was fun. I remember that fundraiser for NOW LA( which is when my involvement with the movt stepped up several fold).And yes I suppose in retrospect with our Calendars, Shows and the like we did aid and abet the revolution.
But-Today we are in another phase of the revolution. Does it adopt a liberal agenda, or a gender agenda…they are exclusive for the latter is inclusive of all women and the former very limiting of women. Ladies such as Bachman, Whitman, Fiona,Palin,Hutchinson have as much to add as Boxer,Finestein,HRC and others who are called liberal.As I noted above, you guys have so much to add that I( and my gender) can not possibly put in the mix. Parity trumps all other issues.
Palin was a woman’s basketball player, a small business owner,a mother,a governor- clearly she as a lot to offer that a man does not and can not offer.Same too for the other conservative women I mentioned above And until she and women in general are given equal seats at the table , our society can not succeed at its fullest. So yes I support Palin,HRC, Finestein,and will continue to argue the parity platform.
I can easily back Palin over Obama because I absolutely cannot stand that man.
I can easily back Palin over most of the likely Republican contenders because I absolutely cannot stand most of those men and the rest of them are so blah they won’t make it past the first rounds in the primaries anyhow.
But if it comes down to Palin vs. Hillary, then Hillary wins hands down. Hillary’s beliefs on the key issues are more in line with my own. But the main reason I’d pick Hillary is because she has so much more experience than Sarah. Hillary is ready to lead this country while I’m just not sure about Sarah, especially since she has resigned as Governor of Alaska. I mean, look at what those two women are both doing right now. Hillary is traveling the globe, meeting with world leaders, tackling major issues, and taking time to meet with women’s groups and discuss women’s issues in each country she visits. Meanwhile, Sarah is posting on Facebook. There’s just no comparison.
Leave your Response Want an avatar? Get a gravatar!
Community Room
February 22, 2012 at 11:22 am
February 17, 2012 at 2:39 pm
February 6, 2012 at 4:25 pm
January 30, 2012 at 2:36 pm
January 26, 2012 at 4:38 pm
January 23, 2012 at 1:04 pm
January 15, 2012 at 11:37 am
January 9, 2012 at 6:36 pm
BUILD your NETWORK
Our Network of College Women
Protecting our Teenage Girls
We’re in the Media »
Click to see our latest stories in the media
More Stories »Recent Comments
The Latest from our Blog
Archives
Pioneer Mentors
Blogroll
Find us Online
Subscribe Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS)
The New Agenda is a 501(c)(4) organization dedicated to improving the lives of women and girls by bringing about systemic change in the media, at the workplace, at school and at home. More...