Oh, goody: years and years of double standards to look forward to
Will it never end? Tonight the news is full of yammering about Sarah Palin writing on her hand. This is apparently more evidence that she is a moron bimbo from outer space, etc., etc., etc.
I used to have a boyfriend who wrote on his hand. I thought it was a rather juvenile habit for a grownup, but whatever. (I used to ask him why he didn’t just buy a fricking notepad. He insisted that hands were more convenient.) The thing is, nobody ever accused him of being stupid because of it. He had a graduate degree or two and was a successful executive in the financial industry.
What kinds of things did he write on his hand? The same kinds of things I write on my notepad. Words. Names. Reminders that are meaningless to anyone else.
So Sarah Palin writes on her hand. Just like my ex-boyfriend. Big whoop.
People seem particularly excited about this because the words Palin wrote on her hand — “energy,” “tax,” “lift American spirits” — were topics of her speech, or maybe of the Q&A afterwards. Shouldn’t she already know such simple things? the excited people ask indignantly. How absurd for her to need reminders!
Ahem. Anybody else remember “Message: I care”? (If you don’t, look it up.) People ridiculed Bush for being phony and insincere, but nobody suggested that he needed the reminder because he was actually too stupid to hold the thoughts in his head.
But then, President Bush had a penis. Which makes all the difference. My ex-boyfriend had a penis too, now that I think of it. Funny how that works.
Oh, I forgot: I titled the post this way because I also see that Palin is acknowledging that she might run for president in 2012. That means we have years of this to look forward to. Years and years.
56 Responses to “Oh, goody: years and years of double standards to look forward to”
-
myiq2xu says:
Sarah was photographed again today with a note written on her hand.
It said “Hi mom!”
February 8th, 2010 at 3:55 am EST -
Cheshire Cat says:
Sarah Palin has plenty to say (except when her friends say stupid things on air when she’s suddenly silent). Most people need notes, etc, when giving a speech, which is why Obama uses a teleprompter. If he can be chided for that, so can Palin.
-
Morning Joe vs. Sarah Palin? Surprise, Surprise, Surprise! « DaTechguy's Blog says:
[...] enlightened members of the left who are supposedly not a bit sexist then you haven’t read the reclusive leftist at all in the last 18 months: Will it never end? Tonight the news is full of yammering about Sarah [...]
-
Kiuku says:
this is, as opposed to using a teleprompter for your entire speech.
-
tinfoil hattie says:
She made snide comments about Obama using a teleprompter. Then she herself used notes to speak. That’s a double standard.
I know notes are not the same as using a teleprompter. But what the hall is so bad about using a teleprompter? Did (either) Clinton ever use one? Gore? Any politician we “like”?
For her to paint Obama as Mr. Teleprompter, implying that he can’t speak spontaneously, and then to use notes to remind herself to talk about “energy,” “tax,” and “lift(ing) American spirits” is utter crap. She’s completely disingenuous.
-
tinfoil hattie says:
By the way, I don’t like Obama. I think he’s about as qualified as Sarah Palin to be president.
-
gxm17 says:
Obama is tethered to the teleprompter. He doesn’t seem to be able to speak without one. Someone writing three words on her hand is hardly comparable.
One can only assume that Sarah wrote those words on her hand herself. Much like I remember Hillary writing notes during the debates, her own words written by her own hand. I seriously doubt Obama loads the teleprompter with his own words, his own thoughts. As I said, comparing Obama’s dependence on a teleprompter to writing a note to oneself is ridiculous.
-
Jodie says:
I know several doctors who write on their hands…you might lose a piece of paper, but your hand is still going to be on the end of your arm (if it suddenly isn’t, you’re probably not going to care what you wrote on it). I use this method sometimes, too.
-
octogalore says:
“She made snide comments about Obama using a teleprompter. Then she herself used notes to speak. That’s a double standard.”
Not really. It’s the difference between a coach and a stunt double.
-
m Andrea says:
It says a lot about your integrity Violet that even though you disagree with many of Palin’s politics, you still defend her against the sexism.
Most excellent!
-
hm says:
She, a female politician is playing her opposition (the elite left) like a violin and having fun too. I wish she were on our side.
-
Miranda says:
I’m willing to bet the writing on her hand was a carefully scripted act to make her seem ‘just like folks’. After all, what was the point of writing ‘lift American spirits’? Without the note would she have said “Oh, crap, I thought I was supposed to depress everyone, sorry!” Nope, scripted act, just like every other politician.
-
Sophie says:
I don’t like either one of them (Obama or Palin) and thing both are equally unqualified to be President of the US of A. But…he has his whole speech written by someone else and displayed on two teleprompters and he is considered an intellectual with good judgment while she has a few key ideas written on her hand and is considered a moron.
Sarah: get a clue. Having more balls than the president is not the criteria; having a penis is.
-
gmanedit says:
Sorry, Violet: I respectfully disagree.
I have a (locally) famous bad memory. If I have to pick up more than three items at the grocery story, I have to make a list. But if I have to talk about a subject dear to my heart, I don’t have to write down basic talking points. Examples:
Cat care:
food
water
litter box
petting
playingKnitting:
knit
purl
shaping: increase and decrease
cast on
bind offCopy editing:
spelling
punctuation
grammar
sense
omit needless wordsFor longer talks with more detail, I like outlines; I can glance at them to make sure I’ve covered everything.
To have to write such simple-minded notes (and a slogan!) is ridiculous. She’s supposed to have this stuff down cold. She’s no Hillary. (Writing notes during a debate is different; you’re catching somebody else’s thoughts on the fly.)
Obama’s reliance on the teleprompter is a disgrace. Old George Bush’s “Message: I care” was an honest admission that he didn’t care.
I would have been charmed if Palin’s list had read: “Bread. Milk. Peanut butter. Toilet paper.” But I’ve been off her anyway since she decided to barnstorm antiabortion rallies.
-
hm says:
I interpret Violet’s Message: I care, to mean that Palin knows what she is doing in that how else would you convey to your audience what you’re all about — get the left to hype it up (negatively) by doing something as simple as writing on your hand (she could not do this any other way with the same impact). The elite left have fallen for her brilliant move again.
-
Alison says:
What an odd, odd thing for people to obsess on and get overly analytical about. And isn’t that the standard symptom of PDA, analyzing Palin’s every move? Who cares if she wrote her bullet points on her hand!!!! Holy hell, I’ve done enough public speaking to know that people want to drive home their buzz words. Who care’s if she gave herself a reminder???
And isn’t this quite different from critical analysis of Obama’s relationship with the media? I think his constant use of teleprompters and his over-regulation of the media is worthy of analysis and might just be demonstrative of his Manchurian status.
Violet’s post on Palin’s super bowl response seemed like a very fair criticism to me. But this mocking of her notes?
Feh.
-
teresainpa says:
she wrote notes about the three things she wanted to make sure she included in the speech. She would have been better off with a note card…I have seen the president use one when he was TOTUS free.
But there is a big difference between giving yourself a few written reminders and reading everything off a teleprompter. The person with a few relevant notes gets more credit for knowing what they are talking about IMO. -
lambert strether says:
Just when you think the discourse can’t possibly get more stupid … It does.
-
anna says:
Have you heard? Costa Rica elected its first female President yesterday, Laura Chinchilla. But apparently this is less important than the Superbowl, and has barely been reported.
-
Ciccina says:
These are my impressions of the speech. I thought she did a fabulous job.
She sounded better- more passionate, natural, persuasive - when she talked about issues she feels strongly about (for example, special needs kids, Obama’s hypocrisy) than on the ones where her perspective is academic (mechanics of health care reform). Her delivery of the criticism of Obama was especially strong and effective - I loved her bit about faux bipartisanship and not promising stuff you have no intention of delivering, and the delivery of her line about needing a commander-in-chief, not a professor at a lectern, was a knockout almost on par with Reagan’s scornful “Liberal” and Bentson’s “you’re no Jack Kennedy.” I totally empathized with her scornful, ’screw you’ attitude.
I wouldn’t say she quite “played” the opposition like a violin (as though her criticism was strictly tactical)… I think its more the case of her knowing exactly what she doesn’t like about the opposition, and expressing it clearly and with great confidence. Its not so much that she baited them or set traps - rather, much of her criticism of the Democratic party and the media is spot on, and their response simply underlines this.
I had a very emotional reaction to her speech, similar to what I imagine Reagan Democrats felt back in the day (personally, though I was just a kid, I hated Reagan from day 1). Her issue positions did not matter to me nearly as much as the thrill of watching her flip the Obama Democrats, the mainstream media, and the Blogger Boyz the giant pterodactyl. I liked the way she looked and sounded. I felt like I understood her personal journey, and, oddest of all for me, on the big issues (for example, forced birth) I had the bizarre feeling that if I could just sit down and explain it to her, and if she could just take a field trip or two to Nicaragua, Poland, Romania etc., she’d understand and change her policy position. Weird!
Of course, she was wonderfully vague on that - if I remember correctly (and I did miss some of the beginning of the speech), she never said anything specific about abortion (no mention of a Constitutional amendment, partial birth, minors, etc). Just her endorsement of that horrible, horrible Bart Stupak.
Given the brevity of her political career and lack of political mentors, she’s made amazing progress and has shown astounding fortitude. She is truly a force to be reckoned with. She’s their Hillary, really, and it was a thrill to see an auditorium full of conservatives cheering her on so unabashedly - so different from the handwringing, backbiting reception Hillary got from the base on the left. Like Hillary, she’s got the courage of her convictions, she’s a workhorse, and she’s a sympathetic human being - exactly what I want in a leader.
I so wish her positions on key issues were different - I’d love to be able to support her. Forced birth is the ultimate deal-breaker. No leader is worth consciously trading people’s lives, and we know, without a doubt, what happens when you try to force women to carry pregnancies against their health and will.
-
myiq2xu says:
I have come to the conclusion that Sarah Palin’s vagina is haunted.
It is possessed by evil spirits that drive her opponents and critics insane.
-
Lori says:
Good lord, Palin’s notes on her hand are the three acts of her speech. She knows what she’s going to say, and those three notes define it for her. If she spoke one or two sentences on each, it would be ridiculous. But when she is giving a complex speech that has some length to it, there is nothing wrong with having a reminder as to how each act begins.
I don’t mind Obama using a teleprompter because I suspect he is a moron who needs it. But people who aren’t attacking Obama over his teleprompter are attacking Palin over her three guide points. Palin, to state the obvious, did not have her speech on a teleprompter - that’s why she needed the notes.
-
Lori says:
Oh, and check out the poll on the upper right of this page at “progressive” alaska:
http://progressivealaska.blogs.....ggers.html
Then listen to what Chomsky has to say because he’s right about everything.
-
Lori says:
Holy Crap, I just linked on the front page of that site. It’s like a hotbed of misogyny. It’s like reading Storm Front.
http://progressivealaska.blogspot.com/
And people like Digby are complaining about Palin being mean! This is pretty staggering shit.
-
Michele Braa-Heidner says:
@ myiq2xu
“I have come to the conclusion that Sarah Palin’s vagina is haunted. It is possessed by evil spirits that drive her opponents and critics insane.”
What a completely horrible, sexist thing to say!! What does her vagina, one organ in her body, have to do with her writing notes on her hand or running for president? Are you suggesting that Sarah Palin, because she is a woman, is just a vagina? Perhaps this is how you feel about all women?
And then to make matters even worse, you state that her vagina is haunted with evil spirits that drive people insane? Have you no knowledge about the time in our history when they burned women at the stake due to men coming to these same ignorant conclusions? Wow, absolutely disgraceful!!
Violet????????????
-
myiq2xu says:
It’s like reading Storm Front.
Progressives like that are one of the reasons I call myself a liberal.
-
myiq2xu says:
What a completely horrible, sexist thing to say!!
Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the concept of sarcasm.
-
madaha says:
yeah, who cares about note-writing, when she made a HUGE statement about how it would be a good thing to go to war just for election purposes! She’s a dangerous menace. I am terrified of her.
-
slythwolf says:
I write on my hand all the time. It’s called ADHD. If I write on a notepad, I just lose it.
-
Jadzia says:
It’s Violet’s “years and years and years” observation, which I completely agree to be true, that makes me weary and full of despair. I thought I was ready to raise my soon-to-be baby girl. I was wrong. Because the more this kind of crap is wall-to-wall media coverage, the smaller our girls’ futures become. And things are just getting worse. (And I’m looking at YOU too, Helicopter Harold…)
: (
-
Laura Chinchilla « Grab and Keel says:
[...] 8, 2010 by roofingbird As Anna rightly commented over at Violet’s place, it’s a far more urgent thing we thing we do to opine about the touch points clasped in a [...]
-
chelate says:
I think she is just causing controversy for her new spot on Fox news. I don’t really believe she is serious about running in 2012 either.
-
myiq2xu says:
I don’t really believe she is serious about running in 2012 either.
She”ll either run or she won’t. If she runs, she might win or she might lose.
But until she’s actually the nominee there isn’t much point in stressing out over what she does. The harder the progressives attack her, the more likely it is she will win.
Bob Somerby today:
But sadly, the jig isn’t up for Palin. And she won’t be defeated this way. (We withdraw our earlier, unwise prediction—predictions almost always are—in which we said there was simply no way she could ever become president.)
-
Violet Socks says:
Michele, myiq is being facetious. He’s commenting on the misogyny of the Palin haters. They’re the one who are obsessed with her vagina.
-
Ciccina says:
@ slythewolf
Me too!!! If its really important, I write it on my hand. Otherwise all bets are off.
Major ADD (no H).
-
Poll: if Palin runs in 2012, will that entice Hillary to run again? | Reclusive Leftist says:
[...] and wrong about a lot of stuff, but she’s still a charismatic leader. Read, for example, this thoughtful comment by Ciccina — who, I assure you from secret personal knowledge, is as much a radical feminist as myself. [...]
-
Sameol says:
Is anyone else as tired of the “She’s not Hillary” thing as I am? No, she’s not. HRC is a highly intelligent policy wonk. Very few current politicians are comperable to her in any way.
And? We should, therefore, compare all politicians to her and refuse to vote for anyone who doesn’t meet that standard? Or, we should continue to hold male politicians to exceptionally low standards while dismissing all female politicians who aren’t Hillary, which would be, all female politicians? How bout that Russ Feingold, he’s no FDR.
-
Violet Socks says:
Lori says:
Good lord, Palin’s notes on her hand are the three acts of her speech.
That makes sense. I didn’t watch the speech, so I don’t know what she said. But if that was the flow of the address, then yeah, obviously.
Most speakers go to the podium with a few notes, some jotted guidelines. Traditional speakers, that is; not teleprompter-dependent speech reciters like Obama. Is the problem that she wrote the notes on her hand?
Of course if Obama had done that it would be proof of how cool he is or something.
-
Grace says:
I think it’s wrong and sexist to compare Palin or any other female politician to Hillary. I also disagree with the statement that Palin is “their Hillary” for the same reason. The same way that it would be racist to compare Obama with Clearance Thomas or Michael Steele (both conservative republicans) because they are all black.
About Palin’s notes in her hand, I agree with other people in this thread that it’s not a big deal. However, it would have been better if she had a note pad, for example, for the simple reason that it would look more “professional” perhaps. Obama depends too much on the teleprompter, and I ‘ve observed that that is the only way he sounds like a good speaker, can concentrate on the cadence of his words, tone of voice, etc. I recently watched him speak to the DNC and he was reading from notes. He sounded flat, monotone, even deflated, like day and night, it was amazing!!
Last comment: Democrats and the left are making a BIG mistake in attacking and deriding Palin. . Doesn’t anybody remember that despite the fact that Bush “the retard” was criticized to death, and mocked about his stupidity, dislexia, and ignorance, he was elected twice? Palin should be criticized for her policies and opinions, that’s the only way she could be defeated.
-
Violet Socks says:
I think it’s wrong and sexist to compare Palin or any other female politician to Hillary. I also disagree with the statement that Palin is “their Hillary” for the same reason. The same way that it would be racist to compare Obama with Clearance Thomas or Michael Steele (both conservative republicans) because they are all black.
Yes, but Ciccina wasn’t doing that. She wasn’t comparing Palin to Hillary simply because they’re both women. She was comparing them as politicians with certain similar attributes (though obviously they’re also dissimilar in many ways) who inspire a similar sort of fervent devotion. The womanliness is part of it: Hillary supporters certainly longed for a woman president and admired Hillary’s ovarian fortitude, and I think some Palin supporters feel the same way about Palin. But the similarities Ciccina was pointing to go beyond that.
-
myiq2xu says:
I think it’s wrong and sexist to compare Palin or any other female politician to Hillary.
Comparing and contrasting is a standard form of expository writing that all of us were taught in school. Considering the limited number of female politicians, it’s inevitable that comparisons will be made between the two that are the most prominent, especially in light of the sexism and misogyny that both have faced.
-
chelate says:
myiq2xu says: She”ll either run or she won’t. If she runs, she might win or she might lose.
ummmmmmm……very enlightening ;)
(all in good fun)
-
votermom says:
Is anyone else as tired of the “She’s not Hillary” thing as I am? No, she’s not. HRC is a highly intelligent policy wonk. Very few current politicians are comperable to her in any way.
I agree. As candidates, I also think she’s not their Hillary. It’s more like she’s their Bill Clinton. She has real charisma, like him.
-
monchichipox says:
I always thought scribbling on the hand was a busy mom thing. There are days I have to practically scrub my hands with sandpaper to get a blank slate for tomorrow. Did anyone catch the smug Gibbs with writing on his hands during the press briefing? UGH! It’s just like anything Sarah does…Her supporters find it endearing and her detractors find it enraging.
Word of warning to her detractors though. Everything she does that irritates you and you bitch about is something millions of everyday Americans do. So now she has the hunters and the hand scribblers.
I wonder if like me though Sarah calls her office phone to leave herself voice mails when an idea pops into her head at 9pm when she’s doing dishes.
-
sisterkenney says:
I care because writing answers TO QUESTIONS YOU KNOW AHEAD OF TIME on your hand smacks of the low-rent, high-school level of discourse and education that she has. Can’t NAME A SINGLE JOURNAL you’ve read recently? OMG the patriarchy is OPPRESSING YOU! Gonna hear about that for years to come! (I can only hope). Just because she is impassioned and has some charisma,(and is hot to some,-watch out, that might bite ya), doesn’t make her ANYWHERE NEAR a woman that would understand my politics, my situation, my history. To equate her with ANY feminist leader is too ludicrous to contemplate. Is it exciting to have a woman excite the masses, without recognizing WHY? Her grasp of domestic or foreign policy? Her understanding of economics? Her deep identification with women of color? Her empathy with people who are suffering under the yoke of the new Depression II? Naah. She’s a female. All she needs. Doesn’t matter if she is willing to throw LGBT peeps under the bus, sell Alaska (what happened with THAT governership?) to the highest bidder, and derange reproductive rights …yeah..she’s my idol.and I’ll get all bent if people make fun of her ..cuz she’s a girrl. Sorry. CAN’T GO THERE.
-
Saurs says:
Is it exciting to have a woman excite the masses, without recognizing WHY?
If you take a gander at Violet’s backlog, sisterkinney, you’ll bear witness to many, many posts and readers’ commentary that do, in fact, recognize, discuss, and argue over the numerous and sometimes contradictory reasons for Palin’s popularity. Your suggestion that Republicans and conservative independents (who appear to be the bulk of her support) like her because she’s a victim of misogyny or just, ‘cos, she’s “a female” or a “girrl” is probably rather implausible, nor are they likely to recognize that a thing called “patriarchy” is oppressing anyone. Radical feminists, they aren’t.
-
slythwolf says:
Major ADD (no H).
They’re diagnosing it all with the H now. So what I have winds up being called Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, Primarily Inattentive.
Just plain ADD would have been easier to explain…
-
monchichipox says:
“I’ll get all bent if people make fun of her ..cuz she’s a girrl. Sorry. CAN’T GO THERE.”
I’d like to scold for that remark but I really can’t. It sounds like me before the primaries.
-
Carmonn says:
Her grasp of domestic or foreign policy? Her understanding of economics? Her deep identification with women of color? Her empathy with people who are suffering under the yoke of the new Depression II? Naah. She’s a female. All she needs.
Have you ever heard of Barack Obama or George W. Bush? It appears that you haven’t, so let me fill you in. They’re frighteningly unintelligent, craven, useless, unempathetic men. Who happen to be Presidents of the United States. It’s been established that the President doesn’t need to have any grasp of policy, deep identification with anyone, or empathy in any form. All he needs is to be male, which makes your statement that being female is “all she needs” slightly puzzling. All she needs to be savaged and held to gross double standards, perhaps? If Palin were male, all of this would be moot. She’s probably the second most charismatic politician to come along in the past 50 years, and we’d also have to pretend that Samuel Palin was “brilliant,” the way we have to pretend with Obama. We’re not allowed to call stupid men stupid, we’re allowed to call them the political leaders of the United States.
I care because writing answers TO QUESTIONS YOU KNOW AHEAD OF TIME on your hand smacks of the low-rent, high-school level of discourse and education that she has.
I never knew frat boys had such gravitas, but I suppose her low-rent, high school level of discourse will be profoundly abashed by our “wee-wee’d up,” “dirt off the shoulder,” “retards,” political culture. I’ve got 99 Problems and I’m still trying to figure out if she might be one, but dear god I hope she doesn’t drag our discourse down too far.
and is hot to some,-watch out, that might bite ya
Interesting observation, that. Of course, those beefcake shots of shirtless Barack running didn’t seem to have a downside.
-
Adrienne in CA says:
smacks of the low-rent, high-school level of discourse and education that she has.
Wow, that’s some elitist thinking there. Funny how that same demographic loved Hillary too.
There’s more than one type of intelligence. Bill Clinton called Palin “an instinctively effective candidate.” No amount of high rent education can teach that.
*****A
-
Grace says:
I agree with Adrienne in CA that there’s more than one type of intelligence. It’s too bad that Palin tends, in my opinion, to rely too much on image, overestimate herself, and has strong narcissistic features like Obama. If she became more (much more actually) informed via extensive and intensive reading, coaching, and debate practice, plus taking some speech training to reduce the high pitch of her voice, she would be dynamite!! Unlike Obama, she is articulate, doesn’t stumble or stutter, has good instincts, and she is nothing but flat or robotic.
-
Shakti says:
Palin winning the Republican party 2012 nomination would mean a dim bulb gorgeous nasty white woman (she might be playing stupid because it gets good reviews from certain people) could get as far as an equally dim bulb gorgeous nasty white man. It’s a truism that women have to be twice as good to get half as far. She has charm and is exceptionally good at folksy nastiness, and she was a very popular governor. She makes my teeth itch.
P.S. Victoria Woodhull was far more awesome than Sarah Palin is on her day.
-
Sameol says:
Well, we went from a dim bulb not-so-gorge nasty white man to a dim bulb gorgeous nasty Black man. Nasty seems to be what works. We tried a brilliant, likeable enough woman and got nowhere.
Think Victoria would agree to come back from the dead and run again? Alice Paul? Alice Hamilton? Eleanor Roosevelt? Think any of them could win or would they be pushed aside for a dim bulb nasty race unimportant man to a chorus of “Not that woman!!!!”s?
-
Metal Prophet says:
Enough with this TelePromTer nonsense. Obama has shown on several occasions that he’s still a dazzling speaker with or without a TelePromTer. Reagan, whom the right idolizes, was never without one. So, how come they’re all mad about Obama using one? This is an incredibly silly line of attack. I mean, it’s up there with this Birther shit. Attack him for his policies if you’d like, not the silly stuff. As for Palin, she’s not terribly disciplined and easily bored. I don’t think it’s much of a stretch to suggest that. But, her ideas and her courting of people who are far to the right are ultimately what should disqualify her.
-
Violet Socks says:
Obama has shown on several occasions that he’s still a dazzling speaker with or without a TelePromTer.
Really? When?
I mean, it’s up there with this Birther shit.
Criticizing the President for his obvious over-reliance on teleprompters (obvious in the sense that the things are Always There, even in middle school classrooms) is right up there with a black helicopter conspiracy theory? Wanna explain that?
Attack him for his policies if you’d like, not the silly stuff.
This post is about people attacking Sarah Palin for silly stuff. You know, people like your adored leader’s press secretary, who had the maturity and gravitas to show up at a press conference with words written on his hand.
And your response is to complain that people aren’t treating Holy Barack seriously enough?
-
Recovering Dem says:
Violet, thank you for such a refreshing blog. The standards for female politicians are so much higher than we hold for men. Here’s another really sad, pathetic example. You know how almost EVERY former male VP candidate is automatically assumed to be running in the next presidential election and almost no one questions whether they should? Just look back … V.P. Mondale (Carter’s failed VP candidate), V.P. Quayle (Bush’s failed VP candidate), Dole (Ford’s failed VP), Lieberman (failed VP pick), Edwards (failed VP pick). They were all failed VP candidates who ran for president in the next cycle.
Sarah Freakin’ Palin was the VP candidate for the GOP in 2008. And yes, she, like dozens of men before her FAILED in that bid. But McCain lawyers vetted every damn thing in her background, questioned her for hours on her “foreign policy” views, and despite an onslaught from a deranged media, she drew unprecedented GOP crowds and raised millions for a doomed ticket.
Of COURSE she’s qualified to run for president. And we should expect her to.
One of the saddest examples of how we treat women was recently when Geraldine Ferraro appeared on Fox with Meghan Kelly. Geraldine said that after her failed VP run nobody asked if she would run for president, nobody encouraged her to run, and she herself didn’t think she was worthy of a run.
HOW SAD … it’s truly sad when the Quayles and Edwards run for president, but quality women think they’re “not worthy.”
Good lord … if the men can do it, so can we.
Sarah rocks!
