Hillary Rosen: Am I "Off Message" on Sarah Palin?

[kristopher]

Am I "Off Message" on Sarah Palin

Posted September 3, 2008 | 12:05 PM (EST)

Warning! This pundit isn't feeling the same way as most of my colleagues about Sarah Palin. She is being attacked for her lack of experience for the job and for whether she should be putting her family first instead of her career. This just isn't that unusual in my book. And the more it goes on, the more uncomfortable I feel with that message.

I am a woman who someone took a chance on several years ago and gave me a job that had only previously been done by old white guys. Experience? How do you get any if no one takes a chance on you? And the decision to take a chance can be instinctive, as John McCain said. Sure it was a gimmick. But would we feel better if it was Tim Pawlenty? What someone does on a small scale can be a good indicator of what they do on a large scale. So suggesting that she would do any worse than the host of guys who have auditioned for the job isn't that compelling an argument to me. And what about the argument that she is a negligent mother who will be distracted from her important role. I am a mother who constantly feels the pressure from others about whether I am fit to be a parent, whether I put my kids first often enough and whether my son with learning disabilities gets enough of my attention. Who has the right to to judge my family?

My grandmother always said "You can't tell time on someone else's clock". Judgments about people's personal lives are better left unsaid and unrealized.

So why then do I think that Sarah Palin would be a terrible vice president? Because I also think that John McCain would be a terrible president.

I don't care about how Sarah Palin or John McCain take care of their families. I care about how their policy choices affect my family and millions of other Americans.

-McCain and Palin get their health insurance paid for by the government (hers in Alaska and his in Washington). Yet they oppose giving the 42 million other Americans the same access to affordable healthcare.

-John McCain's kids don't have to worry about paying for college. Yet, he has opposed every single education support program to help others.

-McCain and Palin say they will stand up to oil companies. Yet the only energy policy they support gives millions of dollars in tax breaks to oil companies to do more drilling and he has opposed every piece of federal legislation to explore alternative fuel sources.

-McCain and Palin say they will revamp how Washington does business. Yet his campaign is filled with lobbyists and she has been in bed with Senator Ted Stevens funneling federal money for useless projects in Alaska for years.

-McCain and Palin have refused to answer very real questions about her potential abuse of power in Alaska when it came to her firing a State Trooper because she was on a reveng ekick for her sister costing an officer his job. And McCain and Palin have solutions for Americans worrying about their jobs in a fragile economy.

-McCain and Palin want us to leave their families alone. Yet they want make rules for our families by eliminating our right to make our own choices over abortion; eliminate our access to family planning education or domestic partner benefits; and our freedom from discrimination. They want to control what our kids learn in school about sex and about science. In short, through the policies they promote and the judges they support, they want the government to be more in control over our private lives than at any time in history.

-McCain and Palin now say their campaign is about change, too. Yet, the only real change they have proposed is a change from a suit to a skirt in the VP's office and one man fighting a misplaced war for another in the Oval Office. That seems to me to be the right reason to oppose them in November. And unlike some others who have focused on the process or on her personally, it is the reason why I don't think this unconventional choice of VP by John McCain will stand up to the hype and result in a win in November.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hilary-rosen/am-i-off-message-on-sarah_b_123540.html

[phantom power]

1. She's right. It's very simple: Palin == McCain == More of the Same.

Ironically, Obama's very first statement about Palin said exactly that, and for some reason we're now all sidetracked in these other briar patches.

[AldebTX]

2. Something Tells Me

Something tells me this is the tack the Democratic Campaign will take as well and its JUST as devasting as all the gossip.

[TwilightGardener]

3. Here's the thing: ask women what their biggest concern is about her, and

they will say, how does she think she's going to care for four kids, one of whom is pregnant and the other still an infant, if she has to be President? It's WOMEN who are saying this. Women are the harshest judges of other women, especially when it comes to mothering decisions. I say we stop trying to eliminate that argument from the public sphere--it's really damaging to Palin.

[Eric J in MN]

4. This essay would have been a lot more persuasive...

...if it quickly got to the criticisms.

Instead, it starts off by saying how important it is to give people like Sarah Palin a chance at a new job.

[n2doc]

7. Yeah, it's not like she hasn't ascended the ranks quickly enough

PTA-Mayor of small town-Governor in 10 years. Don't see too many pols of either gender doing that. She's had her chances and shown what a crook she is at every turn.

[FrenchieCat]

5. Hillary Rosen is keeping her eye on the prize, like we should be doing......

We are looking for a game changing scandal.

She is understanding, like Obama/Biden that the issues in this country is what is going to win us this election, hands down!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6901108&mesg_id=6901108

[FatDave]

8. "the issues in this country is what is going to win us this election"

With all due respect, FrenchieCat, when was the last time an election was won on the issues?

[CitizenPatriot]

6. Too risky

good article, but I take exception to the beginning. I am not willing to take a chance on the VP slot. Now when we are at war and nuclear weapon gathering countries who hate us are breathing down our necks. Now when the economy is in the toilet.

Give her a chance? Ok, run for senate. I'll give any intelligent, bright, hard-working person whose policies I agree with a chance if they show me they are responsible.

I don't agree with her policies.

She has shown me she is irresponsible and puts her ambition ahead of this country by accepting this nomination before she is ready to serve.

Her poor judgment in doing so says everything I need to know, though her policies and behavior while in office as mayor and governor say even worse things.

The bottom line is a person who is ready takes this job seriously. They understand the magnitude. If someone came to me today and offered me a position in my career, much higher than what I do now, I would turn it down. In fact, this has happened to me. I evaluated myself and while I have great faith in my ability and learn quickly, I felt it would be irresponsible of me to take a gamble like that when other people's jobs depended on my choices. If it was right for me, I would get another chance, when I was at least seasoned enough to know the job description off the top of my head. Now where is her concern over the lives of all Americans, nay the world, who could very well find themselves depending upon her as President to lead them? She hasn't demonstrated anything but fiscal failure. Her judgment is so poor, there is no way she can honestly look at her history and say, "I can be President." She didn't even know what the job description of VP was.

No, I can't give her a chance, even if I agreed with her policies. The leader of the free world is not someone who is so reckless as to accept this position when they think the Pledge of Allegiance was written by the founding fathers. Where is her reverence for the constitution? Her grasp of it? has she even read it? Does she really know who the founding fathers are?

The Republicans are the loyalists who opposed our independence. they revere the Monarchy of the Neocons and are anti-american to their core.