Should Sarah Palin stay home with her kids?

[Roxanne Appleby]

THREADJACK:

I will keep this comment short and to the point. If you wish to comment, fight and squabble try and do it without pointing your finger and sticking out your tongue and saying so and so is going to pick on me all the time and their friends are bullies. If your opinion has merit and you can back it up with logic, proof and other sources that support your thought great but don't throw down an idea and then whine that others are going to pick it apart in an effort to white wash your lack of a coherent and decisive argument.

I'm not sticking out my tongue or squabbling or being a bully or accusing anyone of being a bully. This is hardball politics, and if someone can't take the heat they should get out of the kitchen.

What I am doing is saying that the question this thread asks is sexist, and if Palin were a liberal Dem and conservatives were asking the question most of the people here would be screaming bloody murder instead of santimoniously pondering "the best interests of the Palin children."

Excuse me folks, but isn't there a Mr. Palin? What office is he running for? If she's elected they can probably live on her salary quite comfortably for the next eight years. No one's mentioned that, have they? Why not? (Time to trot out the Straw Christian Conservative again?)

I can't quite decide whether to be outraged or hillarious at the spectacle.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Now now, Rox. Mr Palin has been mentioned several times in this thread, and that point has already been brought up, I think.

You KNOW I consider myself a feminist. And I had my babies under the assumption that their needs had to comne first-- the grownups made babies, the grownups need to take care of them.
So I was out of the jobmarket for seven years, and believe me, I would not have gone into national politics with young children in my arms!

Should she stay home with her kids? In the context of her stated belief system, kinda yeah.

But she'll have plenty of money to hire Legal Immigrant housekeepers now.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

I'm not sticking out my tongue or squabbling or being a bully or accusing anyone of being a bully. This is hardball politics, and if someone can't take the heat they should get out of the kitchen.

What I am doing is saying that the question this thread asks is sexist, and if Palin were a liberal Dem and conservatives were asking the question most of the people here would be screaming bloody murder instead of santimoniously pondering "the best interests of the Palin children."

Excuse me folks, but isn't there a Mr. Palin? What office is he running for? If she's elected they can probably live on her salary quite comfortably for the next eight years. No one's mentioned that, have they? Why not? (Time to trot out the Straw Christian Conservative again?)

I can't quite decide whether to be outraged or hillarious at the spectacle.

Hardball politics... *snerk*

The question certainly MAY be sexist... I posed that possibility in the initial asking. So you believe it is. Thanks for your perspective.

As for someone mentioning Mr. Palin, someone did... Sweetness, I believe. (I still can't believe his name is Todd, but I digress...)

But you're making assumptions that I was trotting out the Straw Christian Conservative to make some alleged point... I didn't and haven't. I simply asked a question that's being asked out there, wondering what the folks here had to say about it...

That's all. *shrug*

 

[Guest]

But you haven't answered the most basic question. If she were a man would you hold the same opinion? Do you worry that Obama would not be able to raise his two daughters and be President? And if being a woman does make a difference, I'd like to know why. I know men who are much better domestically than their wives. Is it a problem if these men stay home with the kids while their wives earn a living?

I have a lot of things against Sarah Palin and her politics, but I hope that we are not still stuck in an era where a woman has no place outside the kitchen.

yes, I would ask the same questions in a heart beat and Sen. Obama has... repeatedly he has spoken directly to fathers, from his father's day speech (just one of many he has spoken these words):

But if we are honest with ourselves, we'll admit that what too many fathers also are is missing - missing from too many lives and too many homes. They have abandoned their responsibilities, acting like boys instead of men. And the foundations of our families are weaker because of it.

You and I know how true this is in the African-American community. We know that more than half of all black children live in single-parent households, a number that has doubled - doubled - since we were children. We know the statistics - that children who grow up without a father are five times more likely to live in poverty and commit crime; nine times more likely to drop out of schools and twenty times more likely to end up in prison. They are more likely to have behavioral problems, or run away from home, or become teenage parents themselves. And the foundations of our community are weaker because of it.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/06/obamas_speech_on_fatherhood.html

I would ask the same questions of ANY of the candidates. My concerns over Palin are various... but what does it say about a woman that preaches abstinence, no birth control, no abortions, accountability and responsibility for ones actions.... and look what has show up in her world in just the week since her nomination.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

It's a question that's being asked...and you're right, it's being asked in the media...a lot...I didn't invent it, I just brought it here for discussion...you can shoot the messenger if you want *shrug* but I think it's an interesting topic...

I think Selena is quite aware of what she is doing by opening a dialog on an issue that is pertinent and important. We may not all agree on the answer, hell, we may not be sure of our own answer to the question... but I'm glad she opened the discussion. Healthy and respectful debate is never harmful.

Oh yeah, it's a question that's being asked alright, and it's as sexist as all get out. If it were being asked about a liberal Dem I have absolutely no doubt that most of the people here - who mostly do seem to be agreeing on the answer - would be hollering "sexism!" at the top of the their lungs, shooting the messenger, and doing everything except calling for "dialog."

 

[Guest]

It's being asked of a WOMAN, period. Not a party, not a group, not a 12th grade history class or a church morals group.... its being asked of a woman regardless of her party affiliation.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

Hardball politics... *snerk*

The question certainly MAY be sexist... I posed that possibility in the initial asking. So you believe it is. Thanks for your perspective.

As for someone mentioning Mr. Palin, someone did... Sweetness, I believe. (I still can't believe his name is Todd, but I digress...)

But you're making assumptions that I was trotting out the Straw Christian Conservative to make some alleged point... I didn't and haven't. I simply asked a question that's being asked out there, wondering what the folks here had to say about it...

That's all. *shrug*

With respect Selena (and Elizabeth, and mab, bel and sarah who I also mentioned) - and I mean that - "simply asked a question that's out there" doesn't wash, for the reason I've stated several times: If this were a liberal Dem and conservatives were asking the question most of the people here would be screaming bloody murder and "sexist!" at the top of their lungs.

BTW, credit to Bel for bringing the Dad into the discussion with an apt observation.

 

[alyxen]

I've always thought that anyone in the White House (lets not forget the staff in the rest of the building that generally works 20 hour days with no days off) is NOT a good parent. Does that mean I think only single people should work there? Of course not, this is simply the reality. There are many other jobs that are just like this. Any Presidential or VP candidate (regardless of their political party) that touts there parenting skills as a reason to vote for them gets a laugh from me.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

With respect Selena (and Elizabeth, and mab, bel and sarah who I also mentioned) - and I mean that - "simply asked a question that's out there" doesn't wash, for the reason I've stated several times: If this were a liberal Dem and conservatives were asking the question most of the people here would be screaming bloody murder and "sexist!" at the top of their lungs.

Conjecture. *shrug*

 

[PMI]

Who are we to judge, anyway?

I have a problem with the fact that everyone seems to agree that the VP salary will cover the expenses of relocation and childcare. Do y’all know what it costs to have a home in the D.C. area? It seems to me that the salary paid to our highest officials – is it around the 140 to 200K range? – is not enough to cover the expenses incurred with relocation and maintaining two homes and private school and clothing and entertaining and – what else?

I worry about anyone headed for office. It seems to me that unless one is independently wealthy, they cannot afford the job, hence sidelines such as Haliburton….

As the former employer of a string of completely legal au pairs, I can tell you all that there are ways a mother can tend to the needs of her offspring with a clear conscience and hold a demanding job, even if she cannot sweet-talk the love of her life into quitting or even cutting back.

I cannot in good conscience, second guess the Palin family. As Rob said, this is none of our concern.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Oh yeah, it's a question that's being asked alright, and it's as sexist as all get out. If it were being asked about a liberal Dem I have absolutely no doubt that most of the people here - who mostly do seem to be agreeing on the answer - would be hollering "sexism!" at the top of the their lungs, shooting the messenger, and doing everything except calling for "dialog."

well, let's focus on what is happening, instead of speculating about what might happen someday somewhere, okay?

If this scenario you predict does happen, you can say you told everyone so.

 

[rgraham666]

well, let's focus on what is happening, instead of speculating about what might happen someday somewhere, okay?

If this scenario you predict does happen, you can say you told everyone so.

She always does.

 

[Belegon]

It's an extraordinary question. If Palin was a Dem and a Repub or a conservative asked the question the howls of outrage from the media and the political establishment would be deafening. I daresay that you would all be among the howlers, Selena, Subsarah, Mab, Bel, etc.

You wound me. I have already stated exactly what my opinion of the subject is. I have given an outcry... that I believe the question is outside of what should be considered. I have done so here, on twitter, on my blog, on MySpace. I have done so across party lines.

I resent greatly what you are implying and in this case I want an apology. I have defended this woman's rights to raise her own family and her credibility on this issue despite the fact that I see her in almost every way as a desperate and unsuitable choice for the office.

I will endeavor not to put words in your mouth. Don't put them in mine.

 

[cantdog]

Nice to know I'm not a 'Liberal Dem.'

This kind of shit is nobody's business. If you want to complain about Palin, do it on the record.

Her much-touted 'taking on of Big Oil' was a shakedown, only. It wasn't about defying Big Oil on its agenda. The woman supports drilling in the wildlife sanctuary, and she does that in a state where many citizens rely on the herd for some of their subsistence. She does that despite the fact that McCain does not. The oil companies have no beef with that.

She didn't take on Big Oil about alternative energy, either. She explicitly denies climate change even as the north shore of her state sinks into the sea. She sued the addition of the polar bears to the Endangered Species List. No, she only took on Big Oil to get a share of the windfall profits. She doesn't care, in any way, that they have them, so long as she gets a cut for the State. That's all it was about.

This choice makes Obama the only Green choice left standing.

Other portions of her record cry out to be addressed. The culture war aspects are getting some play. Abstinence, creationist nonsense, anti-choice, and so on-- that's what the Repugs put her on the ticket for. They cannot possibly make a respectable showing on issues, so they want to shift the debate firmly into fluff. Culture-war pseudo-issues are all they have left. But these things are certainly legit to talk about, as her reproductive status and her family are not. The Repugs talk about 'em. Her nomination was intended to drag the disaffected Christo-fascists back into the fold, and it has done that.

Finally, there are corruption issues, but she's barely been in office long enough to accrue much in that way. She has them, but they're nothing much.

 

[Belegon]

edited because I see that it was indeed noticed.

 

[Guest]

It's an extraordinary question. If Palin was a Dem and a Repub or a conservative asked the question the howls of outrage from the media and the political establishment would be deafening. I daresay that you would all be among the howlers, Selena, Subsarah, Mab, Bel, etc.

So after all these years how do you rationalize asking the question just at this moment and in this instance? You trot out the all purpose Straw Christian Conservative: "(Of course I would never suggest such a thing, but) in the Republican world, where women are supposed to stay home with the babies and not have children out of wedlock . . ."

I don't mean to pick on you, Selena - I suspect that you aren't explicitly aware of what you're doing here. It's happening everywhere in the media. It makes me think of the critical scene and line in the film A Time to Kill -"Now imagine she was white."

Let me remind everyone what the word for this is: Sexism. Put your lipstick away - it's still a pig.

Oh, and one more thing: You better be careful. It's really gone right over the top, and the result may be a massive backlash by the 60 percent of women who are neither hard left or hard right politically.

Oh, pish.

The first post I made was about how this question was never asked of men and how unfair it was. Isn't that what you're worried about? Don't put words in my mouth.

I remember when Bob Dole was running for office and Elizabeth was helping him on the campaign trail (while still in charge of the Red Cross) and how people had a fit that she shouldn't be able to do both. She had to take a leave of absence to silence the critics.

Women are held to a higher standard in business and in politics. That's how it is. It isn't right but many of us have adjusted to it and have learned to fight harder.

But I think you need to relax, Rox. One thing the Democrats are doing right now is being very quiet publicly about all of this crap. They are being sweet little angels. No need to open mouth and insert foot.

The press is doing all the scurrying and digging up of information, and the Republicans are doing all of the ass covering.

Unless you think they're going to access this thread and tout it as proof that the Democrats are just as hypocritical as the Republicans have been.

 

[jomar]

I'm not sure it is a fair question, but her nomination sure does hit our socialized gender roles and expectations smack in the face.

Maybe she's a crappy mom and the kids are better off with her being really busy. I've known women who are better moms at arms length. Just tossing it out there.

 

[MsSunshine]

Is it even a legitimate question, to ask the possible future VP, "How are you going to juggle being the vice president of the United States AND being the mother to five small children - one with special needs - and soon-to-be grandmother?"

We don't ask these questions of the men who run for office, right? Is it fair to ask her? Because in the Republican world, where women are supposed to stay home with the babies and not have children out of wedlock... this woman would seem anathema. But they're championing her.

And it brings the whole philosophical question up... what's best for the kids? What's more important? Can women "do it all?" Should they? And does the fact that this question keeps coming up since she was announced as the VP candidate indicate that we're still stuck in a misogynistic world where women are always going to be paid and valued less and judged simply because they're the ones biologically capable of having and nursing babies... or is it really a value we're overlooking?

Just pondering... would love to hear your thoughts...

Maybe we should have been asking the fathers this question all along too

 

[Belegon]

Maybe we should have been asking the fathers this question all along too

I, for one, would have absolutely no problem with that.

 

[shereads]

I'm a more inrested in what she stands for and what she planes to do to help get this country back on its feet.

Since her values are essentially those of George W. Bush and the evangelical right, I think it's safe to assume that her "plans" are similar to the ones that knocked the country off its feet.

deleted other stuff

 

[shereads]

Other portions of her record cry out to be addressed. The culture war aspects are getting some play. Abstinence, creationist nonsense, anti-choice, and so on-- that's what the Repugs put her on the ticket for. They cannot possibly make a respectable showing on issues, so they want to shift the debate firmly into fluff. Culture-war pseudo-issues are all they have left. But these things are certainly legit to talk about, as her reproductive status and her family are not. The Repugs talk about 'em. Her nomination was intended to drag the disaffected Christo-fascists back into the fold, and it has done that.

Thank you. That was succinct and cogent and other words that contain nice, chewy consonants.

 

[Guest]

Thank you. That was succinct and cogent and other words that contain nice, chewy consonants.

Suck what?

 

[Stella_Omega]

I'm not sure it is a fair question, but her nomination sure does hit our socialized gender roles and expectations smack in the face.
...

I don't agree. I have the feeling as I've said before, that McCain thought more about what he'd have for dinner that night, than which woman would make a good pick for VP.

So, no-- same old same old gender role there. Step up when called, and never forget your vagina is interchangeable with any other.

 

[sweetness6280]

I don't agree. I have the feeling as I've said before, that McCain thought more about what he'd have for dinner that night, than which woman would make a good pick for VP.

So, no-- same old same old gender role there. Step up when called, and never forget your vagina is interchangeable with any other.

Dammit, Stella.... are you gonna help me clean the sweet tea off my monitor?

 

[drksideofthemoon]

Is it even a legitimate question, to ask the possible future VP, "How are you going to juggle being the vice president of the United States AND being the mother to five small children - one with special needs - and soon-to-be grandmother?"

We don't ask these questions of the men who run for office, right? Is it fair to ask her? Because in the Republican world, where women are supposed to stay home with the babies and not have children out of wedlock... this woman would seem anathema. But they're championing her.

And it brings the whole philosophical question up... what's best for the kids? What's more important? Can women "do it all?" Should they? And does the fact that this question keeps coming up since she was announced as the VP candidate indicate that we're still stuck in a misogynistic world where women are always going to be paid and valued less and judged simply because they're the ones biologically capable of having and nursing babies... or is it really a value we're overlooking?

Just pondering... would love to hear your thoughts...

Should Sarah Palin stay home with the kiddies? Only if John McCain is out mowing the Whitehouse lawn.