"Just a Soccer Mom"

I had meant to write this post a couple of weeks ago, shortly after Sarah Palin was first announced as McCain's running mate. But I'm a mom myself, so . . . ;)

I want to say first and foremost that, like in years past, I am disappointed that there is no ideal Presidential candidate for me to endorse. It would be nice to get excited about somebody! So, I am not necessarily 100% pro-McCain/Palin ticket, but I do acknowledge that Obama's stances on some issues are not my cup of tea at all.

I wanted to write a post after listening to some of the call-in criticisms from Americans on CNN after Palin was announced. The repeating mantra was, "She's *just* a soccer mom. What does she know about being a Vice President?" Here are some of my thoughts:

• First of all, she's a hockey mom. Not a soccer mom. If we are going to discount her abilities solely based on her status of "mom", we should at least make sure we have the right description.
• Many callers also said, "Democrats are 'smarter' than that . . ." in reference to McCain's choice, implying he solely chose Palin to sway some Democratic women. So those in the country who may vote for McCain/Palin are dumb??? Maybe Palin has something to offer that people genuinely like.
• Multiple callers called McCain's move "desperate". I can see why they may say this, but at some point, another woman would have been nominated to the Presidency or Vice-Presidency. It's been over 20 years since Ferraro. I think people would have been calling a female move "desperate" whether it happened now or in the next 2-4 elections. I also think McCain could have picked Hillary Clinton herself and it would have been labeled "desperate" or "a ploy to sway voters". If people have already made up their minds about McCain, Palin is not going to change it. If they haven't, she may be a breath of fresh air.
• Palin is inexperienced . . . ummm, Obama doesn't have much more on his plate.
• She has been criticized for being a "pro-lifer" . . . and I am wondering why that is a "bad" thing. Aren't we all living, breathing human beings? Isn't life a good thing?
• There were comments that "McCain will set women back decades if elected." Come on now, isn't that a little extremist? I really do not believe women nationwide are going to be expected or legislated to, handing dads their slippers and a cold drink as soon as they walk in the door from work. I don't think our right to vote is going to be revoked. I don't think we are going to be kicked out of the work place and asked to "go home". He has a couple of daughters of his own, I don't think he is a woman-hater.
• One caller commented that Palin was "against abortion but says she stands for family values . . . so where are her 'family values'?" Okay . . . I don't follow this logic but since when does abortion = family values? I personally believe abortion has devastating effects on the whole family that creates long-lasting ripples physically, emotionally and mentally. I also personally believe that abortion creates increased aggression towards women in general. I think we as women are deluding ourselves if we think that separating ourselves and scoffing at our natural differences between men *is* progress. I don't think our differences limit us, but I do think they shouldn't be ignored.
• I take issue that people are discounting her solely b/c she is a mom. Since when is being a mother a detriment to our government? It may not qualify her, but it shouldn't discredit her. I get similar reactions, even from well-meaning friends. Not in regards to working in the government, but in regards to being a stay-at-home mom. People will ask me, "Is there anything *else* you are doing?" I understand their intentions, but asking questions like that implies that I am not DOING anything by being a mom. It is exactly this attitude that contributes to our culture's de-valuation of the family and mothers in particular. In my case, I actually am doing other things (i.e. Bradley classes, speech-language pathology on a PRN basis) but even if I weren't, my job as a mom should be able to stand alone and be respected. I promise you, we do NOT sit around watching soaps and eating bon-bons all day. ;)

I am not trying to sway anyone to vote for McCain/Palin, but I did want to point out some of the silly criticisms she first received. There are probably more valid ones out there (not the gossip that the media spreads) and those are the ones we should address. I also encourage people to take a more critical eye to Obama. He may not be the quite the savior everyone is hoping he will be. But then again, maybe he will surprise me hugely.

I think it is awesome that McCain has a female running mate. I think it is wonderful that she is a pro-life mom who walks the walk as well as talking the talk. I think Washington needs more mothers. As long as society views pregnant women as a burden . . . birthing women as something to be managed and controlled . . . breastfeeding mothers as obscene . . .we will never truly be valued and have no hope of being sincerely respected or appreciated. The more we struggle against our nature, the more misery we bring to ourselves.

Barack-o-mania

I admit to taking a vested interest in the election season this year, for the first time ever. I think in the past I tried to distance myself someone since the political scene is often depressing and in this year's case, more than a little scary.

I read Barack's book, The Audacity of Hope, last month, trying to give the man a fair shake. Can't say it impressed me much, and did very little good in regards to my pessimism for his potential presidency. I just finished a book called The Audacity of Deceit (after reading The Case Against Barack Obama a couple weeks ago) which changed my pessimism to alarm.

First off, let me express my condolences to our Democrat brethren across the land who have been stuck with such a unworthy candidate to vote for. The more they've learned about Barack since the primary, the more they've pined for Hillary, no doubt. I mean, this man is so vastly unqualified for the top office in the land that I've had a knot in my stomach for weeks just thinking about him being elected. And why his cult following refuses to analyze his credentials is beyond me . . . I guess just the words "hope" and "change" in the midst of his polished rhetoric are enough for them. Honestly, the only reason this guy has a shot is the displeasure with the last 4+ years of the Bush administration. If Bush had been even reasonably popular, the public would have squashed an Obama campaign right off the bat, citing his complete lack of . . . well, anything that might make him a viable candidate.

His political "resume":

--7 years in the Illinois State Senate, in which he voted "present" a staggering 130 times. This basically means that he was present for the vote, but decided not to vote yay or nay. Let's hear it for conviction! (A funny anecdote from one of the aforementioned books. During one of the votes, he was second in line. He voted "present", surprise, surprise, but felt pretty stupid when everyone else voted yay. It was unanimous except for him; he then petitioned to have his vote changed to yay. Bravo.)

--Less than a 150 days in the US Senate before declaring his run for the presidency. Wow, almost a whole six months.


Though his voting record is pretty meager (again, all the "present" votes aren't much to go on), it seems that Barack is pretty out of touch with the political views of his country at large. Barack is one of the most liberal members of Congress, running for president in a country that falls just right of center. Nearly all of his political views are in the minority of public opinion polls.

The most extreme (and disturbing) example: The Born-Alive Infants Protection Act. This bill was to provide medical treatment for those infants that survived a late-term abortion. It had nearly unanimous support, even by extreme pro-choice Senators such as Ted Kennedy and Barbara Boxer. Even NARAL didn't fight it. Barack opposed it. Hey, at least he had an opinion, albeit a jaw-dropping one.

So why is he getting a free pass? Why are no voting democrats taking a hard look at his political and social connections to terrorists, socialists, radical Christians, etc.? Why is no one calling him out on the fact that he's flip-flopped on a myriad of issues even since the primaries? When is the public going to rise up and say, "the emperor has no clothes!" I myself am terrified about where we might be as a country four years from now if he's allowed to take the helm.