America's going to hell in a handbag.
I guess I sound negative but I'm so completely dumbfounded and disgusted by the latest turn of events in the presidential race that my fingers lack the happiness to type.
Plainly speaking: Palin.
Wouldn't it be nice if we lived in a day in age when credentials qualified one for the job of next-in-line to the Oval Office rather than the vomit of one too many a political think-tank?
Oh no, that would not be sexy. Nope. Because we all know that the political science/ history professor at the local state commuter college is not as hot as the breast pumping Governor of Alaska.
Yikes. I'm sorry, I heard she actually breast fed in the office -- how crazy! How wholesome! How motherly (for 5 minutes).
Do I sound intolerant? Archaic? Crazy and wickedly medieval to not be happy with the so-called "conservative" woman picked to be McCain's running mate? Guilty. So tolerate me in my dissent and I'll tolerate you in your idiocy. Sounds fair.
If I sound ruffled it's only because I've been on a handful of "Catholic" sites where woman are rallying behind Palin. I can only gander they're cheerful for a handful of reasons:
1. Radical feminism is the norm in our culture and anyone who says 'boo' to it gets roasted at the stake. So even the girls who give up their BA's and MBA's for their babies feel obliged to do a constant "this works for me and not for you / and not for you but for me / and not for you but for me" song and dance until every last child is registered for Head Start.
2. They're plain stupid and buy the lie that someone can be a good mother even if they are not ever physically present; I'm sorry but I want my Governor or VP to be putting in at least a good 60 -- 80 hours a week -- heck if my podiatrist husband has to, shouldn't my flippin' politicians?!!
3. They like to see the glossy photo's of Mrs. Fancy Pants having her cake and eating it too when really she has no cake at all because it's sitting on the counter in her Alaskan chateau being iced by her housekeeper.
Got it, McCain?! So don't try to buy my vote with the "Mother" card. Mothers wipe noses and butts and pour juice and are there to hear how your day was the second you walk in and drop your book bag on the table. Sure there are some women who manage to do so while holding certain types of jobs -- like running part time hot dog stands or selling awful, evil direct sales products but the second a mom begins to rack up the hours away from her youngin's, she becomes less and less "mom" and more and more "(Fill in the blank)" and unless you're radically blessed with days comprised with more than the typically allotted 24 hours, I've got 4 words for you:
I Don't Buy It.
So that's the main reason I'm disgusted with Palin: A mother of 5 young children has no place taking such an active role in politics. period (like I said, tolerate me in my dissent, all you promoters of "tolerance.") The other two reasons are a bit more obvious: Inexperience and Alaska.
Inexperience: At 44, Palin's only been on the political scene for 8 years. She has more experience as a beauty queen than as a Governor and, heaven forbid, a Vice President and, heaven forbid, a President.
And Alaska: She's from Alaska. I know, technically, that's in America but come on? Don't they have caribou up there? Couldn't McCain have picked someone who's rubbed elbows a bit more with main stream America?
Politics Schmolitics Bo Bolitics. I'll still take McCain over Nobama but only because I have to.
Excuse me now while I sit on my porch and pen anthems to Ron Paul, dreaming of what could have been.
Photo courtesy of Cranky Dude
15 comments:
Sarah,
You need some adult conversation. This is clearly a one-woman cat fight. Are you drinking enough coffee, hon? Cause that works wonders even while breastfeeding.
Tiffani,
Here's the website that inspired my post:
http://www.faithandfamilylive.com/blog/the_politics_of_motherhood
It has 99 comments discussing whether Palin has any place in politics. So no, this is not a one-woman cat fight -- lots of cats are fighting.
I have plenty of coffee but am always in need of more adult conversation; I'm calling you right now!
Sarah
Sarah: Found you though Faith and Family...I certainly understand your point of view, but is does sound like the same view many SAHM had/have of us moms who work outside the home. Is VP more taxing than my job, or most other working-moms' jobs, probably; however, I'm not Mrs. Palin. Each of us lives in our own reality. Each of us is equipped to handle different levels of stress, busyness, etc. Parenthood should be Mom and Dad taking care of the kids together. Each role has its own special place, but one is not superior to the other. It was not too long ago I was pumping breast milk and sending it with my daughter to my sister's as I went to work. It would have been nice to be able to have her Dad take care of her and feed her while I was at work, as Mr. Palin will be able.
Debbie,
Thanks for stopping by.
FYI: Mr. Palin works full time in the oil business; he brought in 90K last year; you don't do that while serving up bottles. Once again, I don't buy it.
Like I alluded to on my blog, many many people hold your view on the role of the wife and mom nowadays which is that it's fine for her to work out of the home well over full time and still be considered a good mother.
I completely disagree and find it laughable that motherhood is treated unlike any other job in this sense. Would a plumber be a plumber if he spent none of his day with pipes? How about a non-car-handling mechanic? Or a Pediatrition who had no office hours (she'd be considered non-practicing).
If this needs to be explained than America is going to hell in a handbag but then again I already said that. Like I said, tolerate me in my dissent.
Furthermore, Palin's neglect of her children is only one reason I strongly disagree with her becoming VP but it seems to be the most popular on this blog and others.
Be well and thanks for the comments.
Sarah,
Each woman is different even if you imply that all women must live the same in order to be effective and loving mothers. Just because some women at Faith and Family Live insist that they have a 4 month old and they cannot imagine taking their 4 month old to the office (which Palin does every day), so what? Some mothers cannot even change their playdates without a two month lead time because they are so completely neurotic about giving their children their undivided attention and the perfect stringent amount of structure. That is completely as unhealthy as neglect. But very few stay-at-home mothers would argue for letting kids learn how to survive without them every now and again.
But sometimes, as with Biblical figures, God personally calls women to make a public difference - as a mother - in their own communities. Eighty percent of our own Church is propelled by mothers. If women with children were not so completely active in the Catholic Church - outside their home and not always with children in tow - then there would be no Catholic Church in America. Priests for Life, Right to Life, would never function without those many women who leave their children in the nursery to volunteer on the abortion rescue hotlines.
If women were not assisting unregistered voters at The League of Women Voters, most of America would not vote. They register men, women, new citizens. They register more voters than anyone in the US.
If women, mothers with small children, did not serve several days a week at hospitals, there would be virtually no nurses to care for the many health needs of our society and world. You would have to deal with all men, all the time, and their tendency to lack the attention to detail and compassion the way mothers (the majority of nurses) do NOT. It is a rediculous argument that all women with small children should never leave the home except for a couple of volunteer hours a week. Some women must work or they loose their children to foster homes, because they cannot care for them. If you cannot provide for your children, the US government will find someone who can. Sometimes, this task falls solely on women - even women with husbands, even women with small children.
Without working women, there would be no economy in the US, virtually no Ron Paul volunteers. He was thrust into the Internet world, into the public forum, mostly and one could argue, almost exclusively by women who walked out of their homes while children were at school or with grandma, to hold picket signs, plaster RON PAUL! underneath Philadelphia bridges during rush hour and to call me every waking hour of the day to demand that I must have a small IQ if I cannot immediately see his insane genius.
Without working women, there would be such a hole in our American society that we surely would have lost our "Let's Play Fair NOW!" attitude way back when Lincoln got shot by a group of men.
It's a silly argument, Sarah. It's impossible too.
Go PALIN! She's my new inspiration! I am wearing the button while my daughter and I stay up late to cheer her on tonight.
Tiffani-
Yikes. That was a really long comment for what you call a one woman cat fight.
Since you jumped in my rink, I've got one word for you: MEOW!
We disagree, so deal.
If you need someone to agree with you, go to another blog. But I stand by my orginal argument that a woman cannot effectively mother if she is never physically present in her children's lives.
Of course I know mothers who spend sometime outside the home working but who in my opinion are still happy and healthy and their children are as well.
There is a huge difference between those mothers and what I want in my VP. I want a VP who's a workaholic, who can make every evening event with sparkle. But I'd say a Christian mother with a Down's Syndrome baby and a pregnant 17 year old daughter should spend more evenings at home than wining and dining with heads of state. As is Palin's situation.
I never said mothers need to check out of the world and nor do I think that. I simply believe that the second a mother is not a very strong, physical and emotional presence in her child's life she is no longer a good mother.
To be honest, this feels like a fight but I don't get why you'd be outraged at my opinion. From what I gather of you, you work part time so you can be with your kids. It seems like you must hold a similar view to my own.
Also, like I said to Debbie, Palin shirking motherhood is only one reason I think she's the wrong pick for the job.
Thanks for the comments. However, I can't help but wonder if you and I are better friends in real space and time rather than on the Web. I'm fine with both for now but the second my views frustrate you too much, just spend time with me at the park rather than the blog as I am far more picky with my words in person.
For now, thanks for the comments.
Sarah,
Your assumption that she is "never" with her kids or that she is bad mother because she has five kids and a child with downs syndrome and works, is what is offensive. VP's don't need, or get to be, workaholics. It is just not in the job description. Not possible. It is much less than being a govenor.
When you attacked her for a neglect that you know nothing about, that was very rude.
I still call your fight a one woman cat fight, because most women love her - except some far left wing liberals.
Your attack was very mean. This was the reason for my direct response. I could careless if you question her experience, policies, etc...Go ahead. That's politics, but to say some of the things you said was bafflingly mean.
And you know it.
My response was long because I am a writer. Got lots of talking points, but if it upsets you so much that I disagree with you, then I will keep all my political thought at my own blog.
Oh, and because I was interrupted by my hungry dog and could not say this before...
I so very much do not need you to agree with me, dear. Feel free to shake your fist high in the air. But you made your argument public, so I publically responded with my disagreement.
Tiffani,
You make a lot of points.
Am I judging Palin? Absolutely. Isn't that what we're called to do when we're asked by our country to cast a vote. ["not you, but you ..." judgement on every level is certainly required].
And my vote is not one that has found a home on the "what works for you works for you/ what works for me works for me / the reality of each family is different" bandwagon.
The reason is that I've worked beside career women in the office and at the playground and I've never found them to be good mothers or good workers. They're stretched so thin that they make both the boss and the family miserable.
I have chosen to take a view of motherhood that gladly dissents from what is politically acceptable: Catholic tradition and nature shows us that in the normative instance, the mother is meant to be the primary caretaker of the child, especially in the infant years. Like I said, in the normative instance. Obviously, where their is TRUE necessity (not just a woman climbing a career ladder), a child must be cared for by one other than the mother.
If you disagree with this, fine. If you think it's impossible, fine. I don't. I tolerate you in your opinion. Tolerate me.
I stand by my original claim: a woman with 5 kids, one being a Down's Syndrome baby is not who I want for my VP or my President. Your earlier comment seemed to infer that by me holding this stance, I would also believe that women have no place in public roles. That's not true; I just simply see a huge difference between a woman with a young family vs a woman with no family at all vs a woman with grown kids.
As far as a "mean" tone, I agree. I'm furious and mad and mean because I could think of a zillion people better cut out to be VP.
Sarah
Oh how I do love a good cat-fight every now and again.
Palin used to speak well of Ron Paul, I'm sure McInsane's people will put and end to that.
I do have one problem with your post - don't diss the caribou...they are yummy...
Before I move onto a new post, let me thank you all for sharing my brief political moment.
Especially, thanks to Tiffani who has agreed to a park playdate next week.
Tiffani and I had some really sweet emails where we reassured one another that while we can disagree, we can still be friends.
How beautiful. In a day where it seems the culture is anti-intellectual, I really appreciate a friend who will hash out tough issues with me. God bless you, Tiff.
I won't have many more political posts as they are not my thing.
I will show up to vote but only reluctantly as I'm disgusted with both choices but do find one less revolting than the other.
Politicians will never save the world anyway. Prayer and embracing the call of Christianity personally is the only way; to be a "Christ bearer" to the broken in one's daily walk is so much more effective than bobbing along with the bobbing heads.
Bob bob bob
Sarah,
Thanks for the comments. It's true - I like discussions with you. Often times, we agree, but sometimes, we certainly do not:) Absolutely no hard feelings here. I love reading your posts, political or otherwise, and I sure hope you don't stop giving your opinion. It is valued and respected greatly - at least by me:)
Just one more thing...I did not say that I thought it was a great idea for mothers to climb the corporate ladder in lieu of actually being at home with their kids. However, I too, have known and worked alongside a lot of working moms. The numbers of them who are good at mothering are the same as those who are home all the time. I have known working mothers who have accomplished much at work and much at home, and their children have not suffered as many have said they would. Part of it depends on the work and the situation at home. Teachers can work fulltime while their kids are in school. Nurses can work fulltime but only three long shifts a week.
Also, I have known plenty of stay-at-home moms who should have gone back to work and let grandma or someone nicer and more compassionate care for their children. I've known kids who have been neglected 24 hours a day in the very presence of their non-working mothers, and I have known just as many who have suffered because their mothers chose to work. I seen drug addicts and runaways in stay-at-home/homeschooling families and in work-all-the-time families as well.
Sometimes, mothers are not nuturing. They are selfish and lazy and they are home because they don't want to work, or they have no skills to work outside the home. And their mothering skills can sometimes be completely nonexistent. And sometimes they are home because they truly and very much love their children and do not want to miss a moment of their years growing up. Working moms have healthy, well-adjusted children as well.
Whether we like it or not, not all gloves fit every family, and thank God, at least, God understands this. Perhaps, Sarah Palin is one of those rare, better than you or me, individuals who can work and nurture her children most effectively without doing exclusively one all the time. She does have a husband who stays at home with the kids fulltime except for a few short weeks a year. During those times, Gov. Palin is home with them. I am certain that if she retains the White House with McCain, dad can quit his job on Alaskas North Slope.
yikes! I meant "I HAVE seen!" Forgive the poor grammar.
I have been on vacation for a week with no cpu and am just catching up on the Sarah Palin thing.You put this eloquently, hilariously well. I totally agree with you. Hang in there!
I just got this email from woman in Colorado and I couldn't resist posting her insight about "a rose by any onther name"
Kim wrote:
"A friend sent me your blog post on Palin. I wanted to just holler my
"You go girl!" I swear the (Catholic/hmsc/SAHM) women I know have
lost their ever-lasting minds. The whole position requires far more
mental gymnastics than I am capable of. I whole heartedly agree with
every word you said. Yours is rare voice of sanity in this crazy
discourse that is nothing but feminism being redefined as Christian.
Sorry, but "a rose by any other name...." I told a friend it's been
like being stuck in an Enjoli commercial."
Thanks Kim.
Kim
starryskyranch.typepad.com
Post a Comment