about | contact | home

Weighing In on Women and Politics

Up until now, Seattle Woman hasn’t commented on political candidates, but with Senator John McCain’s choice of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate, it’s finally time for us to put in our two cents about gender and politics in the 2008 race to the White House.

We absolutely recognize the value of having women in high public office. In a democracy, it is essential that our elected officials reflect who we are as a nation. We need diversity in power; and we need women in high public office who understand the challenges of working moms (and dads!) because they live with those challenges, and who understand that equal pay for equal work matters not just for some women but for our society and economy as a whole.

For a democracy to work properly, we can’t just vote for women simply because they are women, and we certainly shouldn’t vote for candidates, male or female, based on sound bites and slogans, or whether we’d like to sit down for a beer with them. That level of political analysis gave us two terms of George Bush.

And in reading up on Sarah Palin, this is what bothers us the most: once again the presidential election may come down to how well the Republican spinmasters à la Karl Rove keep the focus off issues of substance and play to the emotions of undecided and, frankly, under-informed voters. Meanwhile, the Democrats stumble to direct attention back to abstractions like securing health insurance for all Americans.

In this sense, McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin was brilliant. She provides a clever distraction from significant issues and offers a treasure trove of opportunities to pull on emotional heartstrings. Some of her symbolic import is indisputable — she is a woman, and not only a working mother, but the mother of a complicated family with a special needs baby, a child heading off to the war in Iraq and another heading into teenage motherhood. She certainly does come from a small town, and she has absolutely risen from obscurity through her own tenacious grit. Other images being presented, however, are dubious, if not outright false: that she’s a “fiscal conservative” (not only did she support that nowhere bridge but kept the money for it when it was no longer a tenable project), or that she’s a “change agent” (not when it comes to her support for the Bush Administration’s ban on stem cell research, opposition to reproductive freedom, denial of global warming and failed foreign policy approach).

Okay, we’re biased and probably old-fashioned. We believe in voting for candidates based on their policies, experience and judgment and not on whether they are regular PTA-card carrying moms like us. The current frenzy in the media to figure out Sarah Palin is appropriate given how little was known about her when she was selected.

But the focus should also be on McCain and his judgment for picking an unqualified vice presidential candidate. Although it works powerfully on the symbolic level for certain audiences, her nomination shows a cynical and irresponsible disregard for the demands and complexities of the presidency, especially in light of McCain’s age and four bouts with cancer. It is neither sexist nor chauvinistic to point out that Sarah Palin is not ready to step into the presidency if need be. If you have any doubts, read up on her record and her parochial style of leadership in Alaska.

We believe that McCain should be held accountable in the voting booth, not only for this poor choice of a vice president, but for his campaign ads that distort Obama’s record, broadcast false information and direct attention away from real issues. Dishonesty, disingenuousness and poor judgment are not traits we can afford to have in the White House for another four to eight years.

Marianne Scholl
Karen Reed-Matthee
Nancy Silk
Sue Ellingson

To monitor what’s true and not true in the presidential election, visit the nonpartisan www.factcheck.org.

©October 2008 Caliope Publishing Company