The Palin Seminar on Moderate Women

American Thinker ^ | May 29, 2009 | Christopher Chantrill

[neverdem]

Sarah Palin's speech to the folks at Vanderburgh County Right to Life last month didn't seem to get on the national political radar.  But if you get a chance to review the YouTube video, it's worth it.

Governor Palin (R-AK) may have been giving a speech to  conservative pro-lifers in Evansville, Indiana, on April 16, 2009, but the speech was an arrow aimed right over the heads of the conservatives present towards the hearts of moderate women voters everywhere.

And that, if you ask me, is the future of conservatism.

Palin's first big theme that night was "gifting."  You men all know how important gifting is to women.  If you don't then stop home at the store on the way home tonight and buy her a bunch of flowers, because you are already behind the 8-ball.

Palin told her audience that it was the gifts that persuaded her to come to Evansville.  First it was the chocolates on her birthday.  Then it was the donuts and the pastries.  Finally, it was the hockey stick from the Evansville Youth Hockey Association.  And try to guess husband Todd's favorite movie?   Of course, it's Hoosiers.

Then there was Palin's home-state boosterism, her "teacher" theme.  With a disarming reference to her school-teacher parents she reeled of a host of facts about Alaska to her Hoosier hosts.  I hadn't really thought about it before, but women do participate, as enthusiastically as George F. Babbitt, in the boosting of their homes, their hometown, and their home state.   Home is where the heart it.

Finally, when Palin got down to the pro-life part of her speech, she explained her beliefs using a "dilemma" theme.  Conservative men have principles.  Liberal women have issues.  But moderate women have dilemmas.

Palin talked about finding out she was pregnant in her forties, about finding out that her baby had that extra chromosome.  She talked about the love that flooded her when she finally had Trig in her arms.  Disarmingly, she spoke about how she thought, for a fleeting moment, about getting rid of her little problem when she out of town.  Nobody would know.

Fortunately, our liberal friends didn't publicize the speech.  So the MSM missed the chance to tell moderate women what to think about it.  And unless moderate women are carefully taught, they'll receive the speech, and the ones that come after, as a conversation over coffee.

They will get to appreciate the moment when Palin mentions how they are criticizing her for leaving Alaska to come talk to the folks in Indiana.  They will get to hear about a couple of disastrous sit-down interviews.   Women are good at this faux self-deprecation-when they mean, between the lines, how dare they!

Some of you alert readers may recall that I called for a woman-centered conservatism in 2007 here, in 2008 here, and this year here. 

There's no rocket science about the need for a woman-centered conservatism.  It stares at you out of the numbers over at usgovernmentspending.com.  Our rulers are spending about a trillion dollars a year on health care, a trillion dollars a year on education, and half a trillion dollars a year on welfare.  Health care, education, and welfare are things that women care about. 

But there's a problem, a problem that, in a world without an MSM, would have women up in arms.  The trillions of dollars are not being spent in sensitive, compassionate ways that respond directly to the needs of mothers and adult daughters.  Instead, it is spent in rigid, compulsory, government programs devised by experts and administered by workers with lifetime tenure.

You may have noticed that the purpose of this administrative system is not to help people.  It is to reward its servitors.  That is how a vertical system of social organization is supposed to work, whether it is a feudal system, a political machine, or a welfare state.

If conservative are ever to break the back of the welfare state, and introduce a horizontal and sociable society in place of the cruel and rigid liberal administrative state, then our task is clear.  We have to persuade moderate women that the present setup does a terrible job of helping them care for their children, their mothers, and themselves.

It shouldn't be that hard.  After all, the current system does do a terrible job of caring for people.  It puts the children that women care for in custodial institutions for most of their childhood.  Its assault on marriage subjects adult women to frightening insecurities when they need security most during their child-raising years.  And it puts the aging mothers that loving daughters worry about in custodial institutions.

But every message needs a messenger.  The question confronting conservatives is: who is to be our messenger?

Who will talk to moderate women and talk their language? 

How about a woman with executive experience who knows all about "gifting" and "dilemmas" and can fearlessly skipper a fishing dory right through the surf up onto the beach?

Christopher Chantrill is a frequent contributor to American Thinker. See his roadtothemiddleclass.com and usgovernmentspending.com.  His Road to the Middle Class is forthcoming.

[Cindy]

ON THE INTERNET:

Video: "Gov. Palin's Right to Life Speech - Part 1 of 7" (April 16, 2009)

Video: "Gov. Palin's Right to Life Speech - Part 2 of 7" (April 16, 2009)

Video: "Gov. Palin's Right to Life Speech - Part 3 of 7" (April 16, 2009)

Video: "Gov. Palin's Right to Life Speech - Part 4 of 7" (April 16, 2009)

Video: "Gov. Palin's Right to Life Speech - Part 5 of 7" (April 16, 2009)

Video: "Gov. Palin's Right to Life Speech - Part 6 of 7" (April 16, 2009)

Video: "Gov. Palin's Right to Life Speech - Part 7 of 7" (April 16, 2009)

[Darkwolf377]

We have to persuade moderate women that the present setup does a terrible job of helping them care for their children, their mothers, and themselves.

The problem is, though, is that some conservatives want to teach people that "the system" isn't there to solve all our woes, while some "conservatives" want to teach that they can come up with a better governmental system for solving all our woes.

The difference is that the conservative idea is going to be very, very hard to get across now that the government has spent decades "giving" things to people, and now even conservatives still want them because their taxes were paid into these programs.

The RINO, or "conservative" idea of making a BETTER system that takes our tax money and runs our lives in order to beat the democrats makes zero sense in terms of political philosophy. Most of the Republicans in DC seem to just want to deliver a liberal government but not let the liberals do it--so what's the difference?

[wastoute]

bump

[Westbrook]

Sarah is the real thing.

Too bad Satan and his legions in the MSM and the DemonRAT party have done so much damage to her.

The MSM and DemonRAT attack was analagous to the WWII era Soviet Army’s Scorched Earth policy.

It remains to be seen whether that damage is unsurmountable, but it was pretty extensive.

[Yo-Yo]

I do believe that Sarah Palin needs to be added to the Michelle Malkin and Ann Coulter list of Da Rulz!

[longtermmemmory]

Then we control what is defined to be moderate:

DEFINED MODERATE SHALL MEAN:

Moderate means you support the second amendment as an individual right

Moderate means marriage is one man and one woman

Moderate means all children have one mother and one father

Moderate means government is the problem

Moderate means government is a necessary evil and will be treated as such

Moderate means there is a seperation of powers

Moderate means freedom OF religion not freedom from religion

Moderate means Americanism is good

Moderate means socialist is rejected

Moderate means our society is better than other societies

Moderate means children are part of marriage NOT mere legal accessories

By defining moderate to mean the view the majority of the USA holds, we can shut down this RINO nonsense and balkanize them in the same black hole as other democrats.

[longtermmemmory]

Moderate women have dilemas?

IOW poor planing on their part constitutes a reason to raid our taxpayer wallets?

is Palin serious?

NEXT!

[euram]

“It remains to be seen whether that damage is unsurmountable, but it was pretty extensive.”

The last Rasmussen Poll concerning Palin was taken at the end of January, it found that 52 percent have a favorable opinion of her, including 61 percent of independent voters. Her poll numbers in Alaska remain about 60-63 percent. Palin’s Evansville speech, her defense of Carrie Prejean, her comments regaring 0bama’s appearance at Notre Dame, her speaking out against 0bama’s cuts in missile defense, her appearance on American Chopper, her lengthy interview with Christian Living magazine, and Franklin Graham’s featuring her on his fundraising literature, and the good job she is doing in Alaska have all helped her tremendously. You can also add very positive write-ups regarding Todd Palin appearing in Esquire, Men’s Journal, Sports Illustrated, and even The New Yorker, have also helped. Even the fact that Bristol handled herself well during several interviews and was featured on the cover of People magazine and given favorable coverage, has also helped. Let’s not forget her book deal, which generated widespread coverage and comment.

[newfreep]

Palin-Bolton 2012!

[Westbrook]

> Her poll numbers in Alaska remain about 60-63 percent

They used to be about 85%, if I remember correctly.

> Even the fact that Bristol handled herself well during
> several interviews

I could be wrong, by my impression of at least one of those Bristol interviews is that she implied that teaching abstinence doesn’t work. With that kind of logic, we may as well teach children “safe” drug use and “safe” drink driving.

[euram]

Yes, her rating in Alaska was much higher prior to the election, primarily because democrats also favored her. Since she was the VP nominee, the dems in Alaska started taking their marching order from 0bama. The last poll I saw showed that as of now, she’s unbeatable if she choses to run for reelection.

Admittedly, Bristol’s very first interview back in February didn’t go that well, but her appearances earlier this month went very well, and for the most part, received favorable press. I’d say she has done very well, for an 18 year old kid who has been under tremendous strain for the better part of a year. She’ll only get better here on out.

[neverdem]

Cindy, thanks for all the links of Gov. Palin's speech!

Forget Whether She Qualifies as a "Racist." Would Judge Sotomayor Qualifiy as a Juror?

Sotomayor Hostile to Gun Rights, Scholar Says SCOTUS will hear Maloney v. Cuomo on June 26.

Statement From Chris W. Cox, Executive Director NRA - Institute for Legislative Action On Governor Bredesen’s Veto Of House Bill 962

The secret fuel that made the Spitfire supreme

Some noteworthy articles about politics, foreign or military affairs, IMHO, FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.

[Gene Eric]

>> Palin-Bolton 2012!

That’s a great ticket regardless of order.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[EternalVigilance]

I hated almost everything about that speech.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks neverdem.