Posted on 10/05/2009 9:33:15 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Obama garnered 56 percent of women’s ballots last fall. And they have precious little to show for it from this administration. Amy Siskind on why Sarah Palin deserves a second look.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As the Senate Finance Committee moves to pass health-care legislation this week, reproductive rights has been all but sidelined as an issue by the Obama administration. Should we therefore be surprised by a stunning Pew Research Center poll last week which revealed that 42 percent of Americans don't know that Obama is pro-choice? Maybe it’s time that women gave Sarah Palin another look. Palin, back in the headlines for rushing out a new book ahead of schedule this fall, is fresh, open-minded, a centrist and a party noncomformist. Hey, sisters in women's advocacy: Let's end the decades-long cold war with Republican women candidates. If we want progress to be made on issues of importance to women, our organizations need to master a skill at which men have always been adept: negotiation.
I am a lifelong Democrat who for the first time in my life voted Republican in the 2008 elections. I did this for one reason: McCain selected a woman as his running mate. For this act, I was accused of having lost part of my mental faculty: Some circa Victorian act of "voting with my uterus." Strange, that. The Democratic women were corralled to vote for Obama in 2008 because of one issue: reproductive rights. In other words, as my friend Cynthia Ruccia observed, "voting with their uterus."
Sadly, for women, things haven’t panned out all that well with this administration. Despite receiving 56 percent of women's votes, President Obama's record on women's issues thus far is sparse, and suggests something that he either has a tone-deaf nature—or, if you’re inclined to a more sinister view, that he may be uncomfortable with women.
He surely hasn't surrounded himself with many. Of his 24 Cabinet picks, only six were women. Perhaps even more telling are President Obama's czar picks, which do not require Senate confirmation. Of the 35-40 picks he’s made to date, only three have been women. That’s less than 10 percent.
There were harbingers of the Pew poll results—starting on Day One with Rick Warren, Obama’s choice to deliver his inaugural invocation. There was also the selection of Alexia Kelley, founder of Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good to a major Department of Health and Human Services post. And there’s what Obama didn’t say in his health-care speech.
Also ignored in the health-care bills circulating are important women's issues such as gender-based pricing and domestic violence as a pre-existing condition. The advocate for these issues could have been Valerie Jarrett, who chairs the White House Council on Women and Girls. When President Obama selected Jarrett in March, I wrote an op-ed for The Daily Beast in which I argued that we should give Jarrett a chance, even though she has a scant record on women's issues. I received a lot of critical emails and blog traffic; mea culpa, my critics were right and I was wrong. Shortly after her selection, Jarrett took leave to focus on Chicago hosting the 2016 Olympics.
Indeed, since the glorious day on which President Obama signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act back in January (which was ushered through the Senate and House by women before it reached his desk), I'm hard-pressed to come up with much other action he’s undertaken to benefit women. Other than hosting the NCAA Champion U-Conn. women's basketball team at the White House.
Here's the difference: Sarah Palin played women's basketball. That's how she got the nickname "Sarah Barracuda." And she’s had to maintain that same toughness and sensibility as she entered the world of politics—which is, after all, no less a contact sport.
For as we see time and time again, there is a double standard. A 2008 Brown University details the role that gender bias and sexism play for women in politics. Recall the initial objections to Sonia Sotomayor—that she was not bright enough to serve on the Supreme Court, where she begins service as an associate justice Monday. Recall that Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley, the leading contender in the race to replace the late Edward M. Kennedy in the Senate, has had to endure questioning about her merit. And remember that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was accused of becoming a presidential candidate only because of her husband's affair.
Here's what we know: Sarah Palin did not have a governor's seat handed down to her, she earned it. She understands what it is to be a woman having to fight obstacles—some overt and others subtle—that only a woman can understand.
I know I'll hear from critics who claim that Palin would not share my policy views. But what makes them so sure? As governor of Alaska, didn't Sarah Palin appoint Justice Morgan Christen, who is pro-choice and a former board member of Planned Parenthood, to become Alaska's second female Supreme Court justice? Granted, it’s only 2009, and we are three years away from the next presidential election. But doesn’t that give us ample time to open a dialogue and explain why women's issues are so important to our country's future?
Secretary of State Clinton has become a beacon of hope for women around the world in reducing violence against women and girls. Why couldn't Palin do the same for women in the U.S.? After all, don't the vast majority of women's issues impact all women, regardless of political party?
As president of The New Agenda, I'll be the first to raise my hand, and ask Palin to address two important issues: First, what will you do to increase representation of women in government: starting with your own administration if elected? And second, what concrete steps would you take to reduce violence against women and escalating teen dating violence?
Let the negotiations over the 2012 campaign—and the battle for women’s loyalties—begin!
-- Amy Siskind is the president and co-founder of The New Agenda, an organization dedicated to improving the lives of women and girls. Ms. Siskind has appeared on CNN, Fox, and PBS. Ms. Siskind also writes for HuffPo and MORE.
I bet you a buck she is not thinking of running 2012. Meanwhile 2012 is a long time away in elections.
I have a hunch satisfying Ms. Siskind’s shopping list would probably cost Sarah Palin a good bit of her conservative support - and a good many of her principles.
First, what will you do to increase representation of women in government: starting with your own administration if elected? And second, what concrete steps would you take to reduce violence against women and escalating teen dating violence?
1. Ms. Suskind is going to be very disapointed when Sarah chooses the best person for the job, irregardless of gender.
2. Sarah’s love of hunting will provide new game.
But since Ms. Suskind is a liberal those options are out so I guess she had better get back into the harem before the Shiek Obama finds out she left the palace.
I don't support Sarah, because she is a woman. I support her because she shares my concerns, my values, and has what I believe are the right ideas for bringing this country back to its senses with regards to spending, taxes, and National Security.
There are at least 100 conservative women who are more qualified, and about 10M more intelligent.
You can bet that the old guard “feminists” are sweating bullets about now. They know that well over half of those who will be reading Going Rogue will be women. Going Rogue may just generate a rogue wave that will sink their wheezing out ship.
The same goes for the likes of Schmidt, Murphy, and all the other GOP beltway types.
Dick Morris was trashing Palin the other day, saying she’s unelectable because she resigned as governor. I think there’s a little book sales envy at play there.
Before a woman of any political stripe can be elected president, both liberal and conservative women will have to start attacking rampant sexism on the part of primarily PROGRESSIVE pundits. I was reading several progressive commenters on blog sites in the last few days which kept referring to Palin as a “bimbo-ditz” and much worse. What gives? I do no more than disagree with Obama’s prescription for America’s health care system and I’m a racist? And yet NOW and other organization remain silent while mysogenist progressive bloggers attack Palin in the most sexist terms. This is an amazingly obvious double standard.
"Escalating teen dating violence" would certainly make my list of the top two or three issues President Palin should concern herself with. Never mind the recession, two wars, and the Iranian nuclear threat. /s
She's a beacon - except of course for those women and girls who have actual violence committed against them - e.g. unborn women, and Muslim women and girls.
Instead, Clinton is a beacon of hope for victims of that highly specialized kind of 'violence' that offends Feminists - such as "not having a diverse workplace" and laws against abortion.
(A) Quayle was well known when he ran - did not seem to help him much (to be fair Dole was probably equally well known). Name recognition is not too important in Iowa and NH - it is your organization on the ground that determines who wins.
(B) Has Palin announced she’s running? At this announcements are a premature. That being said I would have to agree with you as I don’t think there are any other conservative women who plan to run.
Can you name one?
Well-said. Uterus or not,conservatism is vital to keep our Republic.Sarah is Ronnie is Sarah.We really need to make a concerted effort to put gender (sex) aside and think VALUES and COUNTRY-or else we all feel the sting of socialism-and it doesn’t care what sex,creed,color,etc.you are.
Somewhat misleading to say 56% of women. McCain did get 53% of white women, about the same as the 55% Bush got in 2004 under far, far better circumstances for the GOP. and 5 pts higher than the 48% Bush got in 2000.
And that was with her as VP. As P I suspect she’d do even a few pts better simply for being P instead of VP, let alone any other potential things that may happen to increase the share of the vote.
In fact, that 53% of white women is the same amount Obama got overall which they keep telling us was some huge, landslide victory.
The oveall female numbers were skewed by his 100% of the vote among black women and a likely similar high number among hispanics. Add in the fact that the white vote overall is shrinking and there you have it.
Plenty of women gave her a first look and I suspect plenty more will give her a second one.
This article is only 11 months late.
I suspect Sarah will promise in return.
Promise to appoint the best conservative for the job, regardless of sex.
ROTFL!! Ain’t that the truth!
Question: How could Sarah sexually torture Dick Morris?
Answer: By wearing thongs-on her feet!!
CODE.
Identifies Amy as a man hating Femanazi.
Lefty Amy could control this by controlling her own America hating lefty rap "music" "artists".
Outsource 'em to a Chinese prison, they know how to deal with 'em.
Also go to The Daily Beast and read Elaine Lafferty’s article on October 27, 2008 Sarah Palin’s a Brainiac.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2008-10-27/sarah-palins-a-brainiac/1/
Most tea party organizers were women. Women, and in particular mothers, are fast becoming a new political force to be reckoned with. Just ask Glenn Beck. These women are concerned about the future of this country, because they are mothers. They will be looking for an outside the beltway mother who shares their concerns come 2012. These women are anything but ditsy and they are making things happen. I wouldn't get in their way if I were you.
....And while I never had children myself, I have two grand neices, one who studying to be nurse. Plus I have been to a few tea parties and the best supporters are the women!
Your remark about Mrs P's intelligence was flippant, false, and naïve.
We will see, we need to hear a lot more from her than an approximately 3 month campaign. Press did a job on her. With that said she would be better than Obama, but I don’t know if she can beat him how sad.
A very troll-like post. Of course, liberals love intelligent people, because they are so open-minded, but they don't care for smart people. And the only evidence about Sarah Palin's intelligence is what we get from the media, that she is dumb, stupid, can't form a coherent sentence. Never mind that the evidence of my eyes and ears paints a different picture than the official MSM version.
Yes I know anyone who is the slightest bit critical of Saint Sarah is considered a troll on FR.
I actually gave her the benefit of the doubt (and then some) when her nomination was first announced. But she has pretty much blown every opportunity. It is not enough to talk the talk and walk the walk to be POTUS. You need to have ability to grasp and articulate your views on complex policy issues. Reagan was not a genius either but he had no problems understanding the issues and communicating his views. And he wasn’t a quitter, even when the going got tough.
your comment wasn't slight...
at least 100 conservative women who are more qualified, and about 10M more intelligent
however, it was very troll like
largely republican women..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.