Connecting Singles^® Forums100% Free Online Dating

New York Times
Monday, September 15, 2008 Judith Warner

The Mirrored Ceiling

Tags: Politics, sarah palin, women

It turns out there was something more nauseating than the nomination of Sarah Palin as John McCain’s running mate this past week. It was the tone of the acclaim that followed her acceptance speech.

“Drill, baby, drill,” clapped John Dickerson, marveling at Palin’s ability to speak and smile at the same time as an indication of her unexpected depths and unsuspected strengths. “It was clear Palin was having fun, and it’s hard to have fun if you’re scared or a lightweight,” he wrote in Slate.

The Politico praised her charm and polish as antidotes to her lack of foreign policy experience: “Palin’s poised and flawless performance evoked roars of applause from delegates who earlier this week might have worried that the surprise pick and newcomer to the national stage may not be up to the job.”

“She had a great night. I thought she had a very skillfully written, and very skillfully delivered speech,” Joe Biden said, shades of “articulate and bright and clean” threatening a reappearance. (For a full roundup of these comments go here.)

Thus began the official public launch of our country’s now most-prominent female politician. The condescension – damning with faint praise – was reminiscent of the more overt misogyny of Samuel Johnson.

“A woman’s preaching is like a dog’s walking on his hinder legs,” the wit once observed. “It is not done well; but you are surprized to find it done at all.”

Palin sounded, at times, like she was speaking a foreign language as she gave voice to the beautifully crafted words that had been prepared for her on Wednesday night.

But that wasn’t held against her. Thanks to the level of general esteem that greeted her ascent to the podium, it seems we’ve all got to celebrate the fact that America’s Hottest Governor (Princess of the Fur Rendezvous 1983, Miss Wasilla 1984) could speak at all.

Could there be a more thoroughgoing humiliation for America’s women?

You are not, I think, supposed now to say this. Just as, I am sure, you are certainly not supposed to feel that having Sarah Palin put forth as the Republicans’ first female vice presidential candidate is just about as respectful a gesture toward women as was John McCain’s suggestion, last month, that his wife participate in a topless beauty contest.

Such thoughts, we are told, are sexist. And elitist. After all, via Palin, we now hear without cease, the People are speaking. The “real” “authentic,” small-town “Everyday People,” of Hockey Moms and Blue Collar Dads whom even Rudolph Giuliani now invokes as an antidote to the cosmopolite Obamas and their backers in the liberal media. (Remind me please, once again, what was the name of the small town where Rudy grew up?)

Why does this woman – who to some of us seems as fake as they can come, with her delicate infant son hauled out night after night under the klieg lights and her pregnant teenage daughter shamelessly instrumentalized for political purposes — deserve, to a unique extent among political women, to rank as so “real”?

continued...

Because the Republicans, very clearly, believe that real people are idiots. This disdain for their smarts shows up in the whole way they’ve cast this race now, turning a contest over economic and foreign policy into a culture war of the Real vs. the Elites. It’s a smoke and mirrors game aimed at diverting attention from the fact that the party’s tax policies have helped create an elite that’s more distant from “the people” than ever before. And from the fact that the party’s dogged allegiance to up-by-your-bootstraps individualism — an individualism exemplified by Palin, the frontierswoman who somehow has managed to “balance” five children and her political career with no need for support — is leading to a culture-wide crack-up.

Real people, the kind of people who will like and identify with Palin, they clearly believe, are smart, but not too smart, and don’t talk too well, dropping their “g”s, for example, and putting tough concepts like “vice president” in quotation marks.

“As for that ‘V.P.’ talk all the time … I tell ya, I still can’t answer that question until somebody answers for me, What is it exactly that the ‘VP’ does every day?” Palin asked host Lawrence Kudlow on CNBC sometime before her nomination. “I’m used to bein’ very productive and workin’ real hard in an administration and we want to make sure that that ‘V.P.’ slot would be a fruitful type of position.”

And, I think, they find her acceptably “real,” because Palin’s not intimidating, and makes it clear that she’s subordinate to a great man.

That’s the worst thing a woman can be in this world, isn’t it? Intimidating, which appears to be synonymous with competent. It’s the kiss of death, personally and politically.

But shouldn’t a woman who is prepared to be commander in chief be intimidating? Because of the intelligence, experience, talent and drive that got her there? If she isn’t, at least on some level, off-putting, if her presence inspires national commentary on breast-pumping and babysitting rather than health care reform and social security, then something is seriously wrong. If she doesn’t elicit at least some degree of awe, then something is missing.

One of the worst poisons of the American political climate right now, the thing that time and again in recent years has led us to disaster, is the need people feel for leaders they can “relate” to. This need isn’t limited to women; it brought us after all, two terms of George W. Bush. And it isn’t new; Americans have always needed to feel that their leaders were, on some level, people like them.

But in the past, it was possible to fill that need through empathetic connection. Few Depression-era voters could “relate” to Franklin Roosevelt’s patrician background, notes historian Doris Kearns Goodwin. “It was his ability to connect to them that made them feel they could connect to him,” she told me in a phone interview.

The age of television, Goodwin believes, has made the demand for connection more immediate and intense. But never before George W. Bush did it quite reach the beer-drinking level of familiarity. “Now it’s all about being able to see your life story in the candidate, rather than the candidate, with empathy, being able to relate to you.”

There’s a fine line between likability and demagoguery. Both thrive upon manipulation and least-common-denominator politics. These days, I fear, this need for direct mirroring — and thus this susceptibility to all sorts of low-level tripe — is particularly acute among women, who are perhaps reaching historic lows in their comfort levels with themselves and their choices.

Just look at how quickly the reaction to Palin devolved into what The Times this week called the “Mommy Wars: Special Campaign Edition.” Much of the talk about Palin (like the emoting about Hillary Clinton before her) ultimately came down to this: is she like me or not like me? If she’s not like me, can I like her? And what kind of child care does she have?

“This election is not about issues,” Rick Davis, John McCain’s campaign manager said this week. “This election is about a composite view of what people take away from these candidates.” That’s a scary thought. For the takeaway is so often base, a reflection more of people’s fears and insecurities than of our hopes and dreams.

We’re not likely to get a worthy female president anytime soon.

what is your view on this one J?

you can respond privately if you like....

Hi Hank,

I think the Republicans have chosen a woman merely as a political ploy in an attempt to get the womens vote and have chosen a women who doesn´t have the background, experience or education to deal with politics on a global scale. I think she is being propped by the party and being fed what she needs to say, I think she´s subservient to men and while that may be good for "the party" ... if she does become President due to McCain being unable to complete his term, is very bad for the country. Her strong religious leanings and strong views on Roe vs Wade and sex education in the schools scare the hell out of me.

I think this whole "relate to the candidate" is incredibly ignorant. I don´t want someone that I can relate to... I want someone who understands how the economy, the budget, world wide reprecussions effect the country on a much higher level then I do myself. I expect a leader of a country to be better educated, more intelligent and of stronger character then the average Joe.

Article was published by the New Your Times .. not worth reading IMHO.

Nice try though.

Well I wouldn´t expect a "good ol´ boy" to have much interest in what an intelligent, independent woman has to say anyway.

JMHO

Yep, you are right there.

Try this on for size:

- Seven out of 10 voters (69%) remain convinced that reporters try to help the candidate they want to win, and this year by a nearly five-to-one margin voters believe they are trying to help Obama.

I am one of those. Have been for 75 years.

Well seeing how this is an "opinion" peace... I would think that would be a factor. Your point?

Then you are not the intelligent, independent woman mentioned above.

I assure you she is more intelligent and independent than an average Texan (no disrespect to you personally)

Sorry, Picking her just shows that the republican party has no intention of running a serious race.
they have already lost.

Hell, they could have at least picked Brittany spears mom for his running mate... she can wine with the best of them when she puts her crack pipe down.

Are your little one line punch and run comments meant to be witty and amusing? I assure you the only person you are amusing is yourself.

Your ignorance in discarding an article, because you don´t like where it came from, says quite a bit about your intelligence and lack ability to think for yourself. I would respect your opinion if you argued points of the article rather then casting it off because it does not come from "an approved source" in your little world.

When you have an intelligent remark to make I will happily read it... but I think that will be a long time in coming.

The whole point of being on this site is for amusement.

Naaaahhhh


Paris Hilton's Mom would have been a better choice. She is at least well traveled and cuter.

When asked of her foreign policy experience, SP emphasized the visibility of bordering Russia from Alaska.

That makes me an expert on Hungary, where one of my neighbors are from. I can see their front yard and their cars parked on their driveway everyday...

Point made.

LOL Don216 has plenty of interest in intelligent comments...he was just waiting for one to show up.

And he's also dead right. JMHO

Right about what?... he hasn´t said anything.

Sorry... couldn't resist. But why do you have to be so hateful and provoking?

Great article jbibiza! Thanks for bringing it to our attention. In these days of such short attention spans and fast-food news bites, Sarah Palin is the Republicans wet dream. A woman with such a brief history of accomplishment is like a prepped oil canvas waiting for the Karl Rovsian Election Machine (KREM) to fill in form and color. Thanks again for the reality check.