Who Says Men won't Support a Strong Woman?
In the latest Rasmussen poll, it is actually the men who prefer VP candidate Sarah Palin over women:
I can't say that I'm surprised. I heard over and over during the Hillary and Obama race from people that "men just won't vote for a strong woman." Well, that's a myth. They just won't vote for the wrong woman.
Update: Palin must be doing something right, the Rasmussen tracking poll now shows a tie.
She earns positive reviews from 65% of men and 52% of women. The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll shows that Obama continues to lead McCain among women voters while McCain leads among men. The Friday morning update—the first to include interviews conducted after Palin’s speech--showed the beginning of a Republican convention bounce that may match Obama’s bounce from last week.
I can't say that I'm surprised. I heard over and over during the Hillary and Obama race from people that "men just won't vote for a strong woman." Well, that's a myth. They just won't vote for the wrong woman.
Update: Palin must be doing something right, the Rasmussen tracking poll now shows a tie.
Labels: politics
posted by Helen at 1:17 PM
99 Comments:
Surprise? What surprise? She reads like a shopping list of all the traits a real man would love to have in a woman.
I see on the Drudge Report that Oprah refuses to have her on her show.
Some women have a real problem with her - the "victim-stance woman" and "woe is me as an oppressed woman" are having a tough time with her.
It's like: Uh-oh, one of our own is not maintaining the positions that so easily manipulate men into giving us what we want.
Not surprising, since women as a class are much more left-wing than men, and receive many more dollars of government largesse.
It's official: 48% of women suck moose's @$$.
Hi Dr. Helen:
It has never, ever been about feminism with the "Progressive Left." It has always been about toeing the DNC line.
There is no room for disagreement, and any woman who disagrees---as you can see---is reviled by the "establishment feminist movement."
Yeah, diversity. So long as it is the diversity of which NOW approves. And no worries--- they'll tell you which type of thought is acceptable.
Funny how much like the patriarchy these folks act, it seems to me.
If Obama leads female voters while McCain leads male voters, then it's not surprising that more male than female voters like the woman on the McCain ticket.
It would be more interesting to observe people's reactions to Clinton and Palin if the candidates belonged to the same party and pushed similar policies. Both of them strike me as reasonably "strong" women -- fragile flowers don't survive long in politics regardless of gender -- but Palin exudes a more traditionally feminine vibe.
I'd like to think that it wouldn't matter one way or the other. But controlling for political affiliation is what it would take to tease out the answer.
They're right. Men don't like strong women...who hate men...the other kind, we like plenty.
Sometimes "strong woman" just means a very weak woman with a big mouth.
Obama was the only woman vieing for the Democrat nomination this year.
Eric wrote, Funny how much like the patriarchy these folks act, it seems to me.
...and how rarely real patriarchs act in the manner of which they are so often accused.
If Obama leads female voters while McCain leads male voters, then it's not surprising that more male than female voters like the woman on the McCain ticket.
What's annoying with the MSM is that if Obama is leading with women, it'll be reported that McCain has a "gender gap" with women. However, when McCain leads with men, it's almost never reported that Obama has a gender gap with men. I've seen this happen in every presidential election for the past 20 years.
I love strong women whose views I respect such as Lady Thatcher, Condi Rice, and especially Sarah Palin. I really don't care for whose whose idea of being strong is to yell loudly.
- Men like strong women that don't get their strength from stepping on men.
- Men like strong women that don’t spend their time telling us what is wrong with us and how we would be so much better if we just do what we are told.
- Men like strong women that earn their positions and power, not those that get there on the shoulders of their husband and then talk like they did it all on their own.
She reads like a shopping list of all the traits a real man would love to have in a woman.
And a lot of women are jealous of that.
Men don't like strong women...who hate men...the other kind, we like plenty.
Pretty much sums it up.
A co-worker's wife is a strong woman. Her income is probably double his. But, she likes men and loves to drink beer while watching football. I've often told him he has the perfect wife.
Personally, I'd prefer someone more like Sarah Palin who likes to hunt, fish and camp.
From "The Onion" at http://www.theonion.com/content/node/85974
General Political Philosophy:
Chestnut brown with amber highlights
Advice For Women Beginning In Politics:
"If you work hard and keep your nose clean, you too can have a rich, powerful man come and whisk you off to Washington."
Beauty Contest Victories:
1984 Miss Wasilla, 1984 Miss Alaska, 2008 Republican Vice-Presidential Nomination
----------
I think that's funny although I do actually like her.
How about:
Some of us won't vote for the wrong person.
A real man admires strength and determination. Not "male" strength and determination. Simply the qualities themselves.
Sarah Palin exhibits more strength and determination than anyone else in this race -- would-be Senators and Congressmen included.
I was contemplating staying home on the first Tuesday in November. Governor Palin, and Governor Palin alone, has changed my mind. There's a data point for you.
They won't vote for an Old Girl Network kind of gal, but a New Girl Network woman is another story.
Oh boy, where to begin?
A strong and aggressive woman is just fine as long as she is a strong ally. If (or perhaps when is a better word) she turns into an enemy, then a passive, stupid woman is better. The reason that Palin is so appealing to men is that she appears to have a long history of being a reliable ally to her husband. Therefore, there appears to be good reason to believe that she will continue to be a reliable ally.
Speaking from personal experience, most American women's idea of a "strong woman" is somebody who aggressively attacks men in a variety of ways. To them, men's acceptance of strong women is synonymous with men doing whatever women want men to do, regardless of the resulting cost, risk or damage to men.
Referring to my favorite obsession, I want to know about Palin's opinion of this:
http://www.sptimes.com/News/061800/Perspective/Can_it_truly_be_Fathe.shtml
I think I'll ask her.
All good and true points, Helen. This archetypal female is exploding on the scene in a way that makes me think we've been waiting for it for a long, long time and just didn't know it.
Men love strong women! But many women think that being strong entails being unnecessarily difficult and demeaning. This is being a bitch not being strong.
So, ladies, please be strong, and use your strength benevolently. We'll love you for it.
The simple ability to smile is a great indicator of her strength.
bobh wrote: "The reason that Palin is so appealing to men is that she appears to have a long history of being a reliable ally to her husband."
I am not following you. What aspect of her appearance tells you that? It is an interesting thought, but I am missing the visual or behavioral cue.
Thanks.
Trey
I like Palin and I hope to see her do well. She is refreshing, and she is NORMAL. She could be my neighbour.
However, I hope the Republicans are smart enough to put a ball-gag in the snot-mouths of privilege princesses like Congressman Marsha Blackburn, who made me quite angry with this little lecture she gave to "the boys." What a bitch - isn't Hillary gone? So far, Palin has not been pulling this kind of hatred towards men crap. Hopefully the Republicans sit women like Marsha Blackburn down and explain to her exactly why SHE is a woman that should be seen, not heard (or not even seen). I would hate to see this turn into another Hillary styled man-bashing campaign (who did much self-damage by alienating White Heterosexual Males).
Blackburn pukes out:
"On behalf of all the great new gals in this room, I tell you…
And listen up now, boys.
I want all you guys to listen up.
As a wife, a mother, a businesswoman and public servant…
Neither Governor Palin nor I… NEED YOU! (while finger pointing at audience)
To tell us what our limitation are…
Or, when we might have taken on too much…
Or, when we might have reached too far…"
Like any man has every told this sow something like that. In fact, I have never heard a man say such a thing to any woman in all my days on earth. It seems that it is only women who say this stunned myth over and over again.
I hope the "other women" in the Republican Party don't run around alienating men on Palin's behalf.
Watch the video (her rant starts around 1:50):
Congressman Marsha Blackburn NOT GETTING IT!
Shut up, Blackburn. Make yourself useful and go bake Sarah Palin some cookies.
francis w. porretto said...
I was contemplating staying home on the first Tuesday in November. Governor Palin, and Governor Palin alone, has changed my mind. There's a data point for you.
Interesting. I've been seeing similar, extremely positive reactions, and I'm curious. Given her relative lack of experience (also a valid concern with Obama, though not enough to make me vote against him in this election), what is it about her that appeals to you so much?
TMink --
I don't think he meant appear as visual, but as in the body of her life experiences. She works and works physically as well as mentally, she helped to raise a decent family and she is obviously proud and in love with him when you watch her look at him. She appears to be a reliable ally.
Strength is never disregarded by anybody, and is most often admired and respected.
However, what passes as a "strong woman" by a liberal is normally a self-absorbed, man-hating bitch with a devotion to entitlement and social parasitism.
To a conservative, it's a very different thing.
I want a bumper sitcker that says: Palin/McCain 2008.
That's how I feel about Sarah Palin, and it's not because I see her as a "strong" woman. It's because I think she has class, brains and a heart in the right place.
Strength I leave to the US Marine Corps.
I love that "relative lack of experience" meme.
Yeah, like being the Gov of one of our more strategic defense oriented states means lack of experience.
Same with her breaking the strangle hold that the oil companies had on the state of Alaska, no experience there, either.
Or her negotiating one of the, if not the, largest infrastructure developments in the history of the US.
Lets also not forget her ability to chap the hide off the GOP old guard in Alaska and still keep an 80% approval rating.
Yeah, no experience at all.
The more I read about Palin the less I like about her. She has no substantive foreign policy or economic experience.
Her "experience' governing comes from being mayor of a town of 7,000 and governor of a state that has less than a million people. And let's not forget that she has been governor for less than two years.
She is not even close to being ready to be president. If McCain were about ten years younger I'd feel much more comfortable with her, but he is not.
I value Palin's worldview and political philosophy more than I do John McCain's experience.
Trey
Dudes and dudettes, it is quite simple:
Momma Bear, good. Sexy Momma Bear, better.
Hillary is no Momma Bear, while Palin is. We know we can trust her in the big chair, cause we know how Momma Bears act.
And yeah, Momma Bears do sometimes hit their cubs upside the head -- but sometimes cubs need it...
"She earns positive reviews from 65% of men and 52% of women."
Palin's relative deficit among women might be attributable to pudenda politics,, which appears to have caused a plague of cerebral explosions around the Web.
The prospect of a woman who can talk about things that might interest men is always attractive.
You won't see Palin waking up wanting to talk about the strange dream she had last night and your part in it. At least I suppose not.
McCain will win big and Palin will play a huge role in it. She's tough,intelligent, great speaker, HOT, a reformer willing to buck her own party when it's necesary and the kind of woman most guy's would like to be married to IMHO.
I think the MSM will be scratching their heads after this go round wondering when they became totally irrelevant.
One thing I've been thinking about is the role of Todd Palin, should McCain/Palin win.
This is the perfect opportunity for Todd, a very manly guy in a completely new and high profile role, to take on the subject of the rights of males which has been discussed here so often. If he dedicates his efforts to this area, the impact will be enormous. If you imagine how much influence he would have to raise the subject.
People on the left always talk about "raising awareness", but it's always about things that have already been beaten to death. Everyone already knows. The subject of why boys do poorly in school, the double standards against men, etc. is probably well recognized by lots of people, but no one in a highly visible position has stood up and made it an issue.
I'm 60 and I've never had a problem with strong women per se. My mother and three of my aunts all worked their way through nursing school during the Depression, so I've always had examples of strong women to admire.
What I like about Sarah Palin is that she's more like my mother and aunts than Hillary - Gov. Palin did it mostly on her own (with, of course, the support of Todd and her family). Hillary, by way of contrast, rode on Bill's coattails.
Hillary's personal accomplishments, even in the Senate, are almost nil (I'm from New York, so I know). Similar comments apply to the other women elites in the Democratic Party.
I look forward to reproaching dems about their fear of strong women.
Response to Jack, who wrote:
The more I read about Palin the less I like about her. She has no substantive foreign policy or economic experience.
Her "experience' governing comes from being mayor of a town of 7,000 and governor of a state that has less than a million people. And let's not forget that she has been governor for less than two years.
Gov. Palin has substantially more experience than another well-known Republican, Abraham Lincoln, who I hope you'll agree was a pretty good President. Economics and foreign policy can be picked up relatively quickly by a bright person like Sarah Palin; her strength of character took much longer to develop - and it's a strong character I admire.
Of course, she also has more relevant experience than the guy at the top of the Democratic ticket; just noting this for completeness.
Rob Fedders:
That woman sounds like a childish, spoiled brat. She simply takes in the man-hating rhetoric from feminists and then spits it right back out without any thinking or filters or constraints on her behavior at all.
Society seems to accept that kind of behavior from women. I don't know why - I wouldn't accept a woman acting like a child, personally or politically.
The subject of why boys do poorly in school, the double standards against men, etc. is probably well recognized by lots of people, but no one in a highly visible position has stood up and made it an issue
It won't happen. If there is anything the left and right can agree on, it's that men are important only so long as you can take from them to give to women.
It's about time we eliminate the term "strong woman" isn't it? We never use the term "strong man" unless talking about some 'roid head at the circus who'd lifting those dumbbells with the spherical weights on the ends, right?
I used to have this manager who'd incessantly refer to herself as a "strong woman" -- and that quickly got completely ridiculous. I'm pretty sure the term is primarily used by women who are desperately trying to convince themselves of something.
That's the beauty of a Sarah Palin -- no one has to go around yapping about how she's a "strong" woman. She's Sarah freakin' Palin, and that's enough.
"It won't happen. If there is anything the left and right can agree on, it's that men are important only so long as you can take from them to give to women."
-------
I agree.
On the left, it's "women are horribly oppressed by men, so men have to make up for it" (men are the hero - chivalry).
On the right, it's "I'm going to do everything in my power in office to help the little lady" (men are the hero - chivalry) and also maybe a dose of "women are oppressed" from some of them as well.
In any case, whatever the thinking, men themselves don't want to be treated like human beings and they sure don't want other men to be treated that way either. Men in power will take from men to give to women, and both women AND men have always found that peachy and probably always will. It's summed up in the comment of a man I just heard: "Yeah, I'm just an ATM and sperm donor to her, but I can live with that".
I think the poll, or the interpretation of it, is far off base. Men do not support Palin, they support an excuse to vote Republican. I am not sure how they are seeing it in a candidate based in political correctness and quotas, but that is another matter entirely. I think this is pop-culture mentality thing, I just hope they are still satisfied when the glitz wears off. Maybe, if Palin doesn't work, they can get a Play Boy bunny next time?
Men love her because she won't ask: "Do these pants make me look fat?" but rather, "Does this 30-06 look like it will stop that moose?"
or she won't ask "Why don't we never talk about our relationship anymore", but rathe "Dude, if you want to be with me, SHUT UP when we are hunting!"
or she won't ask "Do these shoes match my purse?" but rather "Does this salmon fly match the hatch?"
or she won't ask "Why, if it was already double overtime with only 30 seconds left, did it take another hour for the game to end? but rather, "Why, if it was already double overtime with only 30 seconds left, did he go to zone coverage?"
or she won't say, "All I do is slave around this house, cleaning up and cooking, all I want is some appreciation!" but rather, I slaved to catch that salmon, you want to eat, go catch your own d**n fish!"
Patrick
Sarah Palin illustrates the difference between a strong woman and a bitch. It's amazing how often the two are confused.
It's funny - or maybe it just shows how low men have sunk - but I think a lot of men will like any woman who doesn't insult them and bitch at them in the first minute and who doesn't have that "American woman chip" on her shoulder.
Almost as if it's just accepted that (American) women are going to insult them and bitch at them right from the very first minute.
"That's just how women are" is what I hear a lot.
And men, on top of all that, also usually PAY for these bitches?
Oh ... my ... goodness.
Why is this a surprise? Most men I know want and expect their wives to work. Does this mean NOW has achieved significant part of its original goals? But wait - leaders of NOW make negative remarks about Palin. Negative reactions to women justify existence of NOW, thus protecting us from- ourselves??
Oh what a crock! Strength has nothing to do with keeping women out of office. Anger, now that's another matter. Men won't vote for someone who looks like they'd be ordering mass castrations once they got into office.
Sarah Palin has traction with male voters because either she's not angry or very good at hiding it. Hillary Clinton...well, let's just say I involuntarily cover my groin when I hear her voice.
Dear Pfrost:
"Men love her because she won't ask: "Do these pants make me look fat?" but rather, "Does this 30-06 look like it will stop that moose?""
No, she wouldn't ask that either. She'd know that taking a mere .30-06 after a moose is like inviting the moose to use you for a throw rug. Even a .30-30 is too light a caliber for Alaskan moose. Those critters are big. I'd go with an Ithaca 12-gauge pump-action, loaded with slugs, not shot. Assuming a Stinger or RPG isn't near to hand, that is.
Ok, fair enough.
She won't ask "I think I need more shoes, I want to go shopping ?" but rather, "I think I need another, bigger gun, want to go hunting?"
PFrost
She reads like a shopping list of all the traits a real man would love to have in a woman.
Actually, she has a lot of traits the many men like me admire in men. She's devoted to her family and spouse. She works hard for what she believes. She knows far more about the environment than a bunch of urbanites whose only experience to a real wilderness is a PBS or Earthpeace documentary.
As for the "lack of experience" meme, all it does is point out that her experience - as thin as it may seem - is actually greater than Obama, Biden, and McCain combined. If she lacks sufficient experience to be VP, how in the world can anyone believe that Obama has sufficient experience to be president? It boggles the mind.
It's not that men don't want to be treated like human beings, it's that they've learned that asking doesn't work. Both men and women are trained to listen and respond to women's complaints, and to not even hear men's complaints.
On the scale of slights this isn't very high, but have you ever noticed that men's bathrooms are often dirty and covered in graffiti? I used to complain about that, until I realized that nothing would ever get done about it. Our social norms ("stop whining", "take it like a man") are very adept at beating down any man who says "this isn't right", if it's for himself or other men.
(Apologies in advance to other readers and Dr. Helen for the length of this post. I didn't intend it to be this long but Jack sort of triggered a lot thoughts and ideas that have been swirling around in my mind lately. Despite its length, I don't think it's a rant in any sense of the word. I tried to write a thoughtful response to the points Jack was making.)
"The more I read about Palin the less I like about her. She has no substantive foreign policy or economic experience.
Her "experience' governing comes from being mayor of a town of 7,000 and governor of a state that has less than a million people. And let's not forget that she has been governor for less than two years.
She is not even close to being ready to be president. If McCain were about ten years younger I'd feel much more comfortable with her, but he is not."
The type of argument you're making always amazes me, Jack, and, with the utmost seriousness and respect, I don't see how you can make it with a straight face. At least, that is, if you're somehow arguing that, due to your thoughts on Palin, voting for Obama over McCain is a clearly more viable choice.
I'll just go through your substantive points:
- "She has no substantive foreign policy or economic experience."
Obama has none either. He's never served in a foreign policy role anywhere and has no academic or practical accomplishments to point to as a substitute. His trip to Iraq and Europe was a grandstanding gesture and not a sober working trip designed to learn things he didn't already know. And in any event, he left it way too late to take him seriously as being up on the issues in any firsthand way. From what I've read, he didn't even much bother to fulfill his subcommitte duties to any great extent in the brief period of time he was a full-time senator before essentially decamping to run for president.
On the economic front, again, no experience. He has a law degree and was a law lecturer. He was a community organizer, not an economic theoretician. He spent years in the Illinois state senate with no track record of economic expertise that I'm aware of. And on the national level the same is true. He's spent his time making vague speeches instead of demonstrating any actual grasp of the workaday nitty gritty of economic theory and analysis. In fact, he's demonstrated the opposite, when he told (I can't remember which interviewer) that he would raise tax rates even if it drove down government revenue. Those hardly sound like the words of someone experienced in economic management.
- "Her 'experience' governing comes from being mayor of a town of 7,000 and governor of a state that has less than a million people. And let's not forget that she has been governor for less than two years."
Obama's 'experience' (which really does belong in scare quotes) governing is simply non-existent. He's never governed anything - a small town, a large town, a city, a state, a country. Nothing.
To me, I look at it in terms of what I call the "Harry Truman Test." Harry Truman said of his role as president, "The Buck Stops Here." The buck has never "stopped here" for Obama. He has no executive experience. Ever. He's never been forced to make a decision, be responsible for it, stick by it, and ultimately be answerable. Ever. Executives don't get the sweet option of voting "present" over and over again. For his entire political career Obama has been swimming among a big school of Democratic fish and has never been solely responsible for anything. He just goes with his crowd and is one voice among many and even if he changed his vote on one issue or another it wouldn't make much difference because, once he's made his vote, his responsibility is done, whether the measure passes or fails.
I submit that the first day Sarah Palin was mayor of Wasilla, she passed the Harry Truman Test. The buck stopped with her. She was directly and personally responsible for her actions and their outcomes. And she had to answer directly to the people for them. And, of course, she passed the test in spades in getting elected as governor of Alaska. She's running the entire state. The buck stops at her desk every day. And, since it's been reported that she has an 80% approval rating, I would surmise she's doing a pretty creditable job of it. And she did it without a political machine or family connections behind her, with the biggest, most entrenched political incumbents (including members of her own party) actively opposed to her, and at an age and with a gender not usually seen as an asset in that sort of situation.
And as to the length of her time in office, it compares quite favorably with Obama's. He's served (fulltime) one third of a US Senate term, i.e. about two years. And again, the buck has been stopping directly at her desk every day of her two years, unlike Obama, who can come and go and skip votes as he pleases.
It's also makes no sense when people poo-poo her role as governor of an entire state, just because it has one of the smaller populations. The responsibilities of a governor are the responsibilities of a governor, no matter the state, and when governors meet she is as equal as any other. There is no kiddie table with folding chairs at meetings of the National Governors Association. There have been way more governors and former governors who have been elected president in the last 100 years than there have been senators. It seems to be a much more fertile ground for training future presidents than the Senate has been.
- "She is not even close to being ready to be president. If McCain were about ten years younger I'd feel much more comfortable with her, but he is not."
That's how I feel about Obama - he is not even close to being ready to be president, if one uses the criteria you've used in criticzing Sarah Palin. And yet, here's the difference - the presidency is the exact office he's running for. She's running for vice president. History shows that the odds are that she will never have the need to move up to the higher office. It's possible, but it's not particularly likely (although, perhaps, slightly more likely with McCain). On the other hand, if elected, Obama would be president from day one. It wouldn't take an unlikely tragedy or health problem to put him into the chair behind the desk in the Oval Office. Those are the stakes we are talking about in this election. It's hard for me to believe that thinking people would make that sort of selection of a person with zero track record of accomplishment beyond, apparently, the ability to write eloquent autobiographies and give an inspiring speech from a teleprompter. Oh, the knack for running for higher office and getting elected in practically non-contested electons. But beyond that, what has he done to prove he's not in way over his head.
I think what it comes down to is neither Obama nor Palin have a long record of political service at the national level. Neither have sweeping accomplishments at the national level. But in the area of executive experience (which is the job of the presidency), Palin has a clear edge.
Of course, it's probably accurate to say that Obama is not running on his record. He's running on his "hope and change" platform - i.e he's saying, "Trust me to do the right thing. I have your interests at heart." He's selling his personality. And that can be okay, as there's no single way to become or be president. And to an extent, Sarah Palin is doing the same thing. She's selling her worldview and outlook on life (along with her executive experience). But to somehow make an argument that Obama is objectively qualified and Sarah Palin is not is, I think, unsupportable.
If these two were running directly against each other it would, perhaps, come down to a choice of philosophies and outlook and the question of who do you trust more. In that department, from what I've seen so far, I'm way more comfortable with Sarah Palin. She seems more genuine, real, and in tune with the country that I know and I would have confidence because of that. I don't trust Obama's vague "hope and change" platform. It's a leap of faith I'm not comfortable taking based on other positions he has articulated more clearly. To the extent that I know him, he doesn't inspire confidence in me that he would competently handle the job and make the decisions that I think would be in the country's best interests.
Of course, Obama isn't running against Sarah Palin. He's running against John McCain, which is why this whole line of argument is somewhat bogus. I've never seen a previous election where people were trying to shape the contest as one where the presidential candidate of one party was running against the vice presidential candidate of the other. It's an implicit acknowledgment, it seems to me, that the presidential candidate is weak and his supporters are reluctant to compare him directly to the man he's actually running against. It oozes a lack of confidence. I don't know if the Obama camp can win if it keeps that as its main line of argument.
So, to summarize, I don't think the argument that one should vote against McCain because of Sarah Palin is much of an argument in favor of voting for Barack Obama. Putting a man with limited experience into the highest office in the land in order to avoid putting someone with roughly comparable experience into a significantly lesser, subordinate position is a strange trade-off and a strange way of looking at things. In that case, my argument would be that you're not making a rational decision based on objective criteria, but rather going with your gut. And if that's the criteria, my gut says Palin is the much wiser choice.
I predict that the 52% will decrease as women get tired of hearing men talk about their new best friend.
@Francis: .30-06 is a suitable cartridge for going moose hunting. Maybe a little light, but plenty of Moose have been taken by it or the near-identical 7.62 NATO and .308 Winchester cartridges.
It's a lot heavier cartridge than the lightweight .30-30 carbine cartridge.
And I'd expect Gov. Palin would know the difference.
I'm with mjl--Character (integrity, courage, honesty) results from a lifetime pattern of achievement. Gov. Palin has Character, much more so than the Chimera of Projection known as The One. How curious that otherwise intelligent people feel like they need a Saviour such as Sen. Obama to absolve them from their materialism or racism or whatever. I'd be happy just with an honest leader such as Sen. McCain or Gov. Palin--someone with decades of consistent attitudes and proven abilities in whatever his/her field at the time.
Francis,
You've got your calibers backwards. .30-06 has, in general, about 50% more energy than .30-30.
And do a google search on 'moose calibers'. You'll find plenty of folks, including many from Alaska, saying .30-06 and .308 are perfectly acceptable for moose.
Jack..."She has no substantive foreign policy or economic experience." Joe Biden's foreign policy expertise was demonstrated in his proposal, made immediately after 9/11, to send a check for $200 million (no strings attached) to the government of Iran.
Education and experience are both good things, but are useless unless coupled with judgment. I see no evidence that either Obama or Biden has developed this attribute.
"30-30"
Probably meant ".303"
You know, I think this is why the women pundits - like Maureen Dowd- took an instant dislike to her. For decades we've been hearing from them that men don't marry "strong women" or "smart women." She's the living antithesis of their assumptions.
I watched Governor Palin's RNC speech with my mom. She noticed that Governor Palin spoke rather than shrieked like so many female politicians seem to do.
Kcom:
Good post.
Not a rant.
M
I remember reading somewhere that the DNC knows their biggest area for improvement is among white males. Apparently, white males are the majority of those who don't show up to vote or something.
Anyway, isn't this Palin woman doing an admirable job of capturing the white male vote? And for all the RIGHT reasons?
I know white males are considered the foundation of the RNC, but Palin seems to be bringing in a whole lot more than just the traditional base.
I'm Canadian though, so I might be talking out of my @$$.
sydney said...
"You know, I think this is why the women pundits - like Maureen Dowd- took an instant dislike to her. For decades we've been hearing from them that men don't marry "strong women" or "smart women." She's the living antithesis of their assumptions."
More than that, she is the living repudiation of everything they stand for and try to promote - in fact, of their entire lives. Instead of being a victim and blaming her lack of success on someone else, she has succeeded and done so totally without them or their ideas. She is living proof that their entire lives and world view are bogus. She, and other authentically "strong women" do not need them or their ways, and are rejecting them precisely because feminism is victimism.
For that reason alone, men need to vote for her. This campaign will be a severe, and possibly fatal, blow to victim feminism. Either they have to prove that they have been lying all along by attacking her - destroying the last tiny vestige of their credibility - or they have to shut up and watch her succeed where they failed, and teach the rest of the world how full of feces they have been. Either way, they lose just by having her run. How badly they lose depends on how much support she gets from men.
The best part of this for men, however, is that she presents a great opportunity for us to call the bluff of all those women who claim to be "not like that." We now have the poster child for what they claim to be, and if they don't turn out in droves to support her, they demonstrate that they have been lying all along.
I think we owe McCain a big vote of thanks for providing the opportunity to blow this scam of the past 50 years wide open.
The "strength" in women that "intimidates" other people -- women as well as men -- is the kind of false strength that comes from experience with exploiting female privileges: the hurtful strength of an abuser.
Goveror Palin's strength, in contrast, is attractive to voters because it is the kind of genuine strength that comes from experience with bearing real responsibilities: the uplifting strength of a leader.
Hi folks,
Thank you for your response to my comments. Let me be clear, I am not a fan of Obama, never have. I don't see him as being ready to be POTUS either.
But I can't criticize his lack of experience without doing the same for her.
Gov. Palin has substantially more experience than another well-known Republican, Abraham Lincoln, who I hope you'll agree was a pretty good President.
Lincoln was an excellent president, but times are different. Lincoln's domestic responsibilities were incredible, the civil war and all that encompassed must have been something else
But he never had the geopolitical situation to face, did not preside over a world in which we live in. Very different times.
Economics and foreign policy can be picked up relatively quickly by a bright person like Sarah Palin;
Maybe, but I am not a fan of on the job training for these things.
her strength of character took much longer to develop - and it's a strong character I admire.
We differ here. I don't admire her character. I see too many things that make me question it. It may be chauvinistic, but I think that she has a responsibility to her children that she is abrogating.
Of course, she also has more relevant experience than the guy at the top of the Democratic ticket; just noting this for completeness.
Again, not a supporter of Obama so I won't spend any time trying to defend his.
It's also makes no sense when people poo-poo her role as governor of an entire state, just because it has one of the smaller populations. The responsibilities of a governor are the responsibilities of a governor, no matter the state, and when governors meet she is as equal as any other.
I disagree. Each state presents different challenges and to a certain extent the scope of those challenges is impacted by the size of the population.
You wouldn't suggest that there is no significant difference between high school and elementary school, would you.
And to provide additional clarification, I take issue with a leader who is misguided enough to be believe that creationist philosophy is sound and that sex education is bad.
My apologies if I offended anyone, overall I don't care what you believe as long as it doesn't have a negative impact on us all.
And I think that while Palin has some admirable traits she also has many that are terrible.
Jack:
I thought America was rid of your kind of misogyny. I guess not! Palin belongs pregnant, barefoot in the kitchen.
Well remember, half the time 'strong woman' is simply used as code for 'acts like an ass and treats men like dirt'.
Similar to the way whenever a woman is nasty and vicious in her speech, and people her on it, they are told 'Oh you just can't handle outspoken women'.
Sarah Palin is a *real* strong woman, and the truest form of feminist there is. She is strong, confident, capable, and in a position of leadership - and it's obvious she doesn't dislike men or nurse a grudge against them. She is happy and confident with herself and others.
Sarah makes it a lot harder for any 'opinion leaders' to pretend that 'strong' & 'caustic' are synonyms.
Healthy men know the difference - always have.
re the small-state governor issue...suppose you were hiring someone to be CEO of a company with 100,000 employees with revenues to match. You have two choices:
1)Janet has been CEO of a much smaller company, let's say with 5000 employees
2)Ralph has never been a CEO or a General Manager, but holds a staff position (let's say CFO or General Counsel) at another very large company
Other things being equal, I'd go with Janet.
I thought America was rid of your kind of misogyny.
I know it is terrible for me to suggest that a pregnant teenage daughter might need her mother. Or is a pregnant teenage daughter and a baby with down's.
Notice that I didn't say that she should be barefoot and pregnant, you took the argument where it had never been.
I never said that I was against her working. I just said that I don't want her in the position she is shooting for.
Jack
"And to provide additional clarification, I take issue with a leader who is misguided enough to be believe that creationist philosophy is sound and that sex education is bad."
You were doing quite well until you made that statement. It would appear that your research into Gov Palin's lacks a certain amount of rigor.
Cheers
Minicapt: I was horrified at first re her alleged stance on teaching creationism in public schools, but it turns out that was yet another lie of the left: All Palin all the time and loving it
Jack, would you please explain to the rest of us what exactly is supposed to be so straining and time-consuming about ceremonially presiding over the Senate, or serving as a symbolic representative of the President at funerals or in meetings with other Heads of States?
Because unless and until you do that, you really don't have a "parental responsibilities" argument against Governor Palin running for Vice-President.
The job just ain't that hard, man.
Or are you perhaps arguing that Governor Palin should be running for President instead?
Or that she should be given a significant amount of responsibility in the McCain adminstration?
"I know it is terrible for me to suggest that a pregnant teenage daughter might need her mother. Or is a pregnant teenage daughter and a baby with down's."
I don't see any objective evidence that one precludes the other. It's a false argument.
I know it is terrible for me to suggest that a pregnant teenage daughter might need her mother. Or is a pregnant teenage daughter and a baby with down's.
Jack, how did you feel about John Edwards decision to continue his presidental campaign even though his wife had cancer? Shouldn't he have withdrawn to spare her the rigors of traveling and making apperances? Certainly a woman with cancer needs her husband by her side and devoted to assisting her.
Do you realize that John Edwards has a nine year old child? Does the fact that he would have been a single parent if Elizabeth Edwards had died during the campaign or after he had taken office mean that he should have dropped his presidental bid?
How about Joe Biden? He continued in office as a Senator after his wife died in a car crash and left him the sole parent of two young children. Should he have left his Senate seat?
And what's this with 'a pregnant girl needs her mother'? Does that mean she doesn't need her father? or that her father is inadequate support? Would we be hearing these same objections of *Todd* Palin was the VP nominee?
It's so interesting to see the sexism that keeps cropping up when women run for office. When it is Hillary, and conservatives say sexist things, they are condemned by one and all for being sexist.
But when the woman is a Republican, even the MSM piles on with incredibly sexist commentary.
It's never ever been about gender. It's all about party affiliation.
Jack, would you please explain to the rest of us what exactly is supposed to be so straining and time-consuming about ceremonially presiding over the Senate, or serving as a symbolic representative of the President at funerals or in meetings with other Heads of States?
Acksiom,
How much time does that involve. If it is such an easy question to answer, I am sure that you will. How often does the senate meet. How often will the VP have these meetings. How much time will they take. How often will they be located outside of the US.
You were doing quite well until you made that statement. It would appear that your research into Gov Palin's lacks a certain amount of rigor.
Minicapt,'
Fine, assuming that is accurate I'll retract it. It still doesn't fix the major issues of lack of experience.
I recognize that it is unlikely that something would happen to McCain and so she'd never assume office. But it would be negligent not to consider it. History provides numerous examples of VPs moving into the top slot.
Jack, how did you feel about John Edwards decision to continue his presidental campaign even though his wife had cancer? Shouldn't he have withdrawn to spare her the rigors of traveling and making apperances? Certainly a woman with cancer needs her husband by her side and devoted to assisting her.
Der Hahn,
I wasn't a supporter of Edwards. But there is a distinct difference between an adult and children. If the Edwards came to an adult agreement, not my business.
How about Joe Biden? He continued in office as a Senator after his wife died in a car crash and left him the sole parent of two young children. Should he have left his Senate seat?
It is a good question and perhaps he should have. Every situation requires consideration based upon the particular situation.
And what's this with 'a pregnant girl needs her mother'? Does that mean she doesn't need her father?
No, but her father is not the one running for office now is he.
The fundamental issues still exist. She has no substantive experience. Doesn't know much if anything about foreign policy or the economy.
We are fighting two wars and the economy is in trouble. I want experienced leadership.
I like McCain, but her, I just don't think so.
I like McCain, but her, I just don't think so.
I'm the opposite. I intended to vote for him because I find Obama to be far worse. Because of Palin, I will now be voting for McCain because I want to.
Jack, we're all still waiting for you to please explain what exactly is supposed to be so straining and time-consuming about ceremonially presiding over the Senate, or serving as a symbolic representative of the President at funerals or in meetings with other Heads of States.
Sorry, but trying to weasel out of providing a meaningful answer to that question with a lot of distractive nonsense, as you did, doesn't count.
Just give us a straightforward answer.
Of course, you could always simply admit that you can't, and that your "parental responsibilities" argument is a load of crap.
Eric Blair,
I agree that in this case it is about party affiliation. I think often that sexism depends on the motivation of the person or group doing it and is a tool. If women want special privileges, they charge men with sexism, if men want women to behave in a certain way, they can be sexist, but in the Palin case, it is both men and women on the left who are using sexism as a tool to win an election. What all this shows is that people of both genders will use whatever tool they think will work to get them what they want. For some, there is no underlying moral philosophy that they adhere to, rather the philosophy changes in order to manipulate or control others.
Dr. Helen:
Yeah, men don't like strong women in politics.
I noticed all the Republican men 25 years ago (myself included) who just HATED Margaret Thatcher.
/sarcasm off.
acksiom, I've been asking more or less the same of a variety of people lately, and it all comes back to the "heartbeat away" thing. At that point they can apply all the objections from a presidential standpoint, not VP (SCOTUS appts, her dreaded religion, etc. etc.). Everyone is pretty sure Palin will be President, is appears.
Sorry, but trying to weasel out of providing a meaningful answer to that question with a lot of distractive nonsense, as you did, doesn't count.
Acksiom,
I didn't weasel out of it. I turned it around because I don't think that you have the foggiest idea what the time commitment is. You feel awfully clever with your response. I wanted to see if you are clever enough to give the real answer.
I asked pointed questions that I am happy to repeat for you even though you won't answer the questions.
How often does the senate meet. How often will the VP have these meetings. How much time will they take. How often will they be located outside of the US.
And you won't answe the question because you haven't thought out the answer. Ceremonial position doesn't mean that there is no time committment.
It doesn't take into account many things, such as Palin is not going to commute each day from Alaska to D.C.
It doesn't account for travel time from the U.S. to points outside of the US.
It doesn't account for cabinet meetings either.
In short this is not a 9-5 position. It is not a standard 40 hour work week.
But let's go back to something else. You didn't disagree with my initial point that Palin's family is getting short shrift. If we follow your logic it is not because you disagree with that, but because you don't see the position as being particularly time consuming.
So in effect you agree with me, but differ on the time commitment.
Jack,
I pretty much have to side with Acksiom: No one really cares what the vice president does. If she blows off the funeral of a B-list politician, so what.
The only area I would disagree is with regard to the possibility of her taking over for McCain. It's a possibility given his age. Then you want to have a vice president who meets a minimum standard level.
I don't know much about Palin - although I like what I see so far - so I don't know if she would be qualified to step into the shoes of president or not. I have a better feeling about her than I do about the big-talker Obama, though.
regard to the possibility of her taking over for McCain. It's a possibility given his age. Then you want to have a vice president who meets a minimum standard level.
JG,
That is the issue in a nutshell. She doesn't meet the minimum standard. If McCain were ten years younger I wouldn't care, but he is not.
You don't want your president learning foreign policy and economics on the job.
This comment has been removed by the author.
This comment has been removed by the author.
This comment has been removed by the author.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jack sez:
"You don't want your president learning foreign policy and economics on the job."
---------
They pretty much all have to learn the job from anew, except for the second-termers.
Being a senator or a governor or the head of the CIA or the mayor of New York does not prepare you to be the president. Everyone has to step into the job as a newling.
Like I said, my gut feeling is that Palin would do better than Obama.
The latter is a big talker. Maybe America needs to bottom out right now, though. Maybe Obama should get in.
I'm pretty much done with the "Rah, rah, team, I want my team to win (fill in republican or democrat)".
If the left-wingers are so sure about Obama, get the guy in there. Let's see if he lives up to the hype. Go get 'em.
I think that Obama could not only be bad, but catastrophically, disastrously, bottom-out, Oh-My-God-What-Have-We-Done bad.
I was just a wee lad when Carter was president, but I remember how absolutely terrible he was - with everything.
Being a senator or a governor or the head of the CIA or the mayor of New York does not prepare you to be the president. Everyone has to step into the job as a newling.
That is not entirely true. You can have all sorts of experience in formulating foreign policy or economic theory in advance of becoming president.
If you look at Dick Cheney he was Chief of Staff and Sec of Defense before becoming VP. Not to mention Minority Whip of the House.
It is not hard to find other examples. Condi Rice would have been a better choice.
Condi Rice would have been a better choice.
Condi Rice would have been a terrible choice. She was a great theorist, but has been dreadful in the application.
Ok, jack. You're saying McCain is a bad choice because of his age, and Palin, because of her lack of knowledge and experience, in the event McCain suffers an illness or dies?
So who are you more in favor of, then, Obama? Using your logic, one would have to hope Obama suffers an illness or dies right after the election (should he win) so Biden could be president.
Palin has the confidence. She says she's ready. Biden, on the other hand, has stated he believes Hillary would have been the better choice.
Take a good look at the only bill Obama has sponsored.
視訊做愛視訊美女無碼A片情色影劇kyo成人動漫tt1069同志交友網ut同志交友網微風成人論壇6k聊天室日本 avdvd 介紹免費觀賞UT視訊美女交友..........................
葉晴貼影片影片轉檔程式情色影片foxy下載色情小說女影片免費下載a片aa免費看情色文學成人小說aa 片免費看影片 aa訊豆豆出租名模情人視訊aaa影片下載城男同志影片免費影片線上直播日本美女寫真集免費av18禁影片18成人卡通成人a片同志影片5278影片卡通影片
Post a Comment
<< Home