Whites lift McCain to slim lead over Obama in poll
By ALAN FRAM, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 38 minutes ago
Friday, September 12, 2008
We're Doomed, Redux
Why is this person allowed to vote?
"My heart sort of runs with McCain and my mind probably tends to run toward Obama," said David Scorup, 58, a county government official in Othello, Wash. "I think I resonate more with McCain."
"My heart sort of runs with McCain and my mind probably tends to run toward Obama," said David Scorup, 58, a county government official in Othello, Wash. "I think I resonate more with McCain."
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Sarah Palin was a brilliant choice for the VP slot for McCain:
Sarah Palin was a brilliant choice for the VP slot for McCain:
There are two main roles women play in our media environment and there is one consistent behavior. The roles are object of sexual desire and nurture/caregiver. The consistent behavior is that they cede authority to men. Call this the “Good Woman” mythology. If you doubt this, go sit down at your TV set and watch the next 10 commercials. Watch who makes the decisions, who drives the cars, which gender turns to which gender for answers, and what gender the Voice of God (the narrator, the voice of authority in the commercial) is.
These mass commercial media representations have been consistent for decades, and are part of the mythology that women are taught virtually from birth. The message women receive on a daily basis is that if they look hot, take care of the kids, and don’t get too big for their britches, they will get True Love and happiness. (This mythology, not incidentally, is the value system that keeps most of the companies advertising in the mass commercial media profitable. No one makes money telling women that their intelligence is a thing of value. But Revlon makes a shitload of cash by telling them that the right eye shadow will win them Prince Charming. If you are relying on your audience to buy into that, it’s best to start teaching ‘em young, and keep reminding them of that daily.)
Hillary rarely played the mom card, shot for the top spot on the ticket, and was, unfortunately, publicly outed as a failure in terms of object of sexual desire. If she was doing her “job,” as Chris Rock suggested, all Monica would have had access to was one of the balls – maybe. For that, Hillary was vilified. Even if she’d won the Democratic primary, she’d have been slaughtered in the general election. That is one of the reasons Obama got the nomination.
Palin knows her place – No. 2 on the ticket – and bills herself as a “hockey mom” who wasn’t afraid to strut her stuff in a beauty pageant.
Which of these two women come closest to the “Good Woman” mythology?
Not only that, Palin comes in virtually criticism-proof. She can hide behind her children anytime embarrassing facts start to show up. Spend money from the state taxpayers to take her daughter on a junket to New York? Hey, she’s just trying to raise a family, the best she can! Quit picking on her! (I find this one really ironic, I once wrote a series of articles that ended up with a city manager going to prison for misuse of travel funds. It’s called misappropriation of public money. Or, more bluntly, stealing.)
Polls show that Palin’s pick has drawn white women to the McCain ticket. Of course it does. For these voters, Palin’s selection validates the decisions they’ve made in their lives. The obvious contradictions – I’m just an ordinary mom with five kids, so give me a job where I’ll never have time to raise them, my family’s off-limits unless I’m parading my pregnant unwed teen daughter on stage – don’t matter when it's not about facts, but feelings. For these voters, selecting the best person for the Oval Office isn’t the question at hand. It’s about the narrative and how it makes them feel. Besides, it always works out in the end on Lifetime TV. Why wouldn’t it work out here?
Well done, McCain folks. Sheer cynicism – and sheer brilliance.
There are two main roles women play in our media environment and there is one consistent behavior. The roles are object of sexual desire and nurture/caregiver. The consistent behavior is that they cede authority to men. Call this the “Good Woman” mythology. If you doubt this, go sit down at your TV set and watch the next 10 commercials. Watch who makes the decisions, who drives the cars, which gender turns to which gender for answers, and what gender the Voice of God (the narrator, the voice of authority in the commercial) is.
These mass commercial media representations have been consistent for decades, and are part of the mythology that women are taught virtually from birth. The message women receive on a daily basis is that if they look hot, take care of the kids, and don’t get too big for their britches, they will get True Love and happiness. (This mythology, not incidentally, is the value system that keeps most of the companies advertising in the mass commercial media profitable. No one makes money telling women that their intelligence is a thing of value. But Revlon makes a shitload of cash by telling them that the right eye shadow will win them Prince Charming. If you are relying on your audience to buy into that, it’s best to start teaching ‘em young, and keep reminding them of that daily.)
Hillary rarely played the mom card, shot for the top spot on the ticket, and was, unfortunately, publicly outed as a failure in terms of object of sexual desire. If she was doing her “job,” as Chris Rock suggested, all Monica would have had access to was one of the balls – maybe. For that, Hillary was vilified. Even if she’d won the Democratic primary, she’d have been slaughtered in the general election. That is one of the reasons Obama got the nomination.
Palin knows her place – No. 2 on the ticket – and bills herself as a “hockey mom” who wasn’t afraid to strut her stuff in a beauty pageant.
Which of these two women come closest to the “Good Woman” mythology?
Not only that, Palin comes in virtually criticism-proof. She can hide behind her children anytime embarrassing facts start to show up. Spend money from the state taxpayers to take her daughter on a junket to New York? Hey, she’s just trying to raise a family, the best she can! Quit picking on her! (I find this one really ironic, I once wrote a series of articles that ended up with a city manager going to prison for misuse of travel funds. It’s called misappropriation of public money. Or, more bluntly, stealing.)
Polls show that Palin’s pick has drawn white women to the McCain ticket. Of course it does. For these voters, Palin’s selection validates the decisions they’ve made in their lives. The obvious contradictions – I’m just an ordinary mom with five kids, so give me a job where I’ll never have time to raise them, my family’s off-limits unless I’m parading my pregnant unwed teen daughter on stage – don’t matter when it's not about facts, but feelings. For these voters, selecting the best person for the Oval Office isn’t the question at hand. It’s about the narrative and how it makes them feel. Besides, it always works out in the end on Lifetime TV. Why wouldn’t it work out here?
Well done, McCain folks. Sheer cynicism – and sheer brilliance.
Little Facts ...
John Feehery, a Republican strategist, said the campaign is entering a stage in which skirmishes over the facts are less important than the dominant themes that are forming voters' opinions of the candidates.
"The more the New York Times and The Washington Post go after Sarah Palin, the better off she is, because there's a bigger truth out there and the bigger truths are she's new, she's popular in Alaska and she is an insurgent," Feehery said. "As long as those are out there, these little facts don't really matter."
"The more the New York Times and The Washington Post go after Sarah Palin, the better off she is, because there's a bigger truth out there and the bigger truths are she's new, she's popular in Alaska and she is an insurgent," Feehery said. "As long as those are out there, these little facts don't really matter."
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
We're on a bridge to nowhere
I've been too busy commisserating with the folks at Daily Kos over this Palin thing lately to update my own blog. But I must pause to offer this to the Obama camp:
It's time to fight back.
Because the other side is simply making stuff up. In the past, at the worst, even the Bush campaigns, there was some passing acquaintance with reality. It was silly to question if Kerry was wounded enough, but it could be debated.
But really, Palin? She campaigned on support for the bridge to nowhere, now she's campaigning because she gave it up under fire? Just flat-out lying. And yet, Americans seem eager to walk the bridge to nowhere with her.
More shocking to me is that John McCain, after cozying up to Bush and the far right to get the GOP nod, now wants to be a maverick again. Obama needs to call him on it, loudly. I'm waiting for this speech:
"I'm not going to get personal, but it's time to talk about the record. The record is that over the past several years, John McCain has shifted his positions to those of George Bush and the far right. The only thing he changes anymore is his mind.
-- he opposed George Bush's tax cuts for the rich, saying they'd bust the budget. They did. Now he wants to keep them.
-- "he opposed lobbyists, then hired them to run his campaign. He saw his child slandered by Karl Rove and Co. and condemned them. Now they run his campaign.
-- "he called those who seek to divide us over religion divisive forces. Now he praises them and gives them his vice presidential pick.
-- "he wrote a fair bill on immigration the far right hated. Now, he opposes his own bill.
"This is not change, it's more of the same. But overnight, he's changed from falling in line with President Bush to calling himself a maverick again. That's not change you can believe in."
C'mon, Obama. It's time to fight.
Side note: As a former journalist who's worked all over the western states, I can tell you I never met a working journalist from the University of Idaho. Never heard of one. On this part of the resume, it may make him an elitisit but at least Harvard Law grads tend to succeed.
It's time to fight back.
Because the other side is simply making stuff up. In the past, at the worst, even the Bush campaigns, there was some passing acquaintance with reality. It was silly to question if Kerry was wounded enough, but it could be debated.
But really, Palin? She campaigned on support for the bridge to nowhere, now she's campaigning because she gave it up under fire? Just flat-out lying. And yet, Americans seem eager to walk the bridge to nowhere with her.
More shocking to me is that John McCain, after cozying up to Bush and the far right to get the GOP nod, now wants to be a maverick again. Obama needs to call him on it, loudly. I'm waiting for this speech:
"I'm not going to get personal, but it's time to talk about the record. The record is that over the past several years, John McCain has shifted his positions to those of George Bush and the far right. The only thing he changes anymore is his mind.
-- he opposed George Bush's tax cuts for the rich, saying they'd bust the budget. They did. Now he wants to keep them.
-- "he opposed lobbyists, then hired them to run his campaign. He saw his child slandered by Karl Rove and Co. and condemned them. Now they run his campaign.
-- "he called those who seek to divide us over religion divisive forces. Now he praises them and gives them his vice presidential pick.
-- "he wrote a fair bill on immigration the far right hated. Now, he opposes his own bill.
"This is not change, it's more of the same. But overnight, he's changed from falling in line with President Bush to calling himself a maverick again. That's not change you can believe in."
C'mon, Obama. It's time to fight.
Side note: As a former journalist who's worked all over the western states, I can tell you I never met a working journalist from the University of Idaho. Never heard of one. On this part of the resume, it may make him an elitisit but at least Harvard Law grads tend to succeed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)