|
Author
|
Topic: McCain praises VP choice Palin's 'tenacity'
|
juniperb
Moderator Posts: 856
From: Blue Star Kachina
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted August 31, 2008 09:42 AM
  
...And then there is Rush Limbaugh  Palin=Guns, Babies, Jesus,” he wrote in an email. “Contrast that to Obama's bitter clingers. Obama just lost blue-collar, white Democratic voters in Pennsylvania and other states.” And, he said, the line that the pick was aimed at picking off Democratic women who backed Hillary Rodham Clinton doesn’t get it right. “[The] choice is to shore up the conservative, pro-drilling base,” he said. “This is an aggressive, on-offense pick, not a defensive pick.” http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080831/pl_politico/13016 juni ------------------
~
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world is immortal"~ - George Eliot IP: Logged |
silverstone
unregistered
|
posted August 31, 2008 06:27 PM
McCain made an excellent choice. I think Sarah Palin is highly intelligent despite all of the negative comments from others. Women can be very powerful and in many cases more intelligent than men; this will be an excellent balance for McCain Frankly, Obama is finished in my opinion, it looks like it'll be Republican again! quote:
BlueRoamer
Knowflake
Posts: 4592
From: Calm Blue Ocean, Calm Blue Ocean
Registered: Jun 2003
posted August 31, 2008 01:02 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This woman is an idiot and she'll never be president.
I'm excited to see what nonsense she spits out during this election season.....sure to be amusing. The combination of the two just seems so weak to me.....aquarius/virgo? blech Bring on the leo/scorpio powerhouse
Weak??? I disagree. Leos and Scorpios are powerful; however, Aquarians are also highly intelligent, as well as Virgos. Virgos especially in business: they are extremely intelligent, perfectionists, diplomatic, detached from their emotions and highly likable. I also think many people underestimate the brilliance of Aquarians. Most Aquarians are ahead of their time, and beautifully display their wisdom with a natural, likeable uniqueness And, um, times change, people evolve. Women no longer stay home, nor I think they ever had to. Wake up people IP: Logged |
silverstone
unregistered
|
posted August 31, 2008 06:39 PM
quote:
I see, so you can decide what's "appropriate" for a woman and a mommy, but other people's judgment must necessarily be sexist or something, and not at all rooted in the practicality of family and child raising? acoustic
quote:
A true misogynist statement which would get you run out of any meeting of a women's group. Besides being none of your business whatsoever. You are not in charge of raising Palin's children. She seems to be doing an excellent job as a mother and has an 84% job approval rating with the citizens of Alaska. Just more misyoginist blather. Jwhop
Good comment, Jwhop
IP: Logged |
Eleanore
Moderator Posts: 112
From: Okinawa, Japan
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted August 31, 2008 10:05 PM
Hey, AG. I figured without the quote by quote cut and paste job you'd get muddled. I really haven't the time to go back and do it now nor do I really think it would make a difference. Just to clarify, if the Chelsea bit doesn't compute, perhaps you need to look back at 1992 and the arguments made against Hillary for choosing to put her career "before her family". The point being that it is a tired, pathetic argument we've heard before. Follow the train and I can laugh at the fact that maybe, for some people, a child is never going to be old enough for mommy to reach as high as she wants without the guilt trips from others. Don't forget your always more important place in the home, ladies! Really, no man gets this load of crap tossed at their feet. The worst is, "Oh, you should've spent more time with your family but they should understand you were doing your job to support them". A man can get away with putting their career "first" because they expect to be the breadwinners and that's enough. Not any more. Many women are out earning their spouses and some even support the family on their income alone. No female automatically deserves the argument against her that pursuing the heights of her career is abandoning her family ... as though only men are supposed to be supporting the family and pursuing careers while a woman doing the same is just keeping busy for purely selfish reasons. Many appropriate words for that chauvanistic, mysognisitc perspective exist but I'll settle for baloney. IP: Logged |
Eleanore
Moderator Posts: 112
From: Okinawa, Japan
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted August 31, 2008 10:29 PM
I'd like to add that so many women find themselves in situations where they are forced to choose between a fulfilling career and their families. I lay a huge burden on the inability to find respectable and reasonably affordable child care. And still, there are those who would argue it's not enough. That Mom belongs at home with the kids. Personally, I do stay home with my son. And part of the decision to do so was the lack of childcare that met my standards to include affordability. But moreso, I LOVE caring for my child. It is what makes me happy, my own dream come true. However, would I feel this way if previous to having a child I would have found an equally important dream? Does this mean I can do nothing more beyond make babies and raise them? That's a resounding NO! I've also had the pleasure of meeting a number of career women, some single mothers, whose children are in some form of childcare for most of the day. And although I still believe that I'm doing my child much good by spending so much of my time with him, I have also seen how well those kids are doing in other areas. All around, I think, there is going to be a compromise between familiarity and experience, between development in one area and stasis in another. I don't think there exists only one solution, only one right way, to raise a child. But I definitely believe that relegating women to "less demanding" positions because they have children or will one day, or chiding them for not staying home "enough" once they do have children, is the wrong position to take not only for grown women now but also especially for the children who will grow up thinking those are the only options women should have.IP: Logged |
AcousticGod
Knowflake Posts: 4415
From: Pleasanton, CA
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted September 01, 2008 03:12 AM
quote:
Hey, AG. I figured without the quote by quote cut and paste job you'd get muddled.
No, the communication wasn't clear. It had nothing to do with whether or not you cut and pasted anything. Cutting and pasting ensures context for comments. I'm sorry if that offends you. quote:
Just to clarify, if the Chelsea bit doesn't compute, perhaps you need to look back at 1992 and the arguments made against Hillary for choosing to put her career "before her family". The point being that it is a tired, pathetic argument we've heard before.
And who, may I ask, would have been saying such things? Who would have had such an agenda? Republicans? And Chelsea was how old? 12? And how likely was it that the First Lady would become President in her husband's stead? Not likely at all? So now does it make sense that I am indeed putting forth Republican family values? quote:
Follow the train and I can laugh at the fact that maybe, for some people, a child is never going to be old enough for mommy to reach as high as she wants without the guilt trips from others.
Well, a twelve year old is developmentally quite a bit different from a four month old, don't you think? quote:
A man can get away with putting their career "first" because they expect to be the breadwinners and that's enough.
Is it because men are expected to be breadwinners, or is it because women are expected to spend a little time with their children when the children are first born? If there's a stereotype about how women should stay home with newborns it's likely more based on women's opinions than men's. And if there's an opinion being put forward about staying home with kids beyond that, it's also being promoted primarily by women. And if there's a movement touting work over stay-at-home motherhood, that would also be headed up by women. I guess these women are all just sexist and misogynistic, huh? Dr. Schlessinger promotes stay at home motherhood? Isn't she a professional and a mother? Is she sexist? IP: Logged | |
Lindaland
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
