-
Forgive me, but I can't be bothered with Palin anymore. I want to linger with the victor. As I've thought about Obama's speech on election night, and his demeanor since, the word that has stayed with me most isn't the names of the groups he said he hoped to unite (blacks, whites, gays, straights, etc.) or the particular policy proposals he reiterated. Rather, it's the name of one of the temptations he hopes we'll avoid as a nation going forward: "immaturity."
It's a striking word for a politician to use (along with the more customary "partisanship" and "pettiness" ). Reading the Newsweek series about the campaign, I was less interested in the latest revelations about Palin's wardrobe than those about the sheer childishness of the Hillary and McCain camps: the toddlerlike tantrums, the puerile infighting, the impulsiveness, the adolescent refusal to accept responsibility for anything that went wrong. Many commentators, of course, have noted Obama's self-containment, his self-discipline, his unflappability. His campaign's motto was No-Drama Obama (i.e., no teenage theatrics). But isn't this just another way of saying that Obama is that rare thing in recent American politics: a grown-up as opposed to a mere adult?
By contrast, Bush, McCain and Hillary remain, quite literally, children. One or both of their parents are remarkably still alive. Indeed, what struck me most about Obama on election night was how alone he was on that stage, except for his own wife and children. (Even an aged Biden could hold his mother's hand.) And I wonder if, even more than race, this unusual parentlessness for a man Obama's age hasn’t contributed to what I regard as his singular strength and virtue in our youth-obsessed culture: his maturity. Yes, McCain was older and more experienced, but in this election, he actually came across as less mature. The youth vote went for the grown-up.
Obama's election may have finally closed the chapter on the 1960s, by which most people mean the debates over Vietnam. But born as he was at the tail end of the baby boomers, Obama, I think, may have also turned the page on the extended adolescence of his generation. In many ways, the last eight years have felt like one of those teenage parties where the grown-ups are absent and things have spiraled dangerously out of control. Countries, like kids, need and want limits. So, while I've been overjoyed this last week as I've watched a confident and competent Obama begin to assume power, what I've felt most, I've suddenly realized, is sheer relief: A responsible adult has finally showed up to shepherd everyone home.
-
To answer Meghan’s question, according to Brooks Brothers online, you can get a very nice suit for less than $1,000. And you can get its top-of-the-line suit for around $1,600. A nice shirt and tie might bring this to $2,000. I seriously doubt Joe Biden bought 70 such suits after becoming Obama’s running mate. And whatever happened to the fine political tradition of wearing jeans and a flannel shirt when courting Joe Sixpack? I’m not sure Chanel is (or should be) the female equivalent.
I also find the argument that Palin had nothing else to wear, prior to the RNC’s shopping spree, a little unbelievable. Palin is the governor of a major state. She campaigned for this office, appeared on TV countless times in that election (including in multiple debates), has surely attended governors’ conferences and other formal events in an official capacity. Are we to believe that prior to being tapped for VP, she never owned anything besides a seal-skin coat and 'coon cap?
As a native of Dallas, I’ve spent my fair share of money at Neiman-Marcus’ flagship store, but as Slate’s piece points out today—it’s pretty hard to blow $150,000, even at a store like Neiman’s. Moreover, I know a lot of high-society women in Dallas who brag about the fine fashion they’ve also found at Target, especially in these tough economic times. (They call the store “Tar-chez.”) Is it really the opinion of the women on XX Factor that a woman can’t look good on TV or at a rally in anything less than a $4,000 designer suit? Seems to me we’re buying into Carrie Bradshaw’s world view a little too much. The dress Michelle Obama wore when she went on The View famously cost $148 off the rack.
-
I swore off Sarah Palin for the week, but I can't resist a comment about her wardrobe—and a few questions for all you smart ladies. First, I find it telling that many outlets (including Slate and our blog) continue to refer to the shopping spree as "Sarah Palin's" shopping spree and talk about what "she's" done, when we know that Republican handlers bought the clothes and arranged for the wardrobe. But how active was she in this whole thing? Was she more or less outfitted than Biden was? Would we use the same kind of language of implication if we found out that Democrats had selected for Joe Biden a wardrobe costing $150,000? Or would we assume more distance between the candidate and his clothes? Would the party EVER spend that much money on a man?
These questions seem important because how we think about women and their clothes is different from how we think about a man and his clothes. Clothes are one of the many ways it's more complicated to be a woman politician than a man; women have to spend more time coming up with a look than men do. Historically, men have had a uniform that connotes authority, and women haven't. Most female uniforms have signified subservience: I'm a helper. Think nurses, stewardesses, etc. By contrast, many male uniforms have signaled power: I'm a protector/decider. Think doctors, cops, businessmen in power suits. (Of course there is also a subset of lower-status male uniforms.)
One imagines Palin isn't that active a participant in her makeover. But she is being dressed up and positioned to look her best. As someone pointed out to me today, in the VP debate moderated by Gwen Ifill there were several shots of Palin and Biden from behind, showing off Palin's shoes, her nice legs, and other, er, assets. And whether or not she chooses any of this, she's implicated in it—setting off these sorts of conversations. It's analogous to many of the problems Hillary faced, and it says to me, at least, that we still have a long way to go before we really get used to women in politics.
Finally, if we're gonna talk about these things: How much does Biden's wardrobe cost, do you think? All you men who read XXFactor: some of you must have a sense of how much this snazzy-looking suit (which he wore during one of the VP debates) cost. I'm at meghanor@gmail.com if anyone has an educated guess...
-
So, news outlets reported that yesterday Joe Biden told fundraisers in Seattle that in the next six months an international crisis would "test" Barack Obama just as one had tested Kennedy. According to reports, Biden told supporters: "The world is looking. We're about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States. Watch, we're going to have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy." The gist in part seems to be that Obama is as brilliant as Kennedy. But one wonders why, exactly, Biden felt he had to say this now, since it opened Obama up to an easy counterattack, which McCain promptly seized. At a rally this afternoon, he asked crowds why they'd want to elect a president whose mettle the world feels primed to test--i.e., a president who has so little experience he seems an easy target, or at least an urgent target.
Meanwhile, according to CNN, McCain has been closing ground in one poll, which asked voters who they supported for president, leaving Obama with a five-point lead compared to the eight-point one he had at the beginning of the month. These polls are changing all the time. But maybe not a good time for Biden to be acting as if Obama has the race locked up.
-
Couldn't agree more, Ann, on Joe Biden's manner and competence and show of feeling: the real deal all around, it seemed to me. (Well, except for the cosmetic dentistry. Just like you can so be too rich or too thin, you can also have chompers that are too blindingly white, as it turns out.) Gwen Ifill did a good job as well, didn't you think? She got out of the way, and asked questions that could not possibly be heard as gotchas. (Could they?) They were unfussy, most definitely not for show, and served their purpose perfectly. Though technically, most of them did not get answered, last night also confirmed my belief that in some ways, it matters less what you ask than how you ask it, since the only real question in these situations is: Who are you? And that one always gets answered in the end.
-
I know this debate was mostly about Sarah Palin, but let's not be sexist and forget about Joe Biden. I thought he was great, not least because he came across as what Palin pretends to be but isn't—and what this campaign could really use: a regular person who resists pat categorizing, rather than a caricature in a polarized drama that bears no relation to life.
I'm not saying that's Biden's usual public mode by any means: Man-off-his-meds can be more his style. But last night on the stage next to Palin, he was a guy in a dark suit who calmly confounded a script that's getting awfully tiresome. He wasn't the Elite Insider to her Maverick Outsider; the way Biden drew on his career accomplishments, he made 36 years in the Senate sound like real-world experience with real challenges for an independent minded person—not (as McCain often does) arcane ritual, and not like the vague grandstanding Palin invokes when she refers to her executive experience. He didn't come across as Professorial Wonk to her Main Street Mom, either, and not just because he said "champ" and invoked his blue-collar origins; he marshaled facts with ease, gave them punch because he knew what he was talking about, where for all her folksiness, her own patter sounded totally canned.
And he wasn't the Old Guy to her Young Gal; only six years younger than McCain, Biden may say "ladies and gentlemen," but he seems a generation apart, lacking the condescendingly old-school tone I hear in everything McCain says about his running mate. Maybe it's that Biden has a hands-on dad aura, which he comes by totally honestly. (Shouldn't we be parsing that choke-up? Seemed completely real to me.)
Race, gender, age, class, education, values, experience: This is a campaign in which both sides like to talk about surmounting divisions and bringing both sides together. But doggone it, you don't very often get to see someone just walking the walk.
-
I have been racking my brain to figure out who Sarah Palin reminds me of ever since she came on the scene with her bright smile, her folksy-corporate style, and her Silly Puttied authenticity, which mirrors back at the viewer whatever talking point she's just absorbed. From the start, I've found her stylistically arresting, for reasons that have to do with her energy and her youth but also, I felt, with some dim recollection of a dark literary doppelganger ... And just now, watching the very end of the debate, it struck me: Sarah Palin reminds me of a character in a George Saunders story. Saunders writes brilliant short stories about characters trapped in the American DreamTM. They are workers at theme parks or Hooters-style restaurants, mummified in corporate-sponsored "flair" (to borrow from the brilliant film Office Space). They speak in the same style of substanceless perk. They are to humanity what MSG is to flavor. (At least, some are.) Palin is, of course, far more successful than many of Saunders' characters, and I don't make the comparison merely to caricature her but to capture what I think is crucial about her. She buys into a whole vocabulary of signifiers that often don't signify very much, and she scaffolds that lexicon with winks, smiles, and carefully mimed gestural reinforcement. All politicians employ empty rhetoric, of course. But I don't know that I've ever seen one employ superficial language with such a sense of palpable enjoyment at her (or his, of course) mastery. And just like Saunders' characters, she refuses to show vulnerability or hesitation, deploying rapid-fire prepackaged phrases like a missile shield, as if the silence that comes with groping for ideas were deadly. (Just listen to her answer about her "Achilles' heel" in the V.P. debate, and compare it with dialogue in a Saunders story.) She loves to say "maverick" and "zero-base" and to recount how she once "quasi-caved" on an issue but didn't "compromise." (Huh?)
A lot of the original media coverage of Palin was confused by things about her that derive, it seems to me, from the fact that she's a woman in the West (which Camille Paglia wrote astutely about a few weeks ago). But what's *not* Western about Palin is how avidly she's borrowed and inhabited the language of cute-can-do-ism that's exploited by companies to lull workers into taking pleasure in how much of their time is given over to "breakout sessions" and the business of being an employee. Throughout the debate, she talked like the executive she's so proud to be rather than the governor she ought to be. (It's no surprise, it occurs to me belatedly, that Saunders wrote a brilliant parody of Palin's speech patterns right after the RNC speech, which you can find here.)
Meanwhile, Biden was the tortoise to her hyper hare: He chipped away slowly and steadily and relaxed as the night progressed. And his answer about being a father and understanding what it's like to raise a child who might not make it was authoritative and emotional at the same time.
-
I was teaching a class tonight (on T.S. Eliot's "The Waste Land," of all texts) and so I just got home to watch the debate and read everyone's responses. A number of my XX Factor colleagues here said that the debate tonight wasn't "about" gender. I guess that's true, but on the other hand, it was, at least in one small way. On CNN, the tracked "real time" reactions of uncommitted Ohio voters were divided by sex. And boy, did Biden simply not seem to connect with male voters. Those same men seemed to like Palin, though—a lot more than the women did. The Ohio women thumbed their disapproval when Palin got cutesy ("It's 'Drill, baby, drill' "), sending her ratings down. Women *really* didn't like it when Palin talked about Iraq and the "white flag of surrender." And they loved it when Biden talked about Pakistan. Meanwhile, any time Palin turned and faced the camera, the men's ratings shot up attentively. This division may have a lot to do with issue keywords—that is, a difference in which issues mean what to the two sexes in Ohio. But it was striking nonetheless. Gender may not be an issue, but I still contend that Eros is one, and Palin just has much more charge on stage than Biden does. (I have to say, I don't think that his suit or tie helped; he seemed overdressed, overformal.)
Meanwhile, I was disappointed (if not surprised) to find that one of their few moments of total agreement concerned the issue of gay marriage. When Biden firmly said "no," neither he nor Obama supported gay marriage, I thought: *here* is politics as usual. Two candidates who've suffered discrimination in different ways (Obama, Palin) yet both defend a profound form of continued discrimination. Nice.
-
Posting on behalf of Emily Yoffe, who's traveling:
Biden won, but more important, Sarah Palin rehabilitated herself from being a national joke. If she’d been performing as she did tonight during her big media interviews, she would have saved all of us a lot of existential squirming. And whatever your politics, I'd rather not have one of the candidates for the second-highest office in the country appear to be a fool. This makes her less of an issue, less of Exhibit A of John McCain's bad judgment. So, doesn’t tonight's debate makes the conventional wisdom right—that the vice-presidential pick really doesn't matter that much?
-
The debate is over, and the Republican base is breathing a huge sigh of relief. Sarah Palin didn't make a royal mess of the debate, something that a lot of us feared might happen after her disastrous sitdown with Katie Couric.
Yes, she benefited from the fact she didn't have to take follow-ups, and she benefited from low expectations. But she was tough and charming, and she held her own against an opponent with vastly more experience and who was on his game in his own right. She almost made me want to believe in a windfall profits tax.
This is precisely what I was hoping for. I like her personally—she's endearing, even with that accent—and we share some important beliefs. (Not all. I will cheer the day any presidential or VP candidate, Republican or Democrat, stands onstage in an important debate and calls out for marriage equality.) However inexperienced she might be, I don't want her to get the blame for taking the whole ticket down with her.
Before McCain stunned all of us with the Palin pick, the consensus is that it's rare for a vice-presidential candidate to make a big difference in the outcome of the election. But then Palin took McCain on a meteoric rise and seemed poised to take him to equally low depths. I think, or at least hope, that she halted that tonight.
I don't know if McCain is going to get a boost from it. She might not pick up any independents. If you look at the instant—and unscientific—Internet polls that appear on Drudge and some of the news sites, they are laughably partisan. Drudge an InstaPundit readers love Palin. MSNBC.com, home to Keith Olbermann, has Biden winning by ridiculous margins.
There's no doubt that McCain is in trouble. He's trailing in the polls, and some of that has got to be because Obama is viewed by voters as better on the economy and the way the House Republicans made him look bad on the bailout. It's going to take more than an amazing vice-presidential nominee to pull him out of that. She saved his campaign five weeks ago. It would be nice if she could do more interviews and perform well in them. But at the end of the day, it's still John McCain running for president. Let's at least say that if Obama beats McCain next month, it's because Barack's the better candidate, not because a hockey mom from Alaska brought down the GOP.
-
Does it make any sense to say that as expected, Sarah Palin exceeded expectations? She didn't flail. She didn't lose her train of thought or all semblance of recognizable syntax. She powered through her answers, airy and bloated as some of them were. She snapped out of the stumped distress of her Couric interviews and turned back into the perky forceful governor who showed up at the Republican convention. What made the spell-breaking difference? She had more facts at her fingertips. She got to needle an opponent, which she clearly loves and does well. But the real magic, I think, is that she didn't have to answer a single follow-up question. God bless that format.
So Palin redeemed herself. But how much does it matter? Because Joe Biden was good. She knifed him in the ribs with a smile, with a wink here, a "darn right" there. And he came back with strength, emotion, and point-by-point substance. According to those mesmerizing green and orange lines on CNN that tracked reactions among undecided Ohio voters—men and women separated this time, instead of Republicans, Democrats, and independents—Biden's numbers spiked every time he talked about the economy and the Iraq war. Palin's didn't. It doesn't matter how many times she says "doggone it" if that reflects the wider sentiment of voters in the middle. Palin got her base back, if she'd ever lost it. But with JohnMcCain writing off Michigan today, that's not enough. How many people who didn't already agree with Palin did her restored charm win over?
What did you all think of Biden's tearing up, briefly, at the end? It worked for me: He was talking about the terrible car accident that killed his first wife and their baby daughter. He choked up in the midst of a powerful answer about how he understands what it's like to be a single parent and to worry deeply about one's family.
My favorite Palin moment: "The chant is 'Drill baby drill,' "she corrected Biden, who'd said, "drill drill drill," and for emphasis she gave a little shimmy. That's the effective blend of femininity and toughness that has made a lot of us waste a lot of time this fall watching her every move. Welcome back, Sarah Barracuda.
My favorite Biden moment: his deconstruction of Palin's much-repeated mantra that she and McCain are the mavericks in this race. Biden ripped her on the facts, citing all the votes McCain has cast with Bush.Then he ended with "maverick he is not." It had gravitas, it was on message, and as my colleague John Swansburg said, it felt cathartic.
-
The most telling moment for me: Gwen Ifill asks both candidates to acknowledge their own worst flaws, their “Achilles' heels.” Biden jokingly thanks Ifill for suggesting that his worst flaw may be a lack of self-discipline before citing his “excessive passion” for the American people. A little disingenuous, to be sure, like the moment you tell a prospective boss that your only fault is working too hard. But Palin? She says nothing to address Ifill’s question in the entire 90 seconds of vaguely patriotic gobbledygook that follow (though somewhere in there Ronald Reagan makes an appearance, along with the shining city on the hill too, though, also). In other words, when directly asked to talk about any imperfections in her character or record, she ignores the question. Given George Bush’s well-established aversion to introspection, shouldn’t her handlers have coached her to have some kind of response prepared for this utterly foreseeable question? Or is obliviously high self-regard now considered a positive quality in a leader?
-
Doggone it, howza 'bout we cancel these next two presidential debates and instead spend those evenings with Sen. O'Biden—Hey, can I call you Joe, too?—and Sarah Palin. Darn right that'd be more fun for Joe Sixpack—that's Mr. Sixpack to you—and for hockey moms across this great nation.
Gov. Palin made no rootin' tootin' sense tonight: Her defense of John McCain's insistence, as recently as two weeks ago, that the fundamentals of the economy were strong was this: "John McCain, in referring to the fundamental of our economy being strong, he was talking to and he was talking about the American work force and the American work force is the greatest in the world, with the ingenuity and the work ethic that is just entrenched in our work force. That's a positive, that's encouragement (wink) and that's what John McCain meant.''
Darned if she didn't answer Biden's charge that McCain had been all for financial deregulation with a big ol' non sequitur about tax cuts: "I'm still on the tax thing.'' Her comment that we have nothing to apologize for as a country was alarming, her tone condescending and her answer on global warming dyslexic: "I'm not one to attribute every activity of man to the change in the climate; there is something to be said for man's activity.'' The Bush phrase blame game -- -- which he popularized post-Katrina -- made a surprise cameo. And the capper might have been when she said "Never again'' in reference not to genocide, but predatory lending practices. Only, you know what? She killed, with her cozy, winking speed-walk around the questions. Oh, and Joe—that is his name, right?—did fine, too, both on the substance and in his demeanor.
When he choked up at the end, talking about the accident in which his first wife and daughter died and his two sons were critically injured, it was in direct response to Palin's suggestion that she has some pretty unique insight into what it's like for families who struggle financially and worry about doing right by their children. So when he said "the notion that somehow as a man I don't know what it's like to raise two kids alone...to have a child you're not sure is going to make it,'' it came across as real, rather than manipulative, while also (and perhaps for all time) trumping her gender card. It would have been nice if she'd found a way to acknowledge his loss, though she couldn't exactly walk over and throw her arms around him. And I doubt that's something they covered in debate prep.
-
Sarah,
It's been a heck of a month, hasn't it? When John McCain introduced you to the nation, I was immensely excited. You were great at the convention. You're a hit with the base. But I've got to fess up, you're making me uneasy.
It's not the easiest thing to admit. Liberal bloggers have spread falsehoods about you, and some in the media have been questioning you since Day 1. The vicious things people have said about you hit me personally for some reason, and I don't want to dignify them. But the interviews speak for themselves. I don't know what happened between the time you spoke at the convention and when you sat down with Charlie Gibson. But you've been like a different person.
My colleague Emily Bazelon has a thoughtful piece in Slate today about the agony women feel watching you. Conservative columnist Kathleen Parker wants to like you but thinks you should step down. I'm not going to go that far. At least not yet. (And if I did go that far, I'm not sure what I'd do, because you'd probably have to stumble through the alphabet before I'd want to vote for your opponent.)
I'm imploring you. Please bring your A-game tonight. I don't want you to do well just so you can ward off sympathy votes or pity parties. I want you to do well because there are many conservative women who support you or did support you but are wavering. We don't want feminism to be defined by the left, but if you fail, many are going to see it as a failure for all of us who share your ideology. We relate to you. And sure, whenever someone brings up the point that people want relatable candidates, someone fires back saying that we don't want "average joes" in office, we want someone exceptional. Well, what I think most people want is someone who is at once exceptional and likable. Someone who's talented and hardworking and successful but understands what it's like to fret over retirement funds and putting our kids through college. You've got that potential. God knows we've seen your relatable side. And you must have some exceptionalism in there. How else could you have gotten from the PTA to the governor's mansion?
Here are some tips and some things to keep in mind.
You're debating Sen. Joe Biden. In the past few weeks, he's asked a man in a wheelchair to stand up and reminisced about President FDR giving a televised speech in 1929. How hard can this be?
Everyone is making a huge deal out of the fact that you'd be "one heartbeat away from the presidency" if McCain wins. That's a lot of pressure. Well, Nancy Pelosi is two heartbeats away from the presidency, and if the bailout disaster in the House this week is any indication, she clearly doesn't let the pressure make her slow down and think too much.
I don't know what calms you down in times of stress, or if you have any tricks, like picturing the audience in their underwear. But if you need to, imagine that Gwen Ifill is Sean Hannity. Pretend that Joe Biden is former Gov. Tony Knowles. Do whatever you have to. Some of us are still pulling for you.
-
Damn, man, whatever happened to Schadenfreude? Isn’t anyone here going to enjoy seeing Sarah Palin struggle tonight? God knows I can identify with the sympathy angle—I once gave a job talk at Brown that felt, from my end, a lot like that Katie Couric interview – but in no way does that translate into hoping she does well enough to redeem herself in the debate, in order to somehow represent on behalf of women in general. On the contrary: I’m looking forward to watching Palin flail (and come on, people, in an unscripted and explicitly polemical format she’s going to flail like an Alaska salmon on the dock.) To me, watching her incompetence get exposed is like payback for the last eight years of staring at a naked, and thoroughly unattractive, emperor. And you know what? I was a lot more qualified for that Brown job than Palin is for VP, but I still wasn’t the best candidate, and my prospective employers deserved to find that out.
I think both compassionate people like the rest of you and spiteful harpies like myself can agree that cutting Palin extra slack – whether because of her gender or her supposed persecution at the hands of “the press” – is a profoundly unfeminist thing to do. And while I agree that strategically, Biden will be wise to tiptoe around Palin’s gender (avoiding the appearance of condescension, etc.), I look forward to a brave post-feminist world in which, one day, the debate partners of lightweights like Palin will be at liberty to mop the floor with said lightweights—not because they’re women (or men), but because they’re arrogant fools.
-
Kathleen Parker says her fellow conservative Sarah Palin has exhausted her cringe reflex, and I hear her on that. Mine has been overtaxed for years. Remember the presidential debate for which some malevolent (or high, maybe?) makeup artist painted Al Gore orange? In the privacy of my living room, I listened to most of that one with my sweatshirt pulled up over my eyes because it was too painful to watch. At the first presidential debate in '04, in Miami, I even had to look away from George W., about whom I am not aware of ever having had an admiring thought, because watching him flounder around babbling that being president, well, "it's hard work ... it's hard work ... it's hard work'' just felt cruel. So am I hoping that both Palin and Joe Biden do well enough tonight that I won't have to avert my eyes? No, because my comfort level isn't the point; their competence is. No, because even the most lopsided debate can help the perceived loser more than the supposed winner; there are no straight lines between cause and effect in politics, which I have to admit is part of the attraction, warped as that may be. No, because women have the same right to be underprepared that men have always had. And no, because voters make me even more nervous than candidates do, so whatever happens tonight is still just the prelims.
-
Slate editors and XX Factor bloggers Emily Bazelon and Dahlia Lithwick will be chatting on Washingtonpost.com this afternoon at 3:30 ET. They will be outlining what Joe Biden and Sarah Palin each need to do to succeed in tonight's vice-presidential debate.
Emily has an article in Slate today that discusses how watching Palin's interviews is agonizing for women. Dahlia has written about how Joe Biden can debate Palin and win.
Send them your questions about tonight's debate.
Update, 5:21 p.m.: Here's the transcript. Thanks for your questions!
-
Sarah Palin striking out on Supreme Court cases she doesn't like, other than the old faithful Roe v. Wade, is painful television. Joe Biden's answers to the same set of questions from Katie Couric seemed odd for a different reason. Biden said he supports Roe, “Because I think it’s as close to a consensus that can exist in a society as heterogeneous as ours.” Call Roe brave if you want, call it essential for women, call it a victory for equal rights—but a consensus? Given how divisive abortion politics have proved to be, that seems like wishful bordering on magical thinking. Biden defends the trimester-by-trimester structure of Roe, pointing out that it allows for progressively more government regulation. And he ends on, "not consensus, but as close as it's going to get." That's a little better, I guess.
I give Biden points for panning the Supreme Court's 2000 decision to strike down part of the Violence Against Women Act. Biden acknowledges that he wrote the law and had a personal interest in the ruling. It does stand as an unfortunate high water mark of the court's federalist revolt. Which has since lost its moxie.
-
No, Emily, we should not judge Sarah Palin as a mother, no matter how beguilingly she and her impulsive soulmate invite us to do so. Remember when the Earth was young, 10 days ago, and we were still wondering about the Hillary Holdouts? If they haven't been scared straight by now, they aren't coming back. But one thing I hope we learned from them is that sexist attacks helped Hillary more than they hurt her, energizing her supporters and winning her some converts, too, among women who weren't totally sold until they saw her criticized in ways a man wouldn't be. Every sexist shot not only boomeranged, but was held against Barack Obama. Which is why everyone who wants him to win should mind Dahlia's advice to Joe Biden and avoid certain modes of attack altogether.
This is especially critical given the latest polling, which suggests that many women really are switching from Obama to McCain because he's chosen a female running mate: According to a Washington Post-ABC News poll, "white women shifted from an 8-point pre-convention edge for Obama to a 12-point McCain advantage now.''
Like Hillary Clinton and every Republican in my lifetime—with the exception of Sen. Soulmate, before he got religion and lost our phone number—Palin is running against the media. So our sins will be held against the Obama-Biden ticket, too. With time so short, she did not even wait to be attacked before throwing down the victim cards of gender, class, and media bias: "I've learned quickly, these past few days,'' she said in her convention speech, "that if you're not a member in good standing of the Washington elite, then some in the media consider a candidate unqualified for that reason alone.'' (Are these the same "some'' who want us to make nice with terrorists? Or the "they'' who hate us because we're free?) Sure, but then why bring the straw man to life by lunging for the bait? Mike Barnicle played right into her hands, worrying on MSNBC about who'd be minding little Trig if Mummy was off working in the Executive Office Building.
And the more Democrats rant about God, guns, babies, and Sarah P., the better for McCain, who must have been doing the happy dance after Harry Reid described her tone as shrill, and when Biden joked that one big diff between them was that she was better lookin'. I was in Toledo for that one; that is what he said, and Obama was just as casual with his words that day, repeatedly addressing older women in the audience as "young lady.'' :(
This past weekend, my 12-year-old son, who totally knows how to work me, suggested that we celebrate my return from the Sarah Palin Party Convention in St. Paul by watching The Contender in her honor. I'd forgotten, but it's one of those heavy-handed, here-comes-the-crowbar and there-goes-your-cranium liberal morality tales about a Sen. Laine Hanson, played by Joan Allen, who's tapped to become the vice president after the guy in office dies. Her top adviser is her husband, but that's about all Hanson and Palin have in common. Early in the movie, we see the Clinton-ish president, played by Jeff Bridges, wondering whether a woman who has served only a decade in the U.S. Senate will be seen as experienced enough to handle the job, especially on the foreign-policy front.
Only oops, he was so busy trying to stump the White House chef that, just like John McCain, he seems to have neglected to vet his pick, whose past is more exciting than he might have hoped. For one thing, though it has somehow previously escaped the nation's notice, she appropriated her best friend's husband while he was managing her first campaign. A story that she had sex with a bunch of guys at a drunken college party turns out not to be true. Hanson would rather withdraw her name than dignify her accusers with a denial, but Bubba convinces the country that we're better than that, too, and don't need to know. So yay, she's in, and sex scandals are out!
There is one scene relevant to life on this planet, however: When consultants advise Hanson's craven shell of a formerly good-guy rival to "gut the bitch,'' he winces but goes along, and is ruined in the end. Though part of me is looking for a reason to wag my finger and say, "Let that be a lesson to you, young man," it's not really Obama or jaw-flappin' Joe that I worry about getting carried away like that; it's the rest of us I'm not so sure of.
-
It's not just the foreign policy chops; he brings some blood (and flab!) and jaw-flapping to a sometimes too-cool-for-school campaign. Voters actually liked it when Bush tripped over his own tongue; when he failed in his battle with blurting, they could relate, and that is the beauty of the Biden choice: He's got the smarts, the experience, and without question could be president. (In fact, watching the Democratic debates during primary season, I always thought that a viewer who came to the exercise cold would have assumed Biden was the front-runner.) But he also brings the humanity that Democrats have not always seen as important. It is.
Though no one has a more heart-breaking personal narrative than he—his first wife and their baby daughter died in a car accident soon after he was elected to the Senate—he sure never talked about it during primary season, showing an Irish Catholic restraint that will be familiar to a lot of the voters Obama needs to win over. And his working-class roots aren't just nice; they're why I fully expect him to know how to play rough and be plenty comfortable in the role of bad cop, taking on the Republican ticket in a way the candidate himself cannot. A guy who commutes home on public transpo every day taking on Mr. Can't Keep Track of His Houses? As we say in the Democratic Party, pas de probleme.