In today's pages: Sarah Palin, feminism, immigration and Los Angeles
Looks like "pick-a-fight-with-Republicans day" lasts more than 24 hours at the Times' Opinion Manufacturing Division. Today's OpEd page offers two, umm, less than flattering takes on John McCain's running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, despite her star turn at the podium last night. (Can I just pause to remark, as someone who enjoys the theater of big political events, that Palin deserves the same accolades that Hillary Clinton received for doing exactly what her party needed her to do at that moment? If you missed it, read the transcript aloud in a strong, assured voice while keeping a determined look on your face. For the sake of verisimilitude, make sure to pause frequently for applause. Of course, it might be easier to peruse this take by the Times' veteran DC bureau chief, Doyle McManus, or this one by Top of the Ticket blogger Andy Malcolm. But I digress.)
Feminist author Gloria Steinem, who calls the speech "down-home, divisive and deceptive," shreds Sarah Palin's record as governor and all but declares her unfit to serve as vice president. Yet Steinem doesn't fault Palin as much as she does the man who picked her:
The culprit is John McCain. He may have chosen Palin out of change-envy, or a belief that women can't tell the difference between form and content, but the main motive was to please right-wing ideologues; the same ones who nixed anyone who is now or ever has been a supporter of reproductive freedom.
Columnist Rosa Brooks takes a different tack in her critique of Palin (and, by extension, McCain), delving into reports of Palin's entanglement with a secessionist political party in Alaska. Rounding out the distaff trio of scribes, columnist Patt Morrison looks not at Palin (make that "looks not again") but at California's GOP delegation, which convention organizers held in low esteem despite the outsized number of votes the state casts in the Electoral College:
Our delegates have just about the worst possible seats at the convention, at the back and so far left that they can only see the speaker in profile. The only way they could be any more distant is if they were working the concession stands.
Over on the editorial page, the Times' board wades into less controversial fare, like, oh, union membership for illegal immigrants. In particular, it bemoans the effort by Agriprocessors not to recognize the organization created by its meatpacking employees on the grounds that the illegal immigrants on its payroll didn't have the right to unionize. Can't wait to see the comments on that one. The board also wishes the city of Los Angeles a happy 227th birthday, and urges Congress to bar federal investigators from pressuring corporate and white-collar targets to reveal what they discussed with their lawyers.
The photo of Sarah Palin speaking to the Republican National Convention last night is from Robyn Beck/AFP/Getty Images.
Although not yet elected, vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin has written a letter to fellow Republican, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, urging him to veto SB 974, which impose a port tax to combat pollution and global warming.
State Senator, Alan Lowenthal, the sponsor of the bill pointed out that we lose 3,400 Californians each year because of pollution. 4,500 people in the Los Angeles area die each year of respiratory illnesses. Palin can babble all she wants to about 9/11 but she doesn’t care that Californians suffer a 9/11 every year.
I retired from LAUSD in 2007, asthma was a fact of life in the inner city high school where I taught. In fact, when one of my colleagues discovered that her inhaler was empty, most of the students in her class offered to lend her theirs.
Palin’s meddling proves that all Sarah Palin thinks about is the oil interests of Alaska. I might add that Alaskans get a $2,000 a year in oil revenues, plus a $ 1,200 subsidy for fuel, all financed by the price Californians pay at the pump. Now Palin wants us to sacrifice our health and lives as well. In spite of her claim about being pro-Life, Palin shows little regard for the lives of Angelenos.
Posted by: Willliam Joseph Miller | September 12, 2008 at 09:16 AM
Recent polls have shown that polar bears and moose are now swinging to the Reb vote.. and new vote for "real change". A radical step towards the Status Quo.
Actual Quotes:
" I used to like my snow fur.. but now I'm going for the brunette-spec look that's so shockingly different and hip. Hopefully Rush L. will find me good-looking then!".
"I have to fish all day and raise 5 pups.. now the Reb party is someone I can truly relate to... because you know... only the Reb understand that. They have families and the Dem do not.".
"I like that common sense no-nonsense approach.. just scratch off names in the endangered list-- and your day goes by faster as the list gets shorter. I Brilliant ! "
"I don't really like personal journeys or growth via discovery... because you know... as animals that's just hard. So the Reb party is now it! "
Posted by: Sapphire | September 09, 2008 at 01:03 PM
The Status Quo is the Status Quo... no gender-bender can cover that. The Status Quo does mask itself as new and fresh and different when truly challenged by a revolution.
See through the mirage, people:
The Reb are now 'change copy-cats'... but who are they inside? The Status Quo.
Posted by: Saph | September 09, 2008 at 12:49 PM
I Have been reading all of these comments and I feel really Sad for Americians Why Cant we see what is really going on what is the truth Sarah Palin is a MONSTER She is your Ticket to HELL and when and if you vote on this Ticket Oh Boy will you be sorry. Unless of course You are Rich not planning to have any more children, are not A jew Or Black or Hispanic or Gay. Or mY dear God are not a MOOse. WHat does this woman stand for BUSHES Master Plan Remember Hilter my fellow Americans Watch out if this this ticket wins End of Story.
Posted by: sondra hassman | September 08, 2008 at 02:15 PM
I understand why the feminists disagree with some of Sarah Palin's views, like abortion, and I understand their disappointment at loosing Hillary as the first female President, or Vice President. But, now they have a real chance to elect the first ever female Vice President. A woman who exemplifies so many amazing qualities, including her successes and 85% approval rating as Alaska's governor, mother of five, and the whole nine yards. In addition to breaking the glass ceiling, Palin can finally bring about tremendous reforms for women.As International abuses keep coming to light regarding women's rights, including everything from burkas, to white slavery, to honor killings, you would certainly think that women would be tripping over themselves to elevate one of their own to such a high position. What a shame the feminists are so petty that they can't see the big picture, set aside their conflicting grievances, and make a couple of concessions, in order to progress in such a big way.
Posted by: Gina | September 08, 2008 at 10:33 AM
I don't need the LA Times any more for a none positive news about Sarah Palin who deserves the utmost respect and we give it to her. Sarah is regularly updated on our countries defence and in charge of one of Americas largest defence missile systems with 4000 plus N.G. solders to protect the USA. Gov. over 20,000 Thousand employees. She has more experience for president than Obama and Biden in leading our military and on and on. Is this a sexist paper, I think so!
Posted by: LAwoman | September 06, 2008 at 11:40 AM
"Looks like "pick-a-fight-with-Republicans day" lasts more than 24 hours at the Times' Opinion Manufacturing Division."
The Times lead-in says it all. I'm sure it just KILLS the Times to have to spend more than 15 minutes on anything with a viewpoint other than the liberal left. And it's darn near impossible to get the Times to report on anything non-liberal in an objective or professional manner. This I know - I read the Times every morning and every morning gripe that it's a horrible paper. Your dwindling readership reflects this narrow focus but you can keep kidding yourselves that it's because of the lack of advertising, the internet, yada yada.
By the way, I'm a working mom who voted for Obama in the primary. I'm now voting for McCain/Palin. The more I learn about Obama the more I realize he is wrong for the job but I couldn't get past McCain and Iraq until Sarah entered the picture. Sorry, Gloria, as someone pointed out earlier, I'd rather have a President with experience and a Vice-President learning the job than the other way around. And I'm just plain fed up with the Obama media love fest.
Posted by: Valleygal | September 05, 2008 at 05:55 PM
Gloria,
Who do you call unqualified? Sarah represents the women of this country. She is strong. She is qualified. And she is a mother.
She is a true feminist --fighting for the rights of women and for the unborn!!!!!
Posted by: Ann Riddle | September 05, 2008 at 09:09 AM
Sarah Palin said nothing last night. She just repeated what was wriiten for her by Bush speech writer's. Plus, they've been prepping her all week. The true voice for American women, a modern day Eliza Doolittle.
Posted by: Mark | September 04, 2008 at 09:21 PM
M, I'd personally welcome a mandate for "an ouzo in every household, but I'm guessing that you meant "an Uzi."
Posted by: Jon Healey | September 04, 2008 at 05:50 PM
Palin must be a threat all the attack dogs were let loose. Big tax, big government, socialists hate her and that should make most main stream Americans feel good. The trouble with extreme lefts and extreme rights have is that when they push their agendas they ultimately create policies and laws that infringe on the very rights our forefathers fought and died to ensure for us. I hope this election is won by the middle. No mandates for more taxes, no mandates for "an ouzi in every household". Just creating jobs, drilling for American oil to help us now and developing alternative fuels (not inefficient high cost ethanol) that truly have a chance to ensure a future for our children and grandchildren.
Right now this independent thinks that McCain and Palin make more sense than tax and spend.
It's good the far left hate her, its good to have a Maverick in government.
I would rather have a quality VP learning on the job instead of a President learning on the job.
Posted by: M | September 04, 2008 at 05:42 PM
Did anyone watch Sarah Palin & Rudy Guliani last night? If yes, great. If not, here's something to ponder on:
1. American President's job in not the kind of job, where you get "Training on the Job". Obama is trying to do exactly that. He talks about change. Well, has he EVER Mentioned WHAT fre**ing CHANGE he's about to bring? The only change would be a Black President, instead of the whites we've had. NOTHING else. Change, change, change... its just a fr***ing slogan he's got. Back it up with something real dude! And not just words, but actions, experience, and Actual things he has Ever changed.
2. Like Palin said, "some people use change to promote THEIR careers. And some promote change by their careers." Well said. I would ask him differently, "do you just talk the talk, or do you walk the talk too?"
3. While Palin HAS PROVEN to lower he expenses in the state of Alaska (which is all she was responsible for), our Obama has increased the Foreign advisors to 300. He needs about 300 advisors to tell him how to answer a question on foreign related issues. I wonder how many more Advisors he will need in ALL the issues that a President has to handle. At that rate, he'll probably have a cabinet of 100,000 Advisors, huh?! for whom WE will all pay Top salaries. Geezzz that's some way to cut the expenses. So, basically the Advisors will run USA, and Obama will be the guy who just shows up on TV, and talks all sweet (the speech they write for him).
4. Its clearly shown that Obama can't take a decision and changed his mind 150 times. Geezzz, how OFTEN you guys want your President to "Change HIS mind?" Is THIS the change he keeps referring to? Haa..haa..
McCain is a hero, a fighter jet pilot, a POW, a politician, and many-many years of experience to prove. What does Obama have to show for, besides the words he uses - like Change, or Hope. That is not a real plan. And McCain also has Palin on his side, who too is a great person. You got to be a great person first, then a politician.
BTW, I'm a Democrat. I voted for Clinton, and I still wish Bill Clinton could come back and straighten all this up. But unfortunately, democrats don't have a decent candidate this time - Obama surly isn't.
I CARE ABOUT U.S.A FIRST, AND THEN THE PARTY!!!!!
Posted by: Roger | September 04, 2008 at 02:23 PM
Good lord, could McCain have picked someone more extreme? Among Palin's mayoral "responsibilities" was trying to remove books from libraries which she found offensive. When the City Librarian balked, Palin fired her.
This is a governor so divorced from reality she supported a political party which advocated the succession of Alaska from the Union.
This is a governor so ideologically driven she would force, by law, rape and incest victims to carry their babies to term.
Palin is a religious fundamentalist so contemptuous of science that she advocates the teaching of creationism in public schools.
Whenever I think it couldn't possibly get any worse ....
Posted by: Eric RIfe | September 04, 2008 at 02:08 PM
Everyone is amazed that a former beauty pageant can read cue cards and a speech written by someone else. What is so amazing about that. McCain just put the feminist movement back two decades.
This is almost embarassing for the Republicans. I feel sorry that your frail leader would have to stoop that low. Both of these bushbots regurgitate the extreme right vision which has led our nation into the toilet.
No new vision, no talk about how they plan on getting the economy back on track. Just more B.S. about a mother (who in my opinion lacks judgement) to berade her pregnant daughter around and then talk about family values.
Sarah Palin represents 77 cents to the dollar and nothing more. She is NO Way, No How equal to women that have fought hard to put 18 million cracks in the ceiling. She is McCain's joke/gimmick to the world. What an insult to all women everywhere (except those that do not realize how oppressed they've been).
Posted by: Gimmicky | September 04, 2008 at 01:50 PM
Just what this country needs...a senile old man and an unexperienced woman who loves shooting guns! Someone, please tell me this is a bad joke! And by the way...in an address last June, Palin told ministry students that U.S. troops fighting in the Iraq war were on a "task that is from God." Egads! She sounds just like the Islamic extremists! Heaven help us all!
Posted by: CB | September 04, 2008 at 01:43 PM
Sorry but this Democrat like her. She is smart and exciting. Obama is not King and the more you, the media, beat up on her the more I pay attention. I am for pro choice but I am at 80% for her and 0% for Obama.
Posted by: Yolando | September 04, 2008 at 12:23 PM
Re: Denis,
When oh when will this vile revolting disgusting woman (Palin) do the world a big favor and die?
Seriously you idiot. Steinem has done more to make sure that your daughters will have more opporunities in life then just being beeder for old men. Palin on the other hand...
Posted by: Andre from Sacto | September 04, 2008 at 11:53 AM
I just have one question for everyone who says Ms. Palin hit it out of the park last night. What, aside from the energy policy, did she say of any substance? How can the RNC criticize Obama for "electrifying speeches with no content" while heralding their new wunderkind as having the best speech ever? Snark, and personality while attractive does not a good policy speech make. I still have no idea what McCain and Pailn plan to do that will be a change from the current Republican policies, I await Mr. McCain's speech tonight.
Posted by: Natalie | September 04, 2008 at 11:45 AM
Now I see why I don't subscribe to the LA Times. I'm glad I cancelled this paper. Very slanted paper.
Posted by: Steve | September 04, 2008 at 11:37 AM
"Republicans may learn they can't appeal to right-wing patriarchs and most women at the same time." But Gloria, she is plenty appealing to the right wing matriarchs. She was a smart pick for McCain. I was afraid a few weeks ago he was seriously underestimating the number of pro-life women who would not vote at all if he picked a pro-choice running mate. The real question is not how many Hillary supporters may vote for McCain/Palin. The real question is how many pro-life women and men would have bowed out entirely if he hadn't made a pick that is this solid.
Posted by: Rachel | September 04, 2008 at 11:33 AM
When oh when will this vile revolting disgusting woman (Steinem) do the world a big favor and die?
Posted by: Denis | September 04, 2008 at 10:45 AM
You Republicain are a power monguer this friking speach is just one of the big picture the americain will see but does not have any substances, you can feel that is an evil speech , hey republicain remenber that the americain people are way better then your lies and your hatered and your cinississme, wake up dummers
NOTICE: THE ABOVE WAS WRITTEN BY LIBERAL
"sarah P". "SPEECH" IS NOT SPELLED CORRECTLY.
"SUBSTANCES" MAKES NO SENSE WHATSOEVER.
"REMEMBER" IS NOT SPELLED CORRECTLY.
"HATERED" SHOULD BE "HATRED", AND I THINK
"CINISSISSME" IS SUPPOSED TO BE "CYNICISM".
This individual is a sad,sad example of what our
education system has become. Of course with the
NEA being in the pockets of the liberals, what did
you expect?
Posted by: NoBO | September 04, 2008 at 10:35 AM
The left-wing media, Hollywood elitists, fanatical femininsts, etc all believe they represent the values of the American people. Our Lakota//Osage/German household will be voting for McCain/Palin.
Posted by: CC | September 04, 2008 at 10:34 AM
LOL, you right wing drones really crack me up. You criticize the L.A. Times, yet you're reading it and posting on their website! hahahah. And you people are in such a minority now that you've become a national embarrassment and a joke. I and a majority of this country don't take you seriously one bit. And Palin? LOL, where do I start with this pitiful trainwreck!
Regardless of all of this, my concern about this turn of events is somewhat softened by a few facts:
1: The "christian" right was looking for an excuse- any excuse- to flock to the McCain banner. Eventually, they would have, even if he had chosen George Clooney as his running mate. They are quite adept at compromising their most closely-held beliefs, when it comes to politics. Their shift to McCain is a fait accompli.
2: While Palin will bring the "christian" right to heel, her selection is failing to sway the largest voting demographic in this country- women. They ain't buying this token appointment, and most of the women I've spoken with consider her selection as an insult.
3: This republican convention is turning into an extremist echo of the 92 convention- a show that was so far-right that it scared millions of voters away from the republican party. They have purged all of the moderate speakers, in favor of the likes of Fred Thompson.
4: There are two more months, and Obama has more money, more volunteers, more offices in more states, is still leading in the polls, and has never dipped below 270 electoral votes in any comprehensive electoral forecast.
5: The majority of the american public considers the "christian" right that is in such a tizzy about Palin to be as palatable as dog turds on rye- the extreme right's allegiance to this ticket will be a net loss, come election day.
But that doesn't mean we should retreat into the comfortable certainty that we have enjoyed, and rest upon our laurels.
Again, check out if there's an event in your area. If there isn't an event in your area, start one. If you don't have the time to do so, give a few bucks to the campaign. If you haven't the bucks, or the time, talk to your friends, and family.
Get active, and keep fighting- we have two months left, and the stakes couldn't be any higher.
Posted by: Paul C. | September 04, 2008 at 10:30 AM
I was seriously considering supporting McCain until his first choice for VP was announced. I'm saying "first choice" because I'm hoping against all hope that the fascist maniac he has chosen for his ticket will turn tail and run before November.
First of all, a woman in her positon has too many distractions - or at least, she SHOULD. Her present choices seem not heroic, but blatantly self-serving and McCain smacks of having been handled. I also don't see why middle America is so excited about someone who has supported the seccession of Alaska, has smoked marijuana but hypocritically opposes legalization, and one who flaunts her American family values in a very, very unusual way.
I might note that the AARP has come out in support of Obama since the choice of Palin. They hate her. They really do.
Posted by: Crossleigh | September 04, 2008 at 10:10 AM