Moms are rising up thanks to Sarah Palin
Even if she doesn't have any foreign policy experience, John McCain probably thought that at the very least he could count on Sarah Palin to nurture the mothers-who-vote niche. But that's not going so well either. Her
campaign has managed to tick off a group of moms that once was thrilled with her.
MomsRising, which in two short years has amassed a membership of 140,000 citizens and counts 85 affiliated groups nationwide, yesterday tried to hand-deliver a letter signed by thousands of its members to Palin's office in Washington. In its letter, the group says it was dazzled to see a mom on stage at the Republican convention, accepting the nomination for vice president, but that it has some questions for her. MR wants to know where she stands on issues such as healthcare, afterschool programs, paid sick days and equal pay for working women.
The smart thing, of course, would have been for Palin's staff to take the letter and thank the 15 mothers (and one baby) for showing their devotion to their country and interest in the Alaska governor. Instead, Palin's people actually turned them away and told them to drop it in the mail.
Dismayed at the rebuff, MomsRising is rallying its troops. Wending its way across the national mothersphere today is an e-mail alerting its membership, and an Internet petition with the group's questions. Its ultimate destination is Gwen Ifill, the PBS moderator for the debate scheduled for Tuesday between Palin and Delaware Sen. Joe Biden. In her weekly live chat over at the Washington Post today, Ifill says she is open to including questions from the public.
Accepting the letter seems like a no-brainer, but who knows? Maybe the Palin camp didn't realize this group is accustomed to much better treatment: Here's Obama speaking at a MomsRising event, and here's Sen. Hillary Clinton.
Photo: Ron Edmonds/AP
For those defending Palin, get a brain. First, she supports supply side economics (as does McCain now) a failed economic approach that will doom the USA. Second, she has continued to argue that being close to Russia (siberia) is somehow foriegn policy experience. Third, she finished in the middle of her class at a 3rd rate university. Havent you had enough of 3rd rate leadership. Obama is an intellectual and I cannot believe that you are not looking for that after the Bush administration.
Posted by: Bob | September 25, 2008 at 08:22 PM
Come on, Sarah, all goin' lookin' watchin' and clippin' the ends off of your gerunds as a guise to make your lack of formal qualifications written off to bein' a down home gal. Asked for specifics by Couric? "Well, I'll have to get that right over to ya'"
Posted by: Patti Smith | September 25, 2008 at 08:03 PM
You all talk about how unqualified Sarah Palin is yet, Obama also lacks the experience needed to run the USA.
Obama can talk the talk, he just can't walk the walk.
You people living in glass houses should not be throwing stones!!!!
Sarah Palin is qualified - More than what Obama will ever be.
Just face the facts McCain/Palin is going to happen!!!!
Posted by: Allan | September 25, 2008 at 07:25 PM
You're pathetic, why does everyone compare Palin to Obama, they are both running in two very dofferent positions. Grow a spine and start comparing Obama to McCain
Posted by: TrishFromCanada | September 25, 2008 at 07:24 PM
I've just posted the following note on the Momsrising website (http://www.momsrising.org/node/1076)
THIS STORY IS A COMPLETE HOAX
I can't believe the LA Times is running with this. On the basis of what you've described, my understanding is that you went to the Washington office of SARAH PALIN, GOVERNOR OF ALASKA.
Now earlier this month I called the Washington Office of Senator McCain and was politely told that the Senate office is prohibited by law to participate in the campaign and that I should contact the MCCAIN/PALIN CAMPAIGN.
So, in other words, you tried to deliver a letter to the STATE OF ALASKA... which is not and cannot be involved in the presidential campaign. The advice they gave you was the only appropriate advice they are authorized to give.
Looks to me like you owe the governor a BIG APOLOGY... but that won't happen because now that your partisan thong is showing, it's clear that your organization is only interested smearing the GOP ticket!
Maybe THIS group of Moms should sit down.
Posted by: Andrew O. | September 25, 2008 at 07:09 PM
To the many Palin-haters here: If you like Obama, fine. If you cherish the Democrat party's secular ideals, fine. But please think through your statements before posting them.
Example. To come out and say the Palin is horrible...and just leave it at that is just empty-headed.
Example. To come out and say that Palin is horrible or ridiculous based on religion makes you look silly. Most past presidents have professed adherence to faith, including the ones you idolize (Clinton, Carter, Kennedy, etc). There's also nothing to the 'snake-handling' and 'speaking in tongues' kool-aid you've all been lapping up. So drop the religion angle for Pete's sake.
Example. To diminish Palin's stature as a governor based on Alaska's population is equally thoughtless. Similar cost-benefit decisions have to be made as with any other governor; the numbers on the ledger are just different.
Palin, like it or not, is a highly accomplished woman. To say otherwise is nonsense. What she was able to do with the pipeline that no one else was able to get going speaks volumes. The fact that she was able to oust the sitting corrupt Republican governor who preceded her speaks volumes.
Please, let's have some intellectual fairness here. Save yourselves further embarrassment.
Posted by: Ivan | September 25, 2008 at 07:05 PM
Baz Said:
Mark, do you believe everything Drudge tells you?
A close friend of mine, was in the press section, while Palin was speaking, and followed the teleprompter... there were no problems. And here's a reporter saying the same thing...
http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0908/The_teleprompter_did_not_break.html
Revisionist Reality (and History) seems to be a big deal, for Republicans. Sometimes I wonder if it's a genetic defect, that can make so many people, so ignorant, and so delusional.
Baz, I'm going to do something rarely done on these boards. I'm going to admit that my comment was not entirely accurate. It wasn't entirely inaccurate either. After the speech I (like many people) I flipped between the Big 3, CNN and FOX in an attempt to see how the different networks would spin it. The comment I heard was that the "the telepromptor gave her trouble throughout her speech, but you couldn't tell it." I believe it was an ABC reporter who said it, but honestly am not sure. Sorry, I don't have a transcript at this point. Based on the videos I've seen of what an embarrassing speaker Obama is when his teleprompter malfuctions, I still think he would not have handled the teleprompter being off as well as she did.
As for Drudge, I've never liked him. I will add that I actually voted for Clinton when he ran for re-election. Furthermore, I defended his right to privacy during the entire Monicagate ordeal. I was unaware that Drudge ran with this story, but he probably got the misinformation the same way I did. Now back to the rest of your comment regarding revising history....LOL....it would seem Joe Biden tried to do that as well this week. Put FDR in the White House at the time of the crash and provided American's with televisions during the great crash even though they were still a few years away.
If you want to watch someone revising history watch these two videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ap2Cg_FDRy4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5R6kVry4_c
I paid you the courtesy of visting the link you posted. The fact that there were no major problems does not mean that there were no problems at all.
Tell me Baz, does it bother you that Obama didn't know that the Russians have veto power on the UN Security Council? Do you care that he didn't know Chavez came to power under Clinton, not Bush? Do you care that he lied when he said he was born because of the march across the bridge in Selma Alabama, when he was in fact born four years before the march took place. Do you care that he flip-flopped on the Iranian issue in less than 24 hours. Do you care that associates with a terrorist. Do you care that he has a half brother in Kenya who lives and Poverty and Obama hasn't done a damned thing to help him? Do you care that he is just another generic product of the corrupt Chicago Daley machine? Does it bother you that he's only been in the U.S. Senate four years and he's spent the last two running for president? Do you care that he sounds like an idiot when his teleprompter goes out? Do you care that he suggested that there were 60 states. I know full well you wouldn't let Sarah Palin get away with that. Do you care that he made the reference small town American's being bitter and clinging to guns and religion? Many democrats feel that if Sarah Palin were not a very attractive woman, she would not have been selected for his running mate. In short, that a man with the same resume would never have been selected by McCain. Surprise, I'm sure it's true. Now let's see how honest you can be. Would Obama's resume be enough to run for President if he were white? Is it possible in the world of left wing politics, a black candidate is a little sexier than a white female candidate. I know what Hillary Clinton would say. As you ponder my question, remember Obama is at the top of your ticket.
Posted by: Mark E. | September 25, 2008 at 07:01 PM
GUESS WHAT... THIS STORY IS A COMPLETE HOAX!
Kindly go to http://www.momsrising.org/
There you will find that these ladies tried to deliver their letter to the Washington office of SARAH PALIN, GOVERNOR OF ALASKA.
Earlier this month I actually tried calling Senator McCain's Office in Washington, only be politely told that the Senate office is prohibited from taking part in the campaign and that I should contact the CAMPAIGN OFFICE.
Similarly, the STATE office is prohibited by law to be involved in the campaign. WRONG ADDRESS, LADIES... but oops, your partisan thong is showing!
What idiots!
Posted by: Andrew O. | September 25, 2008 at 06:52 PM
I am a Mom, have a Mom, and have daughters that are Moms. Sarah Palin offers nothing, to women. She may be a "swell" folksy gal but this country has some SERIOUS issues to deal with and Palin doesn't even come close to having the skills needed to deal with them. I'm scared as hell of this ticket.
Posted by: Stephanie | September 25, 2008 at 06:27 PM
Sarah Palin is the model for my daughters. Mayor, Governor, Member Alaskan Board of Conservation and Energy, candidate for VP---all by the age of 44 and all while raising 5 children. What a woman.
I think it kills a lot of women that she's also gorgeous. I heard it's driving Nancy Pelosi to get Botox injections and double her visits to her shrink.
Posted by: Jennie Harrington | September 25, 2008 at 06:23 PM
"Her campaign has managed to tick off a group of moms that once was thrilled with her"
Really, the group started by a Moveon.org co-founder is going to be supportive of the Republican VP candidate?
Posted by: Mike | September 25, 2008 at 06:17 PM
After watching an interview on CBS I have concluded what I think most Americans will soon realize, SARAH PALIN IS A JOKE! It was literally stomach-turning to watch, and to think of her at the helm of anything at all, specially our future and that of our country. The Palin choice-joke has to be the year's biggest whopper... perhaps the biggest whopper ever! I just hope others like me, who at first was taken by her, wake up on time to save us from McNuts.
Posted by: mkm | September 25, 2008 at 06:09 PM
Who is MomsRising. Is it a nonpartisan? Well, Joan Blades who cofounded the group also helped start Moveon.org according to the TimesOnline website. So I think that answer is no. I think this was a setup. Lisa Richardson, why don't you mention the truth about MomsRising.
Posted by: Mike | September 25, 2008 at 05:52 PM
I am a republican working mother who has morals and raise my children to have morals. I will not vote for a president/vice-president that represent adultery, lying, bigotry, hypocrisy and a future theocracy. That is why I am voting for Obama/Biden!
Posted by: sheber | September 25, 2008 at 05:41 PM
For me, only about 40 days before I vote McCain/Palin. For Obama supporters, only about 40 days AND four more years of squealing and whining before their rematch with Hillary for the 2012 democratic nomination.
Posted by: dom | September 25, 2008 at 05:23 PM
____________________________________________
Sounds like you are whining, Dom,
and squealing as well.
Whoever wins, will win, but people who point fingers and hurl insults will always be losers.
Posted by: saveoursouls | September 25, 2008 at 05:36 PM
Does the author really think we’re that gullible? Come on a left wing group that did like Sarah but now has its doubts!
What’s next a group of traditional Christians who did like Barney Frank but now have some questions?
Posted by: William Belts | September 25, 2008 at 05:35 PM
Sarah is better qualified that any of the other 3. Obama is by far the least qualified. What are his qualifications, anyway? Sarah has been a mayor and a governor--at least she has been in charge of something and that includes the Nat. Guard in Alaska. The critical 'moms' here are probably just jealous. By the way on the Harvard Law Review, Obama didn't even write articles for it --too lazy or ignorant? And Obama has done what? Hardly voted when he was in Illinois senate--voted 'present' 120 times instead of yes or no. Goes to a radical church that preaches against America, won't say the pledge or wear the flag pin and he wants to be our president? You've got to be kidding. Oh and he was 'groomed' by the corrupt Daly machine in Chicago. Any other qualifications for him? What makes Obama qualified to deal with National Security? His vacation to the mideast? And who do Obama and Biden care for? Check their records on giving. Biden hardly anything and Obama started giving a little once he decided to run for President. Does that show how much they care about others? Go Sarah!
Posted by: Jon | September 25, 2008 at 05:34 PM
All of you sheeple that are complaining that this isn't real journalism because it's politically skewed really need to find out what a Blog is, or perhaps even what an "Opinion" section of a news source is.
Posted by: John | September 25, 2008 at 05:30 PM
Plain and simple: the anti-Obama comments in this board sound like they are taken from idiots. Read them all as I have and you'll see the relative fall in intelligence as those who are for Palin speak ill of Obama, on a forum speaking about Palin and her incompetence.
Please realize your stupidity people and change. American needs you now!
Posted by: RR | September 25, 2008 at 05:30 PM
Allow Sarah Palin to be questioned and either prove that she's a valid candidate or prove that she's not. By not answering questions on real issues, she's only doing herself a disservice.
Posted by: Susan A | September 25, 2008 at 05:29 PM
People like overuled cannot take their own medicine!
Posted by: saveoursouls | September 25, 2008 at 05:28 PM
Mark E. said: "Sarah Palin'ss Teleprompter went out several times during her acceptance speech. Could anyone tell? Here is what happens when Obama, the Harvard Law Man, has his go out..."
Mark, do you believe everything Drudge tells you?
A close friend of mine, was in the press section, while Palin was speaking, and followed the teleprompter... there were no problems. And here's a reporter saying the same thing...
http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0908/The_teleprompter_did_not_break.html
Revisionist Reality (and History) seems to be a big deal, for Republicans. Sometimes I wonder if it's a genetic defect, that can make so many people, so ignorant, and so delusional.
Posted by: baz | September 25, 2008 at 05:25 PM
From a male standpoint, I wonder how Palin's stand on such things as her pro-life / anti-abortion (charging women for rape-kits!!! GASP!!!) affect the majority of the female voter population. That, to me would be priority #1 in most women's minds===the concern that their right of choice would be doomed if Palin made it into office as VP, or even worse as Prez.
And, don't get me started on her pentacostal "speaking in tongues" Looney-Tunes mindset. Just take a look at some of the videos that abound on the 'net showing her witch-hunting "preacher" praying for her and asking for divine intervention in getting her elected.
Frightening to even think such people like them, even exist.
Posted by: GeeTee | September 25, 2008 at 05:24 PM
I knew McCain hit a home run when he picked Palin as VP. But I underestimated how far that homerun would tape.
Judging by all the whining and squealing of liberals, that homerun ball still hasn't landed.
Which is more obnoxious: An Obama radio commercial where some young guy whines, "I only earn two gallons of gas per hour, now how am I supposed to afford health care on that?"
Like the thought of getting a better job never occured to him.
Or all the liberal squealing over Palin, the 'wrong' type of woman?
For me, only about 40 days before I vote McCain/Palin. For Obama supporters, only about 40 days AND four more years of squealing and whining before their rematch with Hillary for the 2012 democratic nomination.
Posted by: dom | September 25, 2008 at 05:23 PM
On www.feminist.com:
"While many of the policies that MomsRising advocates have been associated with progressive and centrist political views"
They are a political organization and this was a political stunt they pulled. Who knows what really happened.
Posted by: Mike | September 25, 2008 at 05:23 PM