What do you think? Is Sarah Palin a diva? Is the McCain campaign guilty of sexism?

From ABC News…

Aides to Sen. John McCain anonymously attacked Palin in several reports today, criticizing the Alaska governor for diverting from the McCain campaign’s message, suggesting Palin was unhappy with certain campaign aides and accusing her of thinking more about her political future than about the success of the McCain-Palin ticket.

In an interview with CNN today, one McCain adviser anonymously called Palin “a diva” and said “she is playing for her own future” political prospects.

“She is a diva. She takes no advice from anyone,” the advisor told CNN. “She does not have any relationships of trust with any of us, her family or anyone else. Also she is playing for her own future and sees herself as the next leader of the party. Remember: divas trust only unto themselves as they see themselves as the beginning and end of all wisdom.”

From USA Today…

Sen. Ted Stevens was found guilty Monday on seven counts of concealing more than $250,000 in gifts from wealthy friends — becoming the fifth U.S. senator ever to be convicted of a crime.

The verdict comes about a week before Alaska’s voters will decide whether to re-elect the Republican senator to an eighth term and at a time when his party is fighting to stem its losses in a tough year.

How does this conviction affect the McCain/Palin campaign? Isn’t it a little odd that Sen. Stevens can still be elected to the Senate, but as a convicted felon, he can’t vote? Let me know what you think in comments.

[If you would like to be a guest blogger on The Political Voices of Women, just join our community, and start posting.]

A few days ago, I posted on my blog, New Wave Grrrl, about the gaps surrounding Sarah Palin’s purported policy priority of addressing the needs of children with disabilities. I questioned the McCain-Palin ticket’s ability to put our money where their mouths have been on the subject of more funding for people with special needs. On October 24th, Palin gave a speech in my home state of Pennsylvania, on just what she and John McCain planned to do in order to better serve children with disabilities.

Although Palin’s speech was heartfelt, and I believe she truly cares about disability issues as a parent and as an aunt of children with developmental disabilities, her speech and the so-called McCain-Palin plan for children with special needs (which comes less than two weeks shy of Election Day) still falls flat, and still lacks any real promise of change in the quality of life for individuals with disabilities.

One glaring reason for this is the complete lack of policies that support people with disabilities beyond childhood. People who live with physical, developmental, cognitive, and multiple disabilities need various levels of care and support services throughout their entire lifetimes, in order to achieve a better quality of life and live fully within their communities. This includes not just vocational services for people with disabilities who can and want to work, but actual Medicaid dollars to fund the programs that provide for independent living in the community and not in State institutions, regardless of the severity of one’s disability.

Palin did mention teens in her speech, within the context of education and transition to adulthood planning, but again, the McCain-Palin approach is fragmented and does not address the current and critical health and human service needs of young people with disabilities. A recent study published earlier this year in the Journal of School Health showed that adolescents in special education programs are more likely to contract Sexually Transmitted Infections (STIs) than their typically developed peers. In adddition, we know that young people with disabilities are more likely to be victims of sexual abuse and assault. Better sexuality education and health services are needed to address these serious issues, and under a McCain-Palin Administration which would continue to fund harmfully inaccurate Abstinence-Only Education programs in schools, it is unlikely that these issues would ever see the light of day.

Palin also mentioned how lucky she and her family are to have such a strong network of social supports, and acknowledged that others who are surrounded by less family or have fewer resources are less fortunate. Wow! But neither Senator McCain nor Governor Palin have track records of supporting family-friendly work policies that would make it easier for families to put together the kind of support networks that Palin referenced in her speech. Their actions of not supporting family leave, benefits for same-sex partners, or pay parity for men and women strongly suggest that they recognize their privelege of having access to services and family supports, but will do nothing concrete to create the same access for others. How is this a populist message?

Last, although it is not funny, I almost have to chuckle to myself when I hear Palin talk about IDEA and fully funding this law, which gives children with disabilities the right to a free and appropriate education that best meets their needs. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) was originally passed with the provision of the federal government eventually funding 40% of the cost for states in order to provide education to children with disabilities. This act also includes a provision for Early Intervention, a voluntary program that provides therapeutic and educational services to infants and toddlers with disabilities. IDEA has never been funded fully, which has thrown the special education and Early Interventions systems within many states into decades of problems while not being able to serve enough children with disabilities. This story includes Palin’s state of Alaska, which has little infrastructure and one of the worst track records of serving children with special needs in-state.

Moreover, not only has John McCain routinely voted against more funding for IDEA during his tenure in the Senate, but he has also vowed to freeze all federal spending indefinitely if he becomes President. This could likely be disasterous for vital federal programs that serve people of all ages with disabilities, including veterans, not to mention for states which count on federal dollars to make their budgets whole and to provide the most basic of services to the most vulnerable people in our society.

The recent McCain-Palin proposal to address the needs of people with disabilities is not only too little too late, but it is derived from a complete lack of policy knowledge and understanding that has haunted their entire campaign.

Saturday Night Live Video – George Bush Endorses John McCain and Sarah Palin

From The Associated Press…

From Wonkette…

So here are three major factors that contributed to our country’s world’s current financial misfortunes: prolonged periods of historically low interest rates (even negative real interest rates), the complete deregulation of such derivatives as credit default swaps, and encouragement from Washington that the inflated housing boom was nothing to worry about. It’s rare that you can pin so many large factors on one person, but, well, former Fed chief Alan Greenspan set the low interest rates, led the pressure on Congress to keep derivatives markets wholly deregulated, and was the voice from Washington that said everything was fine.

From Rachel Maddow…

I always felt like Allen Greenspan had some kind of “God Complex” when it came to the economy. I never understood why we gave one guy so much power over our economy (especially, for so long). It now seems obvious, that this was a bad idea.

What do you think? How much blame can be put on Greenspan for our economic crisis? Does he gets points for admitting he made a mistake? Let me know what you think in comments.

[If you would like to be a guest blogger on The Political Voices of Women, just join our community, and start posting.]

Many people, like myself, feel that the way in which a society supports its most vulnerable or disenfranchised citizens is a critical indicator of how healthy that society is, and where it is headed in the future.

The issue of disability policy and the improvements that are necessary to elevate the quality of life for children and adults with disabilities in this country has rarely made it into the mainstream discourse during this election. Unfortunately, this is not surprising as individuals with disabilities are typically excluded from the larger social and political environments, both by actual physical barriers and by traditional social practices in our society which make them invisible.

Although it seemed that we might actually be treated to a serious debate on disability policy issues when Sarah Palin’s name was added to the Republican ticket and she announced that she has a child who was born with Down Syndrome earlier this year, no such rich or meaningful public discussion has resulted. Palin has vowed to make special needs children a priority in a McCain/Palin Whitehouse, however it is not clear how Sarah Palin, or John McCain, would accomplish this. In addition, given the track records of both Palin as Governor and McCain as Senator, it does not appear that the disability policy issues that will be crucial in the 21st Century, such as greater independence, de-institutionalization, community supports, and funding for special education will be represented by this ticket should they win the 2008 Presidential Election.

For example, McCain has repeatedly been unsupportive of fully funding special education for children with disabilities across the nation, and he does not support legislation to help move more people out of state institutions and into communities. Sarah Palin, as noted in a New York Times article in September, has not so far been an advocate of children with special needs in her state, which has one of the highest rates of out-of-state placements of children with disabilities based on Alaska’s inability to provide them with adequate services.

On the other side of the spectrum, Barack Obama released his plan to empower people with disabilities earlier this year, and it is a comprehensive plan that addresses many of the issues facing people, both adults and children, with physical, developmental, and cognitive disabilities, including health care, education, independent living, employment, and a host of other issues. In addition, Barack Obama supports the movement towards requiring that insurance plans cover mental and behavioral health services, which would positively impact people who are dually diagnosed with both disabilities and mental illness.

On November 4th, many who care about the rights and quality of life for people with disabilities will decide, in addition to other factors and issues, which candidate can best serve to support this population and honor their rights and abilities to live full, happy, and productive lives in American society. Hopefully, you will be one of them! Find out more information on where these candidates stand by visiting the links below:

Senator Barack Obama/ Senator Joe Biden:
Website: www.barackobama.com
Plan: Obama-Biden Plan to Empower Americans with Disabilities

Senator John McCain/ Governor Sarah Palin:
Website: www.johnmccain.com
*Plan: Please note that although McCain does address some disability issues for veterans, he does not have a policy plan for people with disabilities.

So…What are they saying? Are they just like Joe the plumber, who makes over $250,000.00 a year? Do they know that guy isn’t a licensed plumber and doesn’t make even close to the income he claimed, and he never had any intention of buying a small business? Do they know, that under Barack Obama’s plan, Joe the plumber would have his taxes lowered? Do they realize, that unless they have incomes greater than $250,000.00, their taxes would be lower too?

What do you think of all the “Joe the Plumber” hoopla? Are you sick of it? Let me know in comments.

[If you would like to be a guest blogger on The Political Voices of Women, just join our community, and start posting.]

“The Time Warner Summit: Politics 2008,” held at the Time Warner headquarters in New York City and co-sponsored with CNN, was a corporate branded event with big name heavy-hitters taking on questions about media, news, and the election. After attending both days of the conference, it reinforced my belief that digital media was the future for pushing out women’s stories, concerns, and dialogues.

There were many prominent women featured. Campbell Brown, CNN Anchor, moderated the opening keynote roundtable comprised of four men. Candy Crowley, senior political correspondent at CNN, spoke during the Media Power vs. Political Power session. One of the most dynamic speakers over the two days was Christiane Amanpour, chief international correspondent for CNN. Her persona and delivery style popped during the discussion with colleagues that included Wolf Blitzer and Fareed Zakaria and former Assistant Secretary of State Richard Holbrooke.

Whether you consider women and minorities successfully enmeshed in the total media picture
or their specificity overlooked, depends upon your point of view. But the conference was a definitive contrast to presentation I recently attended at St. John’s University, which totally focused on the intersectionality of race and gender with the election story. There, a majority of the speakers were law professors presenting academic work.

The Time Warner symposium included one panel entitled Women and the 2008 Election: Playing Politics with Gender–Media, Candidates and the Majority Vote. Led by Lisa Witter, Fenton Communications COO and co-founder of SheSource — a “brain trust” of female experts — six women explored women as swing voters and the cultural phenomenon of Sarah Palin’s candidacy. In reference to Michelle Obama, they also discussed whether you could be an outspoken black woman without being described as “angry” by media pundits.

As Witter pointed out while speaking to a full room of women — “Wish there were more you!” she joked to the sprinkling of men — 59 percent of primary voters were women. At the end of the discussion, Carol Jenkins, Women’s Media Center president, posed questions going forward for the media. She called for continued examination of “who is calling the shots, who is making the decisions, and who is missing from the picture.”

With the understanding that women do not getting their narratives adequately told — if told at all — the need for a fresh playing field is palpable. In the new media, women have an opportunity to create their own communities and their own brands. Whether on the left or right of the political spectrum, a mommy blogger or a political blogger, women are flooding the Internet. This was borne out by a BlogHer/Compass Partners survey found 36.2 million women were actively participating in blogs. Of women online, 53 percent were reading blogs, 37 percent were posting comments, and 28 percent were writing or updating blogs.

I contacted Elisa Camahort Page, COO and co-founder of BlogHer, to find out what effect the election has
had on the site. She told me that “an explosion of women were injecting themselves into the political conversation.” Previously on their blog directory, there were under 300 entries devoted to politics/news. There are now 3,000. Camahort Page said that the most active conversations were political, and the top ten search terms included the four names of the presidential and vice-presidential candidates. BlogHer created a voter manifesto targeting the topics of health care, the economy, Iraq, and the environment. Michelle Obama was a BlogHer contributor. Like the more than 20,000 who signed a MomsRising letter to Sarah Palin–asking for her policy positions, women and “stay-at-home moms” feel the personal empowerment of being able to engage. “It’s a new world,” Camahort Page concluded.

Certain buzzwords and phrases were cited during the Time Warner conference with regularity, such as “democracy with a small d,” and “grassroots groundswell.” 2008 was dubbed the year of the “first Internet election.” As Jim VandeHei, co-founder of Politico pointed out, “Now, anybody can drive a story.” The founder of the Personal Democracy Forum, Andrew Rasiej, explained that while previous generations people would talk about things “over the back fence or around the water cooler,” individuals are now “moving the message” via the web.

At the panel on The Digital Election: The Activist System and the Political Blogosphere, the relationship between activists and bloggers was parsed. With the social media movement allowing groups of people to “coalesce” around a niche interest or concern to inform and mobilize, the future trend — in respect to flexibility and adaptability — is “granular.” As the shift to more mobile usage continues, activity will be even more intense. The days of a monopolized source of information are over.

Forty years after the advent of the second wave of feminism, a new set of tools are available to women. If embraced and set in motion, it could play an important role in irrevocably altering the glass ceiling that picked up 18 million cracks during the primary season.

Originally posted at The Women’s Media Center website