The Political Voices of Women

Here is a guest post from community member Marcia G. Yerman, who also blogs at The Huffington Post.

[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.

Read more »

What did you think when John McCain showed nothing short of total disdain for women’s rights and health, during Wednesday night’s debate? Personally, I think he may have lost many women who might have been ‘on the fence’ about a McCain/Palin ticket. Take a look at what other bloggers are saying, and let me know what you think in comments.

From Crooks and Liars…

Clearly, in all his debate prep, no one thought to coach McCain not to go to the third rail of the abortion issue. Boy, was that an oversight. Because not only did McCain go there, he jumped right on to it. In trying to paint Obama as being for the great Republican bugaboo of late term abortions (because, you know, there are so many women running around and deciding after being pregnant for six or more months that being pregnant is no longer convenient for them), Obama replied that he didn’t vote for the late term abortion ban because it had no provision for the health or life of the mother. And that’s when McCain proved how heartless and clueless he is: Again…just again, an example of the eloquence of Senator Obama, health (indicates air quotes) of the mother. You know that’s been stretched by the pro-abortion movement to mean almost anything. Really? Not a legitimate concern?

From Sarah Palin Lies…

We already knew McCain’s running mate, Sarah Palin, isn’t concerned about the health of mothers since she opposed a ban on abortions even in the case of rape or incest. Now we learn that McCain has contempt for women’s health issues as well and thinks concerns about their health is “extreme.” McCain can kiss the independent women’s vote good-bye after this doozy.

From Nancy Keenan…

McCain doesn’t understand a key principle that, for many women, is central to their choice of a candidate for president. The same woman who wants a president to address the difficulty of paying to put gas in the car while other bills pile up on the kitchen counter also wants a president who respects her ability to make the personal, private medical decisions that are best for her and her family. She doesn’t want a politician like McCain mocking protections for her health or voting against birth control. As the election enters its final phase, and these key voters hear from NARAL Pro-Choice America about the stark differences between John McCain and Barack Obama about a woman’s right to choose, women will choose the candidate who will stand with them. That candidate is Barack Obama.

From Equal Writes…

John McCain put women’s “health” in inverted commas during the debate last night, as though it’s a made-up phrase that represents some imaginary or laughable idea. Or alternatively, an idea that doesn’t matter very much and can be easily dismissed by a candidate who, say, had no idea that health insurance plans cover Viagra but not birth control. McCain labelled people who support the right to terminate a pregnancy when that pregnancy endangers the health of the mother “extreme” and “pro-abortion.”

From The Fertile Infertile…

In my last political post, I said I was deeply disturbed by McCain’s stance on women’s reproductive rights. Now, I’m going to say, if you are a woman of reproductive age or if you love a woman of reproductive age, you are playing with her life and health if you vote for McCain. McCain totally dismissed the fact that pregnancy ever threatens a woman’s life.

. . .

Hell, I wish we could completely ban late term abortion but I value the lives of the adult women involved more than I value their unborn babies. I am pro-choice but I am not pro-abortion. I will never presume to claim I know whats best for someone medically and that includes whether or not they should continue to carry a baby. I believe each and every woman should be able to decide what to do with their own body. With this one ignorant statement, John McCain has alienated many people who feel the way I do.

Here is some post debate media and blogger reaction.  If you want to see what I thought, check out this link, that also has the full video of last night’s debate.  I am very interested in what YOU thought.  Who won?  Who lost?  Are you sick of hearing about “Joe” the plumber?   Who do you feel will do better fixing our economy?  What about health care, taxes, and jobs?  Let me know what you think in comments.

From David Gergen on CNN…

Maddow on McCain’s Snide Remark about Women…

Read more »

Here is the full video of the last presidential debate before the 2008 election. What did you think? Who won the debate?

My thoughts on McCain’s performance…

• McCain hit a home-run with his base, especially the “anti-choice” crowd, and plumbers making over $250,000.
• McCain pulled a “Sarah Palin” in his avoidance of answering just about every question.
• In John McCain’s attempt to be “mavericky” – he came off as just plain rude.
• McCain doesn’t think the “health” of women is important, and has no idea of the true cost of health insurance.
• John McCain appears to be living within his own stump speech, and not actual reality.

My thoughts on Obama’s performance…

• Barack Obama started off weak, but ended strong.
• Obama actually answered the questions that were asked.
• I liked what Obama said about taxes, jobs, and women’s rights.

That’s what I thought.  Well, I have to admit, most of the time I was just thinking…

• This whole election can’t be over soon enough.
• How bad would I look, if I just pulled all of my hair out right now?
• Is a lobotomy covered in my health care plan?
• Why?  Why?  Why?  Why?

So, that’s me.  What did you think?

NOW‘s President Kim Gandy on Colbert Report.  It is very funny.

Never underestimate the power of women who feel they are targets of campaign condescension. I received an email urging me to donate to Planned Parenthood in Sarah Palin’s name three times over the last two weeks, and that my friends, means it went viral. But just how viral? Almost $1 million dollars worth according to Ben Smith at Politico. Why does Palin inspire such a strong reaction from women who favor choice? Linda Hirschman’s editorial in the Washington Post outlines part of a future that simultaneously inspires fear and fury in women across the country. I’m sure Palin is going to enjoy receiving all of those thank you cards for donations to Planned Parenthood.

Here is a guest post by community member Zatfig Redhead from The Zatfig Redhead’s Blog

(If you would like to be a guest blogger on this site, please join our community)

Barack Obama has just had a particularly good week with the ladies. In fact, it was a noticeably big week for women’s endorsements for the Obama campaign. Can you say “gender gap?” I knew you could. In a week that saw Republican VEEP candidate Sarah Palin’s approval rating drop precipitously, these activities aimed at women voters well timed.

First, a group of women’s organizations — those few that have PACs and thus can endorse without jeopardizing their precious non-profit status — endorsed the junior senator from Illinois. Prominently featured was the still-not-as-happy-as-they-could-be NOW, who joined their shero Hillary Clinton in saying “no way, no how, no McCain.” Other groups included the Feminist Majority with the ever colorful Ellie Smeal, the Business & Professional Women/USA, the National Congress of Black Women, and the National Association of Social Workers. Watch portions of the press event here:

But the real coup de grace in my mind was this week’s Obama endorsement from Lilly Ledbetter. The plaintiff of Ledbetter v. Goodyear fame headlined the Democratic National Convention in Denver, and on September 18 made it official — she’s for Obama, in a big way. Ledbetter made the announcement at a series of events in the critical state of Virginia, and was treated like a rock star by adoring crowds. The New York Times has referred to Ledbetter as “the Democrats secret weapon,” and they may be right.

Take a look at this ad featuring Ledbetter, below, just released this past week — she’s a humble grandmother from Alabama who packs a punch, and women nationwide are cheering her on. Why? Because her experiences are so familiar, so universal to us all, and she’s speaking up and trying to change things for future generations — despite the fact that her own case is closed. Now, the Democratic Senate needs to do the right thing by Ledbetter’s vocal support and national advocacy and pass the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. The House has already passed this critical bill that would right the Supreme Court’s FUBAR handling of the Ledbetter case. However, the legislation is currently stuck in a defacto Senate filibuster on the more pompous, ponderous side of the Hill. But if we can get more Dems elected to the Senate — and inch our way closer to that magic number of 60 — I predict the Ledbetter bill will be one of the first bills signed by an Obama Administration.

Read more »

Here is a guest post from community member Marcia G. Yerman, who also blogs at The Huffington Post.

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

Washington – Top leaders from women’s rights groups gathered to announce their support of the Barack Obama – Joe Biden ticket at an emotionally charged press conference on Tuesday, September 16th. Qualifying that it was an unusual move for her organization to make an endorsement, Kim Gandy, chair of the NOW PAC (National Organization for Women Political Action Committee) stated, “This is an unprecedented candidate and an unprecedented time for our country.”

Gandy, who has spoken at length with Obama about his “commitment to women’s equality,” went on to present what she characterized as Obama’s record of saying “yes” to women’s rights. She focused on four primary categories: pay equity; reproductive rights; violence against women; the Supreme Court.

Obama is a co-sponsor of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and the Paycheck Fairness Act – legislation designed to end wage discrimination against women. He has made it clear that he not only supports Roe v. Wade, but would also oppose any efforts to overturn it. Understanding that a component of the total picture is the prevention of unwanted pregnancies, Obama signed on as a co-sponsor of The Prevention First Act, which would strengthen access to contraception and reproductive health care.

Obama backs the continued reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (Joe Biden – Chief Sponsor). He stands behind the…(SAFE) – which would provide medical, legal, and financial support to domestic violence victims. Obama has opposed George Bush’s selection of candidates for the Supreme Court, who espoused an “anti-choice” agenda.

Gandy completed her opening remarks referencing NOW’s support of Hillary Clinton in the primary, and said, “We proudly stand with her [Clinton] to support Barack Obama and our longtime friend and ally, Joe Biden.”

The Feminist Majority PAC chair, Eleanor Smeal, took her turn at the podium. “Hundreds of women’s groups are coming out,” she said. “McCain has a 26 year record of voting against women’s rights.” As an example, she pointed to a $214 million breast cancer research-funding bill that McCain had voted against. Smeal reiterated that Obama and Biden wanted to expand opportunities for women, which would close the pay gap. “This is a ticket that we know. They are standing on the strongest platform.”

Betsy Clark, Executive Director of NASW-PACE, which has 150,000 social worker members (81% are women), spoke about the “strength and power of women in this country.” Talking about her profession (600,000 practitioners nationwide) she explained, “We advocate; we promote social justice; we are committed to supporting children and families.” There are 13 million children who live below the poverty line, and Clark characterized Obama and Biden as those who “will do the most” for them. She ended her comments with, “The best hope for America is Barack Obama.”

CEO of Business and Professional Women/PAC, Deborah Frett, discussed her personal meetings with Obama and observed, “The return of the ERA (Equal Rights Amendment) to the Democratic Platform wouldn’t be there without Barack Obama’s support.” Having contacted both candidates with questions about their positions —including expanding sick leave, flexible work hours, and equity for women in the workplace — Frett mentioned that there had been no response from McCain. Another area of concern for Frett came out of her organization’s research on women veterans (numbering 200 million), which exposed their specific needs. She stressed Barack Obama’s election as essential for working women. “We need to ensure that our voices are heard loud and clear.”

Injecting a bit of humor into the proceedings, E. Faye Williams, National Chair of the National Congress of Black Women, said, “We know the difference between a zero and a hero.” “Obama,” she said, “is willing to listen to us. He has met with us, and he will support equal pay for equal work.” Emphatic about her vision of women she asserted, “We women — we stand ready, willing, and able to turn this country right side up again.”

Inevitably, during the Q & A, inquiries were posed about the latest polls and the Sarah Palin factor. Gandy replied that “polls will shift” when people find out more about Palin’s record. On an ironic note, Gandy opined, “I love it that the Republicans have discovered sexism. Before that…it was whining.” For her, the key to supporting Obama-Biden is that “they both stand up for women.”

Smeal spoke about “where people stand on issues, not gender.” Directly addressing the Palin query she maintained, “We are not against a women being on a ticket. Her [Palin] personal positions are extremely negative.” Discussing the top of the ticket, Smeal said, “Naral and Planned Parenthood gave zero to McCain on his voting record.”

There was definitely an air of urgency in the proffered comments. Smeal admitted, “We are worried to death,” alluding to the possibility of “losing the Supreme Court.” With an air of finality she concluded, “If you care about the rights of women, there is only one place to stand.”

Here is a guest post from community member Marcia G. Yerman, who also blogs at The Huffington Post.

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

I knew something was up when I turned on my computer and saw a number of e-mails that had similar subject titles. The two standouts were, “Please Respond and Forward” and “Women Say No to Palin.”
As I opened them, each featured the same text in the body, with different introductory clauses.
“We must do something;” ”Please sign this;” “I am outraged by McCain’s choice.”
I was beginning to get the concept.

The letter began:

“Friends, compatriots, fellow-lamenters,
We are writing to you because of the fury and dread we have felt since the announcement
of Sarah Palin as the Vice-Presidential candidate for the Republican Party.”

The note raised the issues of Palin’s stated beliefs and record, and questioned her preparedness to
“become the second-most-powerful person on the planet.” It featured a sentence that clearly
articulated, “We are not against Sarah Palin as a women or a mother,” making a point to take theconversation out of the personal realm, where much of the discourse has recently been.

It went on to say:

“First and foremost, Ms. Palin does not represent us. She does not demonstrate or uphold
our interests as American women. It is presumed that the inclusion of a woman on the Republican ticket could win over women voters. We want to disagree, publicly.

Therefore, we invite you to reply here with a short, succinct message about why you, as a woman living in this country, do not support this candidate as second-in-command for our nation.”

The site, Women Against Sarah Palin, is housed at blogspot. It has a clean design and features quotes from “American feminist role models,” photos, information and activist links (including a “Register to Vote!”), in addition to the blog archive. One of the letters is from Margaret Sanger’s 30-year old great great niece.

I spoke to Quinn Latimer and Lyra Kilston, the originators of the letter. Both women hail from California, and are associate editors at Modern Painters magazine. They were taking their daily work break, with a walk around Chelsea, discussing the choice of Palin as Vice-President. Latimer came up with the idea that they “had to do something.” She clearly emphasized that they were “not in the habit of calling out women.” However, they did feel that they needed “to come out as women because she [Palin} doesn’t represent our interests.” Kilston said, “McCain is the one to blame,” and stressed that that she opposed Palin on the basis of “her lack of experience and her positions.”

Read more »

Memo to the Media:  Stop Covering Manufactured Controversies, Start Covering Issues. 

It’s infuriating that the McCain campaign is continuing to claim statements they make are true, when many have been confirmed to be untrue.   Deception to change your perception, is what the Republicans seem to do best, and it’s only proven to win them elections.  So why would they stop?   Even more troubling, is that this behavior has become an “acceptable” practice in politics.  Not necessarily acceptable to you and me, but acceptable to the media, which in turn leads to the deception of the American people.

From Washington Post…

“We have created a system where there is not a lot of shame in stretching the truth,” said Charlie Cook, editor of the nonpartisan Cook Political Report.

However, I’m discovering that the “real” truth isn’t in debunking the lies, it’s in seeing through the lies.

See…We have all fallen for a classic bait-and-switch here.  Clearly, if the media continues to chase down facts (that are purposefully misleading), then the McCain campaign successfully diverts attention away from the “real” issues.  Which is EXACTLY what they want to do (what they are doing).

Why is it that the only people who can see through this smoke-screen are comedians? Or, is it just that they are the only ones who are “allowed” to speak the truth? Isn’t that kinda backwards?

Read more »