When Sarah Palin was first announced as VP, many people began attacking her personally. I know that her supporters have yelled "sexism". I, myself, felt that without a doubt sexism was an issue behind her attacks. However, I no longer think the attacks are sexist. I believe there is a much bigger underlying issue in the attacks, not just from the left, but from the media as well.
There is some sexism against her, but the core issue seems to be an ideological one, not a gender one. I have gone back and looked at some of the comments made about Palin in the media and on the blogs. They state that she is the anti-feminist and will bring down women. Why? Because as I have said in the past, liberals do not understand that their point of view can be an elitist one. I am a conservative, but I do not feel that my opinion speaks for everyone. Yet, if you read the attacks on Palin, those attackers feel that their point of view is the only point of view and Sarah Palin is the antipathy of those views.
Here are some examples in the media:
Campbell Brown of CNN questioned whether Palin could be a mother and Vice-President at the same time. At first glance you would think that she, as a woman, was being sexist. However, if you take a look at Campbell Brown's own life, you will find that is not the case. She is a mother of a small baby and has been working overtime as a CNN anchor during the campaign and political season. By questioning Palin's ability, she would have to question her own. Yet, it's not a female issue. It's an ideological one.
National Organization for Women states on it's own website that it is "taking action for women's equality since 1966". There is no way that this organization could be SEXIST right. That would stand against everything that they supposedly stand for. Yet, on their own website they have this posting: NOW PAC Chair Kim Gandy said, "Sen. John McCain's choice of Alaska governor Sarah Palin as his running mate is a cynical effort to appeal to disappointed Hillary Clinton voters and get them to vote, ultimately, against their own self-interest." Do I think they are sexist? No. Without a doubt this is an ideological issue. Apparently, NOW will now have to change it's name to NOLW or National Organization for Liberal Women because they no longer speak for those of us who are conservative.
Even during Charlie Gibson's interview with Palin, watching the disgust on his face at having to interview her was disheartening. Is Charlie Gibson sexist? For that matter, is ABC sexist. No. However, they do apparently take a left leaning turn at the ideological wheel. If you look at the parts of the interview with Palin that were edited out, you would think it was a completely different interview. You can read the full transcript here.
He misquoted her comment on sending the troops out on a mission from God. Is he a bad journalist? No, but is there a little bias in his interviewing?.....yes! You can compare the questions that Gibson asked Obama compared to those that he asked of Palin here. The bias is unmistakable.
Now does any of this matter to voters and to the election in general. The answer is yes. If the media that most Americans watch on a daily basis or read on a daily basis are openly showing their personal political views, how does the average American hear the truth? Good Luck. Even the NYT recently had to retract an article they had written about Palin that was false. Of course the retraction was three days later and placed on page seven.
I don't tell anyone who to vote for. You visit here knowing that I am Conservative and you will hear my point of view, but please make sure that you don't believe everything that you hear or read this election cycle. Great......now I am agreeing with Hollywood. Are pigs flying too?