Philosophy, not gender

Head Strike

By Rene Calandria
The selection of Alaska governor Sarah Palin as the running mate of Senator John McCain had and has continually been making so much buzz and headlines in the newspapers and tabloids around the country. The internet blogs and news media are joining in chorus for this unconventional move of Senator McCain. All the cable news, CNN and Fox news have been singing in perfect unison for covering the “who and what” of Ms. Palin. It is unfortunate though that Mr. McCain’s supporters and surrogates are expounding the idea that the selection of Gov. Palin is part of the Grand Old Party’s (GOP) campaign strategy in order to win the votes of white women and those disenfranchised women who supported Sen. Hillary Clinton during the Democratic primary. This kind of thinking is a blatant insult right on the face of feminist philosophy. This is unacceptable and a complete disregard to the intellectual faculty of women. The excitement of having a woman Vice President in the White House is entirely different from the very act of voting and electing a woman because she resembles the ideals and philosophy of Feminism. There is and there could never be an automatic transfer of votes and loyalty between Senator Clinton and Governor Palin because the votes and excitements that run within the hearts of Clintonites women are votes related to issues that concerns women. They are votes that run into the gamut of women activism and liberalism. Gov. Palin’s philosophy in life and her conservative agenda are directly oppose to the cause of feminist movement. While Ms. Palin is pro-life ( so as Sen. John McCain, in fact he believes that Roe v. Wade, the 1973 US Supreme Court ruling legalizing abortion nationwide, should be overturned), Sen. Clinton and the feminists group are pro-choice. On one hand, conservatives believe that abortion should be made illegal even in cases of rape and incest. On the other, feminists believe that pregnancy is a woman’s choice. If she does not want to carry the baby, she should not be prevented from having an abortion. While Ms. Palin promotes the idea of abstinence, Sen. Clinton adheres to the concept of availability and accessibility of all types of artificial contraception. While Ms. Palin is a clever politician and good at political calculations (like Alaska’s bridge to nowhere project), Ms. Clinton is a fighter and champion of women’s rights. With the birth of Governor Palin’s son, Trig Paxson Van Palin, who has been diagnosed with Down syndrome even before birth is a hallmark of her conservative credentials. But this is at the expense of the taxpayers money because then the government will have to accommodate this kid into the health care system of the country for the rest of his life. When asked about my position on some social and political issues by a friend. I honestly and frankly pronounced that I adhere to the philosophy of Clintonism.
***
Now that the Federal government literally owns the mortgage finance giants – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the biggest insurance company in the world – American International Group (AIG), Bear Stearns and is on a deal of pumping the Wall Street with hundreds of billions of dollars (more than 800 billion dollars), I wonder what it means by small government and deregulation of the market which the Republicans have consistently preached and lectured in the pulpit. Is this deal and bailout in the Wall Street a clear sign of the biggest government in American history? When Democrats preach the idea of business regulation, it is all about oversight of the financial market in order to avoid economic disaster. I guess, the Democrats are better economists that the Republicans. The same is true with the health care system. There should be regulation and hands on government intervention, least we fall again into another Wall Street meltdown, this time on health care. Don’t make me wrong, this bailout plan by the government is immediate and necessary in order to rescue the financial market. This economic disaster in New York could have been avoided if the philosophy of business deregulation and small government have been outrightly rejected by the American people in 2000 and 2004. In November 2008, are we to embrace the same economic philosophy of the Republicans (and foreign policy) which brought us trillions of dollars in deficit?

Popularity: unranked [?]