Last week in the Columbia Spectator, Lauren Salz wrote an editorial entitled "Palin Haters Anonymous". It included the following: This past Sunday, Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) came to speak at Columbia. One female student stood up and said, "As an educated woman, I know many of us were offended by the pick of Sarah Palin. So a two-part question—first part, what are your thoughts on Sarah Palin? Go wild. Second part, I'm really unsure why it became bad in politics to be smart and well-educated, especially at elite institutions such as Harvard or Yale or Columbia."
Well I am the questioner Lauren refers to. And Lauren, your rants against my elitism are not that far off base—I am an intellectual snob. So here we go…
1. Sarah Palin did not know what the Bush Doctrine was—fine if you're an average citizen, not ok when you are a heartbeat away from the presidency
2. Sarah Palin is unsure if global warming is man-made—expedient thoughts if you are a polluting industrialist, probably not the best belief set when your ignorance raises the rate of hurricanes, tsunamis, and more.
3. Sarah Palin cannot name any Supreme Court case she disagrees with besides Roe v. Wade—disappointing if you are a voter, appalling if you will have a role in choosing future Supreme Court Justices.
4. Sarah Palin seems to think all government spending is the core of economic problems—fine if you're the Libertarian candidate for President, not the best stance to take when Wall St. is imploding as I type this.
5. Sarah Palin took five years and several universities to graduate with a degree in sports journalism—great if you want to be Bob Costas, not the best credentials if you're vying to be the leader of the free world.
As I watch my roommates (who I have never known to be vocal about politics before) become incensed by Sarah Palin, I understand why—Sarah Palin is under qualified, untested, and a horrible representation of what women have to offer to the American people. She is in no way comparable to the likes of Senator Clinton or Senator Klobuchar. And this ignores the huge policy disputes many of us have with her, reproductive rights, the Iraq War, gay rights, the environment, education, health care, you name it.
Many who defend Sarah Palin, also refer to Barack Obama as an elitist (including the uber-rich Rothschild)—you know: one of those arugula eating, blackberry carrying, Ivy educated, know-nothing urbanites. Obama attended Columbia University and Harvard Law School—he is undoubtedly a brilliant, intelligent, and thoughtful man. Especially in this time, with so many incredibly complex issues to sort through, from the economic crisis to the Iraq War, the fact that Obama went to Columbia and Harvard can only be an asset. Is that elitist? We came to Columbia for a reason: to attain one of the best educations this world has to offer. Obama is a product of that—why in the Lord's name would we take that as a weakness?
In the end, Lauren concluded her article by saying: "Sarah Palin shows that while women have to make sacrifices, they don't have to choose. You can have a career and have five kids. You can be a strong woman and have a strong marriage. You can be beautiful and be respected for your accomplishments. If that's not feminism, then what is?"
Lauren, this has nothing to do with feminism. Its laudable that Sarah Palin balances family and work so well, but honestly, that doesn't make her special. I myself plan on doing it along with everyone else I know at Barnard. The problem is she is still not qualified. If she had a penis, I promise she still wouldn't be qualified. It is an assault on women to think that we would vote for her because she is a woman rather than considering her qualifications.
Ultimately, I don't require an Ivy League education for my vote, but if you want to be President, I would hope you would be able to keep up in Kim Marten's Intro to International Politics. Barack Obama would probably get an A and we know Sarah Palin would at least get the question on the Bush Doctrine wrong. Call me an elitist—but my vote goes to the arugula eating, blackberry carrying, Ivy educated candidate.
____
The author is a Barnard College Senior.
Well done!
Thank God someone responded to that baseless argument!
Well said!
Brilliant response to a baseless argument.
yeah
the McCain camp implied that being a woman was a qual in itself when Palin was making all of those sly references to Hillary voters early on. If I were a woman, I guess it would feel unfair if people judged me or praised me on anything other than merits.
Feminism
Sarah Palin is successful, pretty, has a strong family, raises kids, and runs a state. She does it all with poise and grace. If that is not feminism then what is? Liberal Upper West Side psychologist types with a nanny and two kids and supported by their husbands? Put things in perspective Elyse.
Feminism
If Sarah Palin were a feminist, she would have said, " Thanks but no thanks" to being the Vice President to someone who voted against equal pay for equal work and the Violence Against Women Act.
If Sarah Palin were a feminist, she would not have had rape victims pay for their own rape kits.
Sarah Palin talks about how we need "Smaller government so that we can makes the choices that are best for us and our families", all the while trying to legislate over women's bodies.
“Our opponents think they have the women’s vote all locked up, which is a little presumptuous since only our side has a woman on the ticket,”
Sarah Palin offends me as woman for assuming that because we share genitalia, she has my vote.
heck, if they thought i was
heck, if they thought i was gonna vote for palin JUST because she was a woman, i'd smack them silly. that would be an affront to my ability to decide who i'll vote for. bc then they're assuming they know what i look for in a vice president solely based on my gender.
but palin's selling point isn't that she's just a woman. it's the fact that she is a woman in the nationwide political arena. and her governorship testifies to the kind of person palin is, as much as, or even more than what obama's education tells us about him.
moreover, what's the value of a columbia education for obama? he hardly talks about it. one could even say he vehemently avoids the topic. so we wonder, why? what's he got to hide?
soo
it's because she's a woman.
2nd point
First off, I agree with most of the points you're making, and overall this seems pretty well reasoned and well written, so good on you.
However, your second point, that "Sarah Palin is unsure if global warming is man-made—expedient thoughts if you are a polluting industrialist, probably not the best belief set when your ignorance raises the rate of hurricanes, tsunamis, and more" concerns me because it logically implies that Sarah Palin's knowledge or lack thereof of global warming has a direct impact on the rate of global-warming-related natural disasters.
I would argue that Sarah Palin's knowledge or lack thereof of global warming could have a much clearer impact on the government's preparation for and response to natural disasters rather than on the rate of occurrence of the disasters themselves. One could make an argument that Sarah Palin's knowledge or lack thereof of global warming, if McCain were elected, could have an encouraging effect on activities which are thought to increase the effects of global warming, thus increasing the rate of natural disasters, but that's a shaky argument at best. Such an argument depends on the validity of controversial causalities (varying in degree of controversiality): (1) Sarah Palin would have an effect on certain activities, (2) these activities contribute to global warming, (3) global warming exists and (4) is happening now, and (5) global warming is causes more natural disasters to occur. I'm not saying that I disagree with all of these causalities, just pointing out that these causalities are very far from given facts.
My point is that it's far less controversial to say that Sarah Palin, if McCain were elected, is far more likely to have an effect on the government's reaction to the threat of a natural disaster than she is to have an effect on the rate of occurrence of natural disasters.
This small objection aside, nice column.
well
we do get a lot of hot air from the mcCain campaign
One thing you left out
I was at that event, and I'm surprised that Salz's account left out one thing you said: to paraphrase, you remarked that people who go to Ivy League schools are 'the brightest.' I remember this because Sen. Klobuchar began her response to you by saying she would question the idea that Ivy League students are the brightest, and that there are many awfully bright students at other schools in Minnesota and across the country.
This is what I found so bizarre about your question - I could care less about whether someone is Ivy League or not (I mean, I am), but to basically put down non-Ivy students, no matter how unintentional it was, tells you why we have a reputation for being elite snobs.
Educational Credentials
It is good that you do not require an Ivy League education to earn your vote, you study at Barnard!
Sarah Palin has TWO blackberries, fyi.
"Kim Marten's Intro to International Politics" is a stupid poli sci Barnard class. You're a joke.
Post new comment