Delightful Dinosaurs

by digby

John McCain is saying that the Georgetown party circuit is turning up its snobby collective nose at Sarah Palin because she's such a down-to-earth gal whom they hold in disdain. (Sally Quinn said that John McCain is "an absolutely delightful dinner partner," however.) And in one way, he's right.

Kathleen Parker, who has gained an incredible amount of cache among the cognoscenti lately for saying that Palin should resign from the ticket, claims that she knows nothing of the Georgetown party circuit:


"I haven't gotten an invitation yet, but I am available," said Parker, who splits her time between Georgetown and tiny Camden, S.C. She said most of her big-city socializing consists of sidewalk chats, occasionally involving dogs.


You see, she's just a down to earth gal too --- just like Palin. Isn't that something?

Palin is upending all the normal assumptions. You have the allegedly down home Parker wandering around Georgetown with her muttssaying that Palin is unqualified --- and everyone acts as if that's some sort of shocking development. But Parker is the person who wrote a book called "Save The Males"

Beginning with a history of the female empowerment movement, Parker explains how for the past 25 years, males have been indoctrinated from the schoolhouse on the idea "women good, men bad." She lays out the history of this phenomenon as she sees it, beginning in 1989 when Harvard professor Carol Gilligan claimed research showed that girls were drowning in a patriarchal education system. From that research, feminists and liberals latched onto the idea that girls suffered from low self-esteem. An all-out effort was launched to push girls to the front of the line and praise their every effort - often at the expense of boys.

Much of Parker's arguments put the plight of males squarely on the shoulders of these feminists and liberals as well as an ongoing campaign by Hollywood and advertisers to portray men as dolts and women as capable and efficient. Even schools have gotten into the act, rewriting textbooks that now devote as much space to women as to men. On this topic, Parker relates, "This is a nice idea, except that women simply haven't accomplished as much as men in the areas that make history. I know this is blasphemy, but there's no way around the facts. Women have done great things, no doubt. Radium! Madame Curie, you rule! ... Martha Washington was a great woman to be sure, but she did not, in fact, lead the American Revolution. George did, and it's his face, not hers, on the dollar bill. We have to try to deal with that."


Now, I'm not saying that Sarah Palin is qualified. She certainly has proven in spades in the last few days that she is woefully unprepared for the job. But Parker is hardly a credible critic, considering that she believes pretty much all women aren't particularly accomplished and that trying to change that is unfair to men. I am unimpressed wit her "startling" realization that Palin should remove herself from the ticket.

But what of our other doyenne of Georgetown, who loves sitting next to the delightful dinner companion, John McCain. (Does he playfully whisper "you lovely trollop" in her ear do you suppose?) Perhaps she is more credible on the issue.

Here's her view:

KURTZ: Ed Henry, does any of this make you cringe? I mean, when Joe Biden tragically three decades ago was in a car accident where his wife and one of his kids was killed, nobody said, oh, how could he take his Senate seat because he's got two young kids at home who need a father? I mean, these are questions that seem to be asked of women.

ED HENRY, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Right. I think you're absolutely right.

I don't think Sally's a pinhead, just for the record, and I have admired her work for a long time.

QUINN: Thank you so much.

HENRY: But I can't believe what I'm hearing from you though, Sally, and I can't believe what Emily said, basically that, you know, how could she be a mother and be vice president? Why are you not saying the same thing about Barack Obama? He's a father of two young daughters who look quite beautiful.

How could he possibly, then, by this standard you're creating, go to Washington and be president, which I assume is more important than vice president, we would all agree or just as important? And why are you not questioning whether he could be a good father?

I just think there's a double standard. And I thought the whole point of women having equal rights was that they could have a family and a career. And secondly, that men, as fathers -- and I'm a father -- should be just as active as the moms are. So I don't understand.

KURTZ: Let me get a brief response from Sally.

QUINN: It ain't going to happen. I mean, men and women are different. Every single one of my friends -- I've been a working mother for 26 years -- every single friend practically that I have is a working mother.

They are constantly in a state of guilt and conflict. They take on the burden of the child rearing, and the husbands do not. Men and women are different, and every mother and every father knows that in his or her heart.


Again, Palin is a dramatically unqualified candidate and deserves the ridicule she is receiving for her utter lack of knowledge about ...well, anything. I'm not defending her. But I think we all have come to realize that her guilt and conflict as a working mother is the least of her problems.

Both Parker and Quinn are completely full of shit. Palin is unqualified purely on her own, individual merit as a politician. Let's make sure we don't put them on some sort of feminist pedestal just because they criticized her. In fact, where the two of them are concerned, McCain is right. They are a couple of snooty rich elites who believe that women (other than themselves) should lead lives proscribed by traditional gender roles. Their problem with her isn't her basic lack of knowledge --- they believe that no woman in her position should run for office no matter how qualified and intelligent she is. It's not the same thing at all.


.