America's Hidden Curriculum: Palin Part II

Since I wrote my blog about Sarah Palin yesterday, a number of new columns debating her impact on McCain's ticket and her status as a "diva" have sprouted up. The one I found most interesting was by CNN writer Campbell Brown, who basically accuses the Republican party and entire media of sexual bias against Palin. (The link to the article is below)

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/27/campbell.brown.palin.diva/index.html

I find this article by Brown very interesting. She is arguing that the whole idea of Palin being a diva is only being discussed because she is a woman. Brown cites a McCain adviser that said, "Remember: Divas trust only unto themselves, as they see themselves as the beginning and end of all wisdom," clearly a gender biased claim. Could you imagine this type of thing being said about say Bill Clinton or John F. Kennedy. Whenever there is drama surrounding a woman, she suddenly becomes a "diva" and this is certainly unfair.

I do not like Palin or her policies but I do believe that she is often unfairly judged or portrayed by the media. Because she is a woman, she is expected to fall in line with everything McCain and her party say and do, and if she goes off script she is suddenly a rogue diva.

Joe Biden recently snapped at a reporter, calling her reaction "silly," so where are the calls for Biden's status as a diva? After all, do we think that the Obama aides wanted Biden snapping at a reporter? However, the reports on Biden's behavior fall to the second page, as every one of the unprecedented Palin's actions land in the headlines. How can America change this hidden curriculum?

I am currently reading a book titled "Schoolgirls" for my Psych 353 class on developmental psychology. This book focuses on gender bias against women, and I believe it adds insight to our Palin dilemma. According to "Schoolgirls," girls treated unfairly in school beginning from the earliest grades. Girls are expected to be "deferential," "polite," and "passive," and their actions are viewed as "containable" as opposed to the "inevitable" actions of males.

These biases against women clearly do not change between kindergarten and the race for the White House. Maybe Biden's outbursts are viewed as inevitable, as everyone knows he has a short fuse. However, Palin's actions should be contained. McCain's aides think that they should be able to stop Palin from acting out of script. If Palin is not polite or passive, she is not seen as a "good woman," she is just a rogue diva that has fallen off course.

I could not agree more with Campbell Brown when she says that the attacks of McCain's aides are "beyond ridiculous." While, again, I do not agree with Palin's policies and in no way support her, I think she at least deserves respect as a person. Just because she is a woman does not mean she is not human or equal to men.

I am certainly not a feminist, and before several days ago I never even considered the effects or implications of America's so called hidden curriculum against women. However, I know think that many, including myself, across America have unintentionally judged Palin because we have been taught our whole lives that women need to fit a certain role in order to be acceptable.

Unfortunately, I do not think there is any question that this bias has irrevocably affected the election, but hopefully, maybe, something can be done to one day eliminate this gender bias so everyone can have an equal opportunity to succeed in America.

Palin the VP or Diva?

With Election Day nearing closer and closer, now only 8 days away, the scrutiny on Barack Obama, John McCain, Joe Biden, and Sarah Palin has never been higher. Because of this, you would hope that your party's two candidates would be functioning better than ever together, convincing the country that their tandem would be most likely to bring success to America.

Taking that information into account, the Republican party must feel like they are on a roller coaster trying to follow the relationship between Senator McCain and Governor Palin's camps. Despite McCain and Palin's public denials of any problems, the news coming from behind the scenes begs to differ. The more news I read, the more I hear about Palin's "mavericky" behavior turning into "rogue" behavior. One McCain aide recently said stated this about Palin, "She is a Diva. She takes no advice from anyone."

If you broach this subject with any staunch supporter of McCain-Palin, they will connect these reports with media bias against Palin. However, I not only think these reports are true, but that they are a very scary omen of what may happen if McCain and Palin are elected. Keeping policies aside, I think it would be terribly destructive for America if the Vice-President had a completely different agenda than the President. If Palin truly has no relationships or trust with McCain's aides, can we really expect them to team together to help save America?

I struggle to envision McCain and Palin bringing the stability that America desperately needs in our current economic disaster. It feels as though in recent weeks all the attention on McCain and Palin has focused on their parties inability to get along, Palin's supposed excessive spending on clothes and trips from Alaska for her children, and McCain's negative campaigning, as opposed to the different policies he supports.

Playing the what-if game is always difficult, but what if McCain had not selected Palin, would his party be better off now? Would America be focusing on his merits as a Presidential candidate instead of his relationship with Palin? Could the selection of Palin over other candidates end up costing McCain the presidency? We will learn the answers to some of these questions one week from tomorrow, but until then America will be left to ponder if our two highest profile "mavericks" can co-exist.

The Rapping Vice-President

Last Saturday, on SNL, I was intrigued by Amy Poehler's rousing rap. For those of you who have not yet seen this clip, here it is,

http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/update-palin-rap/773781/.

Now, I think there is a lot of meaning that can be taken away from this seemingly innocuous rap on SNL. First, Sarah Palin's willingness to play along with the constant SNL, left-wing bashing of her persona. I can't decide if this should be a credit to her resume, showing her willingness to make fun of herself and play along with the joke, or if she truly hates these charades and will do anything it takes to win the vice-presidency. Not everybody could play along with a show that bashes one's own personal life every week, so overcoming that can certainly be credited to Palin. However, I simply do not like it when there are talks of this type of appearance making an impact on the election itself.

Yes, Palin showed the willingness to make fun of herself, but did nothing to make me think that she should not be made fun of. She simply went on SNL, said two or three lines, and bobbed her head when Poehler made a complete mockery of her Alaskan roots. Yes, not everyone could take this kind of comedic beating, which is a credit to Palin, but I do not think she should be rewarded for coming on the show, as in receiving more votes or positive publicity. You could say that this type of appearance shines positively on Palin's temperament or personality, but I do not think that this one minute appearance is a strong enough sample size to make this sort of conjecture.

I think we need to instead focus on Palin's policies and views on America, for these are what truly matter in the race for the White House. We can laugh at Palin every Saturday night, but come November 4th, I hope the main variables affecting the voting are how Palin views Abortion, Education, and other major issues.

Colin Powell: A Vote for Change?

Yesterday morning, ex-Bush Administration Secretary of State, Colin Powell, endorsed presidential candidate Barack Obama. This move has sent shockwaves throughout the Political world and has new voters like myself curiously scratching our brows. How often does an event like such happen, with an ex-Republican leader endorsing a Democratic leader in such tumultuous times?

The answer: almost never. A tenured Republican like Powell endorsing an "inexperienced" democratic Obama just doesn't happen very often, if ever. This is a sign of just how tumultuous the Republican party is right now, with such high profile people jumping ship merely days before the election. Powell is essentially endorsing that another four years of an administration he was an integral part of is just not the right answer.

I personally cannot decide whether this is more of a boost for Obama or detractor for McCain. I guess this cannot come as a shock for McCain, as the self-proclaimed Maverick certainly does not seek to please his fellow Republicans at all times, and Powell has already publicly announced his support for Obama's foreign policy plans with Iran as opposed to McCain's. This endorsement by Powell also begins the exciting last few weeks before the election, which I would call the endorsement period. Every day now major politicians, newspapers, and even celebrities can be found on the television and internet letting America know who they think should become the next President. This is obviously of great importance, because if Matt Damon is voting for Obama, shouldn't I be voting for him too?

While that last line was clearly a joke, I worry that many voters may be swayed by their favorite celebrity's opinion. While I think America is great for allowing everyone to voice their opinion, I think this is a bit of a problem. Americans need to focus on the candidates and their issues and opinions rather than their favorite celebrity's opinion on the candidate's opinion. I believe it is times like these when major public figures need to encourage Americans, young and old, to get out and vote, as opposed to letting us all know their voting preferences. While it certainly can be interesting to know who Paris Hilton supports, I think we can all wait to hear her opinion after November 4th.

Campaign Ads or Food Banks?

As you all know, one of the most anticipated Presidential Elections in history is fast approaching us. With November 4th only 16 days away, both candidates, Barack Obama and John McCain are kicking their campaigns into full gear. Both campaigns this year have raised record funds, with Obama raising $150 million in September alone, and are expected to spend about $30 million a week from now until the election. However, with the economy in a flux as it is now, and many across America struggling to pay their mortgages and put food on their dinner tables, this question must be asked: Is this kind of spending on advertisements, most of which have been negative, sensible?

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/16/campbell.brown.negative.ads/index.html?iref=newssearch

I read an interesting article by Cnn's Campbell Brown on this issue last week. (The Link is directly above) In her article, Brown poses this same question to the reader of the sensibility and morality of these campaigns. Do these candidates truly care about their fellow Americans, if they are willing to spend unprecedented amounts of money on negative advertisement, Brown asks.

She proposes that the candidates, "Give the money to that homeless shelter in Grand Forks [North Dakota] or any of the hundreds of charities around this country that are trying to help desperate people get through these difficult times," she adds, "If you really care about hurting Americans, put your money where your mouth is and spare us three more weeks of negative ads."

While I certainly understand Brown's argument, I do not think agree with it. While I do not agree with the amount of negative advertisements by our presidential candidates, I understand their need to spend unprecedented amounts of money in this unprecedented election.

It is not like they are stealing the money from people across the country. Those that truly care about these candidates and their campaigns are the ones that are feeding this fire. They are not giving their money to Obama's campaign or McCain's campaign so it can be given to charity. While I would advocate giving it to charity in the first place, instead of these campaigns, it is the duty of these candidates to do the most with the resources they are given by their countrymen. I do not believe they are doing their best with these negative ads, but using the money donated to their causes is the right thing to do.

Sorry, Ms. Brown, but the fault is not in the candidates, it is in us, the American's that are willing to donate these unprecedented amounts of money, despite our economic downturn.

Town-Hall Snoozer

Last Tuesday night, the second of three presidential debates was held between Presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain. Many, including myself, were eagerly anticipating this political showdown in Nashville, Tennessee, as both campaigns had recently significantly upped their personal attacks on the other candidate. However, the 98 minutes passed, and one letter came screaming out of nearly every American that had watched the debates: ZZZZZZZZZZZ.......

Despite all of the hype and potential for this debate, almost nothing was actually accomplished by either side, other than reiterating the fact that both candidates lack any real concern for the debate guidelines, as they strayed from taking questions from the town-hall, talked over their allotted times, and did not directly answer many of the questions.

For me, one main question truly bothers me following this second debate: Are the increasingly boring debates a result of the growing need for each candidate to appeal to every potential voter, leading to more generic and non-controversial responses, or are they a result of each candidates lack of the ability to take control of America's problems and reach out and touch America?

Unfortunately, we may not get this answer before the election in less than a month. In fact, we may not get this answer until over 4 years from now, when McCain or Obama is nearing the end of his first term. I completely understand the growing problem with the debates and campaigns as a whole, that they need to appeal to such a broad audience in the growing and culturally evolving America that any statement that can be contrived as controversial or offensive in a debate could lead to a public outrage, but are these candidates really just not the right answer?

It would be great to know the answer to this question, as America, with our unbelievable economic problems, with fluctuations unseen since the Great Depression, could certainly use a leader that could fix our problems or boost America's collective ego. Maybe, maybe neither of these candidates are the answer. Or maybe we will simply have to wait and see if the elected candidate can turn things around. The one thing I do know, is that you cannot have your voice be heard, or, in my opinion, have the right to voice your opinion, unless you vote in the general election on November 4. Vote.

Obama the Terrorist?

How much more of this can America take?

“Who is the real Barack Obama?”

Today's latest attack on Presidential candidate Barack Obama by Senator John McCain focused on this question posed to the American public. Who is the real Barack Obama? Is he a terrorist supporter with no idea what American politics are or entail that if elected would certainly spell the further demise of the American people? If you ask John McCain then the answer to all these questions is yes.

In reality, these questions seem preposterous. Even if you do not support Obama or his politics, do you really believe that he is that mysterious and terrible a person?

A New York Times story today focused on how the Campaigns were "shifting to attack mode" on the eve of the second presidential debate. Despite the fact that both candidates denied their interest in these petty, childish attacks on each others characters over the summer, BOTH find themselves within a mudslinging war.

Several weeks ago, I wrote about how presidential ads were reaching a new low, turning off young voters like myself. I'd rather hear about these candidates views on important policies rather than listen to them attack each other mercilessly. I don't want my President to be a gutless man with no respect for his fellow American.

Campbell Brown of CNN explained the situation well, saying, "Here's a purely practical reason: The negativity you are spewing now will only make your job harder after Election Day. Bipartisanship is really tough to achieve when everyone on both sides is left with a bad bad taste in their mouths...Don't you want to be able to walk into the White House with your dignity intact and your head held high?" (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/06/campbell.brown.campaign/index.html?iref=mpstoryview)

I hope that the candidates will somehow find it within themselves to focus on their own political strengths and weaknesses over the final 4 weeks before the election rather than trying to make the other look like an anti-American hooligan. I doubt this will happen, but it sure would be nice. Right?

The American Nightmare: Why Can't America Stop Drinking the Juice

Orenthal James (O.J) Simpson might finally be going away for good. 61 years after his birth in San Francisco, 40 years after he won the prestigious Heisman trophy, 35 years after being the NFL MVP, 23 years after marrying Nicole Brown, 14 years after Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman were found dead outside Brown's condo, and 13 years after being found not guilty of murder, we may have just seen the last free chapter of O.J Simpson's unbelievable life come to a close around midnight on October fourth as he was found guilty on all 12 twelve charges including armed robbery and kidnapping. After years in America's spotlight, we may have seen the last of O.J.

Why does this matter? Why does America care so much about a sociopathic, ex-star athlete that has not contributed positively to American society in any way in around 35 years?

Sadly, we care because O.J has come to symbolize America in far too many ways. He was symbolic of "the American Dream," but has now come to represent racial tension, greed, and lost hope. In many ways, O.J has become a scapegoat for American society and its growing problems. Who cares about the economy, at least we aren't in O.J's shoes (or gloves). It is as though America needs to constantly be a part of his situation and even before the murder he constantly needed to be in our spotlight.

Regardless of if he was innocent or guilty of murder in 1994, the day he led those California cops along the Orange Country freeway in his White, Ford Bronco, O.J became more than a person, he became a sign of change and loss of innocence in American society. As America watched O.J drive away from authority, losing his fortune and livelihood right before our eyes along the way, we could no longer hold onto the blind faith and trust connected with American superstar athletes. Never before had one's demise been so public, and in a weird way it feels as if O.J never left his Bronco, but has continued to drive for the past 14 years through American hearts and minds. Millions of American's can't stand the though of O.J, yet they can't seem to stop thinking about him.

Even if O.J's lawyers appeal this case, it is hard to imagine O.J not spending the rest of his life in jail. And in many ways, jail may be the most fitting end to O.J's life-long saga, as he has gone from embodying the American Dream to the American Nightmare.

K-Rod

K-Rod will blow this game tonight. 11:36 p.m. Bottom 10th 1 out

It's now 11:45. Ortiz walked and Youkilis singled. Two on, 1 out. Kiss 62 goodbye K-Rod.

Biiiiig out. 11:48. K. Two Out.

3-2 2 out.....walk

Bases loaded...regardless of the end result K-Rod is no Paplebon or Mariano

11:54 2-1 count bases loaded...hmmmmm

11:55....heading to the 11th. A 19 minute bottom of the 10th. Let's see how this ends.

11:59: Paplebon starts the top of the 11th. Let's see who the real closer is

12:01: 1 out. K for Paplebon. K-rod sucks

12:08: Two on. Two out. Bear down

12:11: Second Paplebon K of the inning. Inning over. 12 minutes after it started as opposed to K-Rod's 20 minute plus mess in the 10th. Game over in bottom of the 11th? I hope so.

12:14: Bottom 11 and Jered Weaver, not K-Rod is in. I guess he is not good for two. But no, I'd definetely pay him $75 over 5...There is just no way the Angels win this game. Is there?

12:16: 1 on. 1 out.

12:22: It looks like we are in for a looong night. We head to the top of the 12th. If the Angels are going to win they are going to probably need a home run. They havent gotten a big clutch hit in hours, but they do have hits. 13 hits but only 4 runs. They need to punch one over the green monster and come back tomorrow for more.

12:27: Paplebon is out. Who has the deeper pen?

12:32: What do I know. Single-Sac bunt-Bloop=1 run lead for the Angels. Just hope I don't root for your team because I have the baseball kiss of death.

12:37: We head to the bottom of the 12th with the Angels up 5-4 and 3 outs away from erasing their Cub-like losing streak in the postseason.

12:40: Bottom 12th and Weaver is back on the mound pitching to Big Papi...do the Red Sox miss Manny now??? Yes.

12:41: Weaver walks Ortiz, the leadoff man, this will be a fun half-inning

12:44: Full count and Youkillis flies out to deep center. A great at-bat that despite the end result shows the importance of patience and a good eye in a professional batter.

12:46: Jason Bay strikes out looking. Who needs Manny. 1 out away from an unbelivably improbable and gutsy win for the angels. Why couldnt the Cubs do this.

12:47: Unreal dig by Chone Figgins at 3rd base. The Streak is Over. I clearly cannot predict baseball games. An incredible performance by catcher Mike Napoli and starter turned reliever Jered Weaver lead to Game 4 on Monday at Fenway. Goodnight

Poor Addie Polk

Last Friday Afternoon I was sitting in my room reading various articles online. I perused over to cnn.com, where I like to find much of my political or world news and was pretty startled by one of the stories I found. This story was related to America's housing crisis, which has been at the forefront of American minds over the past several weeks. However, unlike most of the articles on Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, or the $700 billion dollar buyout, this one included a 90 year-old woman from Akron named Addie Polk and a long-barreled handgun.

"Addie Polk, 90, of Akron, Ohio, became a symbol of the nation's home mortgage crisis when she was hospitalized after shooting herself at least twice in the upper body Wednesday afternoon."

That's right. We now have 90 year-old women shooting themselves rather than getting evicted from their homes. Now, there is clearly much more to this story than that simple summary, but I think to see the true absurdness of this story you need to step back and view the surface. Somehow, in 2008, the only solution this poor woman could find to her housing problem was an attempted suicide (she did not die despite sustaining two upper-body wounds from the gunshots).

Who is to blame here? Is it the bank that first gave her the $45,620 loan in 2004 for her home that she had inhabited since 1970? Are the deputies that supposedly tried to evict Addie 30 times before Wednesday but left everytime she did not answer the door? Is America as a whole responsible for letting women like Addie fall into precarious situations like this without providing help? Or is Addie herself at fault, for not paying her rent or finding a payment plan or solution to her housing crisis outside of a handgun.

I think that everyone is at fault here for the escalation of this crisis. I obviously do not personally know Addie so I cannot comment on her actions outside of the fact that they seem pretty extreme and intense, but I have no personal knowledge of her life or her side of the story. It just seems absurd to me that something like this could happen to a very old woman that had lived in her house for twice as long as I've been alive. Could no other solution have been found? Really?

Now, Fannie Mae has announced that they have "halted" their action against Addie and that they were giving the house to her "outright." Great. Now, the bullet-ridden, 90 year-old Addie can return to her house of 38 years soon (90 year-olds recover quickly from bullet wounds right?) and we can all just move on. This doesn't send the message at all that attempting suicide to get out of your own personal housing situation is the right answer. Oh wait, it does.

This story of a old Addie Polk and her handgun epitomizes the absurdity of America's economy and the housing crisis today, and in some ways I fear the truly unbelievable stories that are sure to come in the future.

By the way, the Cubs may have come away losers last night for the 100th consecutive year, but one day we will come away champions...and hopefully Addie Polk will still be around to see it. Sadly enough, she just missed our last championship by 10 years (even though I doubt she cares about the Cubs right now).