There it was. Boom! First question out of the box from Charlie Gibson to Gov. Sarah Palin, using the "Q" word. THE word that every actual or aspiring professional woman constantly asks herself...am I qualified?
Over my nearly forty year career, I have addressed this topic in countless speeches, panels, roundtables, seminars, presentations, and one-on-one counseling sessions with women of every age. Like all women, Sarah Palin knows this attitude exists and she took it in stride and nailed her response.
Women always want to know whether they should go to law school or business school, even though they already have advanced degrees. Too often, they aren't sure they are "qualified" to apply for or accept the position or run for the office, even though they may be head and shoulders more capable than any other candidate for the same job or position.
It is not that we don't want to assure qualified people are the ones who get the jobs. It is only offensive for Charlie Gibson to ask that question of Sarah Palin because neither he nor his colleagues of the ‘mainstream media' talking heads have ever posed that question to Barack Obama.
While the liberal media demanded to know how on earth Sen. John McCain would select someone of Sarah Palin's ‘qualifications' for the job that is ‘one heartbeat away from the presidency', they never bothered to ask the same question of the person whose heart would actually be beating in the Oval Office on January 21, 2009.
This is the very definition of sexism, according to the feminist mantra.
Women always think that if they have ‘one more piece of paper, or one more degree, or a few more years of this or that experience, then they will finally be ‘qualified' for whatever next thing they are seeking. My advice has always been to forget the additional piece of paper or the few more years of whatever it is they think they need to meet some undefined and elusive definition of ‘qualified'. Instead, I've said to look at their male competition and ask this question: Can I do a better job than he can? And if the answer is ‘yes', then forget the paper and the extra titles and go for it.
Anyone who has ever taught a Sunday School or pre-school or elementary school class is familiar with this scenario: as you are asking the question, "Boys and girls, can anyone tell me..." and before the question is finished, half a dozen little boy hands shoot into the air with no girls' hands, since they are waiting for the actual question. And how many times has it happened that when you call on one of those hurried little boys whose hand shot up, he looks puzzled and says, "Oh, I don't know..." Even girls who know the answers haven't raised their hands at all. It is an inherent male trait to assume he knows.
I learned in my second term as a state legislator in 1979 that freshmen male legislators were not deferential to me, but were deferential to my male colleagues elected the same day I was. And I realized that men grant to themselves and each other a certain ‘credibility' that women have to earn.
Every new job, every new opportunity, every new challenge requires proof of a woman's credentials and merit. I decided decades ago not to be angry about this fact, but rather to tell myself and other women to accept the reality of this ‘credibility' gap and to use it as a reason to try harder, work harder, and do more to prove ourselves worthy of our position.
After eight years of liberal hysteria accusing Vice President Dick Cheney of running America's foreign policy from his second chair position, one would think the left-wingers would be cheered by a Republican ticket where a President McCain's VP isn't likely to be fodder for those same accusations.
And it is more than a bit ironic that the Democrats have now nominated a ticket in which Senator Barack Obama's dearth of experience and qualifications, particularly in foreign affairs and national security, are bolstered by his choice for Cheney's successor, Sen. Joe Biden.
Many of the questions posed by the liberal media to and about Sarah Palin are illegal in the American workplace to be asked of prospective female job candidates and would get a person asking these questions fired on the spot. "Who will take care of your children while you are working?" "Can you work here and be a good mother?" and "Isn't it a bit of hubris for you to think you are qualified for this job?"
The Obama campaign was wrongly jubilant (at first) at the Palin nomination, believing that it would take off the table the question of Obama's ‘qualifications' to be president. The opposite is true. Just as I've advised all those women, all these years, capable women should be compared to their actual male competitors, instead of some elusive ideal of what ‘qualified' looks like. Now the nomination of Sarah Palin has put a face on that male competitor and turned the tables on the claims that Obama is qualified for the nation's highest office and the leader of the free world.
And even if Sarah Palin is as ‘unqualified' as the left would have us believe (a claim most Americans have already rejected), then former Congresswoman Bella Abzug's (D-NY) lifelong goal has been achieved. She used to say that she was "working for the day when a mediocre woman could get as far as a mediocre man." So every time the Obama campaign slams Sarah Palin's ‘qualifications' and ‘experience', the residue of those attacks lands squarely back on their own candidate.
Sarah Palin has raised the bar for Obama. Let's see if Charlie Gibson & Co. will start asking him about his hubris at thinking he is qualified for the position as leader of the free world and review their collective failure to ask him that question before now.
Cleta Mitchell is a lawyer in Washington, DC and a former Oklahoma legislator.
26 Comments
TLee | September 12, 2008, 6:45pm | #
The "hubris" of her answer was the fact that she said she "didn't blink" before accepting the position of the second most powerful person on Earth, not that she accepted it. And in all honesty, with her family situation, is it really sexist to wonder if she stopped to consider the impact on them? I would have been more confortable with her if she had. I could relate more to her if she had, because, yes, I have had to do the same.
For the record, I don't recall Charlie asking her about balancing work and family, I don't recall anyone asking her that, as she hasn't been taking the real "Q" word, QUESTIONS.
And I am shocked that you could write that the top of these tickets have never been asked about their qualification. They have been aswering those questions for the last 19 months! Both of them!
All the outrage about Palin's "mis"treatment baffles me...the country has NO idea who this woman is or what she believes other than what we have been told (and what she has regurgetated as she did not write her own speech, and has not been allowed to use her own mind) by the MEN who presented her to us. To simply take their word on her "Qualifications" would be irresponsible and dangerous for our country. To assume that we will support her unconditionally and without any "Qualifications", as women, is what is insulting to me.
We need to get over ourselves, and stop looking for reasons to complain. If we can't run with the big dogs, then we need to stay on the porch. Personally, I'm running!
Just a Mom | September 12, 2008, 8:16pm | #
I can't imagine a Presidential candidate NOT being asked if he/she/it is qualified. Politics is a contact sport. Check out clips of Margaret Thatcher in front of Parliament.
You are describing a Reverse Sexism by believing a woman should be exempt from what would be expected of anyone else.
The Feminism I embrace expects a woman and a man NOT TO BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY. As in gender does not matter.
Just a Mom | September 12, 2008, 8:45pm | #
One more thing. At a public forum being taped, Governor Palin stated that Senator Clinton was "whining" about the treatment received during the process for selecting the Democratic Presidential nominee. Now, we are to believe Governor Palin is to be held to a different standard than Senator Clinton.
This is simply politics aimed to further divide voters. This is allowing an issue many have fought for to become a political football. Worse yet, it might be punted by a team ready to deny women choice.
Not_Just_a_Mom | September 13, 2008, 9:06am | #
The junior senator from Illinois, Barak Obama, the thin man with the thin resume, has never been asked by the MSM, "Isn't it a bit of hubris for you to think you are qualified for this job?" And to "Just a Mom," I saw the tape to which you referred, and Sarah Palin did not state that Hillary Clinton was whining, only that commenting as she did, it could be "perceived as whining."
As citizens of this country examine closely the candidates (who they are, where they have been, and what they believe) running for president and vice president of these United States of America and are honest with themselves, I believe that more and more voters will come to see beyond the hype of the media to finally observe that the "emperor" has no clothes.
Jacqueline Jones | September 14, 2008, 11:52am | #
Charlie Gibson is more qualified to be vice president than Sarah Palin. I'M more qualified than Sarah Palin, as is the majority of the people I know. I am an independent female voter who does not like Obama and his socialist world view, but I have never been more devastated by any candidate's lack of qualifications, intelligence, experience, and utter lack of knowledge and grasp of any issues than Sarah Palin. John McCain showed a total lack of disregard for this nation by choosing her, and Palin did the same for accepting the nomination. The fact that McCain/Palin are ahead in the polls makes me absolutely terrified for this country.
Colleenk | September 14, 2008, 1:54pm | #
The bigger picture is this: America is experiencing it's worse racial divide in 4 decades. America is experiencing it's worse sexism in 4 decades. Who benefits from that? The white male dominant culture that controls the media. Divide and conquer. Palin may very well become the first female Vice President of the US, but she will be the subject of sexism the entire time. This dumbing down of women as sex objects, at a time when women have been conquered and divided, hurts ALL women. A short term situation that becomes a long term schism for equality for all women.
Chilachuck | September 15, 2008, 12:52pm | #
Ms Jone's comments sound like a much subtler form of the rather obvious "false witness" or "reformed sinner" scam we see in the male dominated blogs.
"As a life long Republican, the more I learn of ____, the more appalled I am ..." then proceed to spout the Democratic Party line in a fashion that clearly shows the person speaking is totally unacquainted with the other side of the question he/she is so appalled about after "long study".
C | September 15, 2008, 5:04pm | #
I'm really shocked that Republicans care about sexism all of a sudden. Do you think Hilary got fair treatment? Or does it only matter now because Palin is Republican? First of all, if Charlie Gibson had asked if she can still be a good mother to her children and work one of the most powerful jobs in the world, that would be sexist. But Ms. Mitchell does a disservice to women to assume that a woman candidate for VP can't be asked a straight-forward, legitimate question as to whether she is qualified for the job. If you are a woman on a job interview, and someone asks you if you are qualifed and why, you answer it, just like everyone else. If you'll remember correctly, Obama has been the one fending off that question for more than a year. Palin needs to put her big girl panties on (and so does everyone else) and play with the big boys on this one. She did not win a contest that she didn't know she was enrolled in, she chose to be in this position. It comes with media scrutiny and I'm sure she was aware of that. Maybe she should ask Hilary for advice.
Just a Mom | September 15, 2008, 6:46pm | #
Dear Not Just a Mom,
Even though I am Just a Mom, I can Google. NEWSWEEK's Karen Breslau wrote, "When Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin arrived backstage for our NEWSWEEK Women & Leadership Event in Los Angeles last March, John McCain had just wrapped up the GOP nomination. Palin had yet to endorse McCain—she liked Mitt Romney—and as we waited in the green room, I urged her to "feel free" to make some news on stage. She grinned broadly—looking back, I guess it was a grin of the Cheshire Cat variety—and thanked me for the offer.
Once onstage, together with Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, Palin talked about what women expect from women leaders; how she took charge in Alaska during a political scandal that threatened to unseat the state's entire Republican power structure, and her feelings about Sen. Hillary Clinton. (She said she felt kind of bad she couldn't support a woman, but she didn't like Clinton's whining.)"
I didn't crop the quote so you would not think I had distorted it.
This article and your comment strike me silliness. We are in a once in a century economic crisis, two foreign wars, and you are focused on the emperor's clothes. You and the country would be better served by focusing on real substantive issues and not shape, gender, or color.
Just a Mom | September 15, 2008, 7:19pm | #
Politfact.org has McCain voting 19 times against raising the minimum wage. In 1999, 58% of the people who benefited would have been women "simply because, as a group, they earn lower wages than men. As a result, a minimum wage increase would help to reduce the overall pay gap between women and men." In 2006, about 66% of minimum wage earners were women. Women continue to earn less than men.
If you care about feminist issues and justice regardless of gender, then you care about the fact that women still earn less than men. This is a real issue. Whether or not a woman is asked whether she is qualified to lead our country when she has just appeared on the national stage is not a real issue.
By the way, neither Senator McCain nor Governor Palin support equal pay for equal work. This is a substantive point.
Another substantive point for me is that Mayor Palin had the cost of rape kits/collections charged to the women who had been victimized. This was counter to the existing custom in Wasilla and Alaska in general. Unless Mayor Palin also had murder victims charged for the collection of evidence to prosecute homicides, then her action was sexist. Worth noting is that Alaska has a historically high rate of violence against women, the highest in the nation at times. This single executive action is striking and demonstrates anything but that Governor Palin was a strong adovocate for women.
Marie in NC | September 17, 2008, 10:33pm | #
I can't believe that women are the worse in the way they treat Sarah Palin. Gibson treated Palin in a very condescending way. It is laughable to see how the liberal media treats Obama and the disrespect they show for the Republican ticket. I wish they would talk to Obama they way they speak to McCain and Palin. Then it will be fair, and nobody is saying that she is complaining by the way.
Marie in NC | September 17, 2008, 10:38pm | #
Some people in this site can't stop themselves from repeating the "talking points" that all Obama supporters spill every time they appear in some show or interview. Give it a break! Obama can't speak without a teleprompter. Why does he use them now even when he is at a town hall meeting? This is why he will not appear in one with McCain. I can't wait for those debates! It will be the end of Obama. Can't wait for this election in November either. Hope not to hear the name Obama in a long time!!!
a reader | September 17, 2008, 11:04pm | #
It is no surprise that the media question Palin's qualifications, which are scanty. If McCain had chosen a male with Palin's qualifications, Gibson and his ilk would have asked the male candidate if he thought he was qualified. So, sexism isn't really the issue.
The issue is media bias favoring Obama. Most of the public know that Obama lacks any qualifications to be President. The media, however, never address that issue and would never ask Obama if he is qualified.
To the contrary, with the complicity of the media, Obmama has run for nearly two years without setting forth his programs, without answering for his asssociations with Wright, Resko, Ayres and other stench-making people, and without addressing his supposed (lack of)qualifications.
SRO | September 17, 2008, 11:10pm | #
Creta, you make some obviously good points. I haven't seen Obama get the grilling from the press that appears in wait for Palin. Obama has already made it known that he has access to 300 advisors on foreign policy alone. But that didn't stop him from making an error on whether the Surge in Iraq would work. He simply followed the partisan crowd of his party without mentioning that the military came up with the number of troops and strategy it thought would succeed. So Obama didn't give due diligence to those experts on the ground but simply flowed with partisan, consensual opinion. And I didn't hear a peep out of Obama when Russia attacked South Ossetia, although we heard plenty from John McCain -- who actually does have the experience.
It bares mentioning that Obama got a seat on the Senates Foreign Relations Committee. He was even given a committee chair on the Subcommittee on Europe, with jurisdiction over NATO. When asked why he never convened a subcommittee meeting since his appointment, it was none other than Joe Biden who stepped in to say that those duties were folded into the Senates Foreign Relations committee because of the current issues between Russia, NATO and the Balkans. That is quite an admission that Obama doesn't have the experience to even run that subcommittee. Nevertheless, in 47 days, he wants to be President.
Had Palin made such a comment, the reactions from the press would have been enormous. The good part is that an awful lot of Americans know that.
Rich | September 17, 2008, 11:13pm | #
You couldn't get a job at McDonalds and become director of the company after 143 days of experience.
You couldn't become chief of surgery after 143 days of experience of being a doctor.
You couldn't get a job as a teacher and be the superintendent after 143 days of experience. And you know full well that you couldn't join the military and become a General after a 143 days of experience.
You couldn't get a job as a reporter and become the nightly news anchor after 143 days of experience either.
But, from State Senator, to the time he announced he was forming a Presidential Exploratory Committee, he logged a whole 143 days of experience in the Senate. That's how many days the Senate was actually in session and working, whether he was there or not.
And after only 143 days of Senate experience, Barack Obama actually believes he is ready to be Commander In Chief, Leader of the Free World .... 143 days, folks!. A little arrogant? You be the judge.
twiceblessedmom | September 17, 2008, 11:21pm | #
The BO talking points are all you will ever hear from the BO nation. May I refer them to Mr. Gibson's questions for Senator Obama upon said Senator's nomination. Not exactly no-holds-barred journalism. Compare the questions side-by-side (Obama's vs. Palin's), as posited by Mr. Gibson, then get back to me. The MSM is indeed in bed with BO and his demise is theirs as well.
thinkingmom | September 18, 2008, 12:11am | #
I rarely post, but I have to comment. Justamom, do you know that when the minimum wage is raised it also raises unemployment rates? So many inexperienced women entering the workforce are hurt by these policies. Wow. To suggest that there are such easy fixes is truly lazy thinking. Vote for whom you'd like, but make sure the vote is based on solid reasoning and not emotional knee-jerk reactions. A suggestion: these policies are juxtaposed in the NYT and WSJ. Read a book on basic economics. Observe the effect these policies had on Germany or France. Good luck, everyone!
ic | September 18, 2008, 2:03am | #
Justamom: Let's face it McCain has a men problem. He is so afraid of a powerful man upstaging him that he chooses a woman for vp. But Obama understands power is for men, those women just get insulted for harmless comments like "sweetie" and make a federal case out of it. He already has three women at home, what will happen to his manhood if he chose a woman for vp?
Another proof that McCain has a men problem: his campaign pays less to men than to women. While Obama's woman staffer makes 83 cents for each dollar a man staffer makes, (mind you: the national average is 77 cents), McCain's woman staffer makes $1.04. Can you imagine paying less to a man than to a woman? Among Obama's top 20 advisors, 7 are women, among McCain's, 13 are women. I wonder how self-respecting men can vote for McCain. Being sweeties, women will line up for Obama for his standing up against those power hungry bitches.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NmEzMTZmNTk5MDI0NTZmNjUwMjllN2ZlZTc0MWFmYzY=
GED | September 18, 2008, 4:34am | #
IC, you are an idiot
Gary Ogletree | September 18, 2008, 8:48am | #
The relentless smear campaign against Palin has had some success in drawing attention away from her genuine and remarkable accomplishments. British Petroleum is said to have laughed when she stated the need for Alaska to renegociate their deal in light of creative accounting going on at BP and Exxon. The people who own BP are the "old money" of Europe with titles and connections galore. They can remember how Dad and Uncle booted out the pesky elected government of oil rich Iran in favor of their beloved Shah. The Unqualified One rode circles around them like a Mongol horse archer. She kicked open the gas pipeline logjam and walked away with plenty of loot for the people of Alaska. My bet is on The Unqualified One.
ic | September 18, 2008, 9:05am | #
GED: I'm glad you have a GED. Bravo!
But you do know that calling people names does not improve your arguments or your thought process, don't you? Please be brave, facts won't bite you, go read the link, then come back for a proper discussion.
a | September 18, 2008, 10:47am | #
Another reporter, and many more commentators, blindsided by agenda. I am so tired of the partisan agenda in this election, and Palin is the prime example. She is neither God nor the devil, but to hear people talk, you'd think she had to be one or the other. I think it's legitimate to ask if she's qualified - that's a legitimate job interview question, and the voters need to know. Feel free to ask Obama, too. In fact, that's a debate I'd love to see. I think it would be illuminating - and hopefully get some non-thinkers to see beyond their partisan agenda.
Marsha | September 19, 2008, 3:41pm | #
Is she qualified??? Palin has the shortest and least impressive resume of any V.P. in our history (except maybe for Spiro Agnew who resigned in disgrace). The question was fair - yes she meets the minimum criteria-- born in the US and over 35. However, Americans should stop accepting the bare minimum. When it takes 5 different colleges and 6 yrs. to earn a B.A. degree you are mediocre. Even McCain who was 5th from the bottom of his class of over 800 only needed 4 years. I could name dozens of Rep women who are much more qualified than she. But as my OB-GYN says McCain's view is any cute and feisty vagina will do. Thinking women can't be fooled. Not even for the Party!!!
annemarie | September 21, 2008, 12:43am | #
Re Obama's experience. He was Illinois State Senator for 8 yrs and US Senator for 4: 12 yrs as a Senator.
In her acceptance speech, Palin accused Obama of authoring NOT A SINGLE LAW in the US or State Senates. Well, she was lying. Obama sponsored/co-sponsored 570 bills in the 109th and 110th Congress and has authored 15 bills that have become LAW since he joined the Senate in 2005.He has introduced amendments to 50 bills, of which 16 were adopted by the Senate.
His record is in fact very impressive. His record suggests several priorities and the bills he supports address many of our Nation’s most pressing problems. Most of his legislative effort has been in the area of Energy Efficiency and Climate Change (25 bills), health care (21 bills) and public health (20 bills), consumer protection/labor (14 bills), the needs of Veterans and the Armed Forces (13 bills), Congressional Ethics and Accountability (12 bills), Foreign Policy (10 bills) Voting and Elections (9 bills), Education (7 bills), Hurricane Katrina Relief (6), the Environment (5 bills), Homeland Security (4 bills), and discrimination (4 bills).
He introduced two major laws bearing his name: "Lugar–Obama," which expanded the Nunn–Lugar cooperative threat reduction concept to conventional weapons,and the "Coburn–Obama Transparency Act." He introduced S. 453, a bill to criminalize deceptive practices in federal elections, as well as the Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007. He sponsored an amendment to the Defense Authorization Act adding safeguards for personality disorder military discharges, the "Iran Sanctions Enabling Act" supporting divestment of state pension funds from Iran's oil and gas industry, and co-sponsored legislation to reduce risks of nuclear terrorism. To name but a few
He has served on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the Senate Health Education, Labor & Pensions Committee, the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, and the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee. He is Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on European Affairs and has made official trips to Eastern Europe, Europe, the Middle East, Central Asia and Africa.
He has a degree from Columbia University, a law degree from Harvard and was elected President of the prestigious Harvard Law Review. He practiced civil rights law and was Professor of US. Constitution Law at Univ of Chicago.
He has written two best-selling books (no ghost writer): Dreams of My Father and The Audacity of Hope.
Senator Obama is an extremely intelligent, well-educated, accomplished individual with an impressive Senate record, profound respect for and deeo knowledge of the US Constitution AND had the judgment in 2002 to strongly oppose the invasion of Iraq, stating why in his eerily prescient speech - - well qualified for the presidency!
Don | September 22, 2008, 3:11pm | #
A state senator is a less significant position than a mayor, and a federal senator is a less significant position than a governor. and it isn't really true that Obama has been a US senator for four years; he's been running for president for the last two years.
The simple fact of the matter is that Palin is more qualified than Obama, as VP or President.
Elisabeth | September 23, 2008, 9:43am | #
I'm an educated professional woman. I am an Independent. I will vote for Palin.
I have many friends who are also Independent and they are going for Palin .
We've all seen this dog and pony show of politics for many decades. The same old tired tunes over many decades: "Change!!!", "lower taxes!!", we're just like YOU!" ...same old stuff over and over again. What a bunch of dribble.
But this time, someone chose a real person, Palin. authenticity.
And guess what America... there are many Independent women who can see that and identify with it.