I think it is time that the McCain brigade to focus on the real issues at hand and stop harping about the “lipstick on a pig” remark.

For crying out loud, it’s a frigging common analogy. Milking it for all it’s worth as a sexist weapon and gender discrimination is not only demeaning to women, it is insulting. I am a woman and I am not the least bit offended by Obama’s usage of this analogy in his speech. You are not doing women any favours.

Marc Ambinder shows that Obama is fond of using this analogy, way before the McCain team attempted to make it all about Palin. McCain himself has used it on Hillary Clinton too. Is he, by virtue of parallel argument, being sexist then?

If anything, Palin’s floundering in foreign policy is cause for concern. Her lack of knowledge (Bush doctrine, anyone?) and experience showed up in her interviews with the press. In terms of experience, she has nothing up against Biden’s 37 years of experience. Focusing on nitpicking of inconsequential comments at this point of time seems to indicate an inability to align importance to the real issues at hand. Or perhaps it is a smokescreen to defray attention from the real issues at hand?

Her policy positions are also cause for worry. She opposes abortion and will move to abolish abortion rights, even in cases of incest and rape. Essentially, taking such a stance would be a setback to feminist progress so far. I cannot agree with a policy that renders women helpless and disembowels the essence of women’s rights.

She also opposed the funding of sex-education programs in Alaska- citing abstinence as the best birth control. Even after her daughter Bristol had a teenage pregnancy, she still does not see the short sightedness of such a close minded policy. Not a big plus point for a politician.

In contrast to the McCain team’s propensity for cheap potshots, the Obama team scored a brownie point when it declared the topic of Bristol Palin’s pregnancy as “off limits”.

“People’s families are off-limits,” Obama said in Michigan. Bristol Palin’s pregnancy “has no relevance” to the governor’s performance, he said.

The MacCain campaign is getting increasingly dodgy in its antics. Apart from the inane nitpicking over the lipstick remark, McCain praised Palin for being a tax cutter - when Alaska has no state income or sales tax.

“Enough is enough,” Obama senior adviser Anita Dunn said in a statement e-mailed to reporters
“The McCain campaign’s attack tonight is a pathetic attempt to play the gender card about the use of a common analogy - the same analogy that Senator McCain himself used about Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s health care plan just last year,” she continued. “This phony lecture on gender sensitivity is the height of cynicism and lays bare the increasingly dishonorable campaign John McCain has chosen to run.”

**
The McCain decision to bring Palin on as a VP candidate is probably a very shrewd one, despite her not being qualified in various administration areas. For one, polls have showed that McCain has pulled ahead after Palin tried to play the gender card. Here in Singapore, we have qualified editors like Chitra Rajaram proclaiming support for Palin and gushing about how Palin is clear about “who I am and this is what I am all about”. However her religious and political leanings point to a different direction - in that she does not allow women of America to be who they are and what they are all about. An extremist stance on abortion rights and sex education is merely a tip on the iceberg.

It surprises me that women, even educated and modern ones like Ms Rajaram, is not separating the gender element from the big picture. As an added irony, Ms Rajaram had posted this question for discussion in an inaugural series organized by AWARE:

Should we have a woman prime minister or president because they are women — or should we be gender blind when it comes to such matters?

In a society where we pride ourselves on true equality and meritocracy, we have to be gender blind on such matters. Otherwise, we run the risk of putting people who are not good enough in jobs for the sake of having them there. And such measures are not progressive for any society.

Ms Rajaram seemed to have lost the crystal logic she demonstrated in March or is there something else in the equation I have missed out?

As a full time working mum of two kids, I do respect Palin. She manages a career while having 5 kids. On the other hand, her dedication to her career seem skewed. I also wonder at her sense of priorities - her youngest child was born with Down’s Syndrome. Is it right for her to run for VP at this point of time? This is, of course secondary to the fact that I do not find her a qualified candidate.

Of course, it is entirely possible to objectively respect or even like the woman in the aspects that are relevant to us, but it would be dangerous and emotional to vote her in based on gender bonding.

Imagine my disappointment and shock when I read this piece from Constance Singam, president of AWARE. I don’t know what to say when the president of an organization, which mission is to “identify areas for improvement in gender equality, encourage positive change, and support women in realising their highest potential”, support a candidate whose policies undermine the very essence of gender equality.

Gloria Steinem, an author, feminist organizer and co-founder of the Women’s Media Center, offers a more objective view.

This isn’t the first time a boss has picked an unqualified woman just because she agrees with him and opposes everything most other women want and need. Feminism has never been about getting a job for one woman. It’s about making life more fair for women everywhere. It’s not about a piece of the existing pie; there are too many of us for that. It’s about baking a new pie.

Palin’s value to those patriarchs is clear: She opposes just about every issue that women support by a majority or plurality. She believes that creationism should be taught in public schools but disbelieves global warming; she opposes gun control but supports government control of women’s wombs; she opposes stem cell research but approves “abstinence-only” programs, which increase unwanted births, sexually transmitted diseases and abortions;

**

I fear to think what could be if Palin is indeed voted into office but for now I will leave you with this light hearted video from Saturday Night Live. It’s a deliciously evil impersonation of Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton: