Let's look at those 'silly arguments'

Next up is my third allegedly silly argument that Terpstra does not refer to what “change” it is that he finds so appealing in Palin. As I repeatedly stated, the fact that Palin is a woman is not in itself a significant indicator of change. He did not discuss her policies in the first article and despite my repeated requests, again failed to do so in the second. Simply listing the number of prominent female Republican politicians is not evidence of change, Policies, please. It’s the policies that count. In what way does Palin represent a change in the way Republicans do politics? I am still waiting for an answer to that question.

And onto silly argument four: the ever-present subject of disenchanted Clinton supporters. I took exception to Terpstra’s original statement that Palin “may win over Clinton’s hurting supporters” as it portrayed women as a monolithic entity who vote less on issues and more on whether the candidate sports their vaginal characteristics.

Terpstra has since watered down his stance to “McCain only needs 10 per cent of them” and claims that he has seen YouTube video’s of ex-Clinton now McCain fans which he cites as evidence that Palin is indeed winning over a large chunk of Hillary Clinton’s 18 million voters. However, without actual figures, it is impossible to gauge whether this is at all true. There are also no indicators that the examples that Terpstra cites have anything to do with the Palin pick. If he is referring to the group Clintons4McCain, then he would do well to acknowledge that this group surfaced well before Palin’s arrival on the scene and their website has since been revealed to be registered by the Republican National Committee.

Regardless, however, of whether or not some Clinton supporters defect to Palin in protest, it is the inherent sexism of Terpstra’s initial statement that I objected to. That women will automatically flock to Palin en masse, simply because she is a woman. On the contrary, according to a Lifetime Networks poll, 62 per cent of women say that McCain’s choice of a female VP has no bearing on their vote either way while the vast majority (76 per cent) of Clinton supporters have actually “flocked to Obama”.

Women Against Sarah Palin a website created as a response to the claims that McCain can win women over by picking a female running mate features these words by Gloria Steinem:

Selecting Sarah Palin, who was touted all summer by Rush Limbaugh, is no way to attract most women, including die-hard Clinton supporters. Palin shares nothing but a chromosome with Clinton. Her down-home, divisive and deceptive speech did nothing to cosmeticize a Republican convention that has more than twice as many male delegates as female, a presidential candidate who is owned and operated by the right wing and a platform that opposes pretty much everything Clinton's candidacy stood for - and that Barack Obama's still does. To vote in protest for McCain/Palin would be like saying, "Somebody stole my shoes, so I'll amputate my legs”.

According to Terpstra, that is silly argument number five and he issues a series of frustratingly simplistic blanket statements to “counteract” it. Ignoring the irony of Terpstra claiming that Palin represents a real change, then promptly declaring that her views are virtually identical to Clinton’s anyway, let’s examine them one by one:

“Abortion? Clinton now says that ‘abortion should remain legal, but it needs to be safe and rare’. This suggests that she is moving to the right. Less abortion clinics, after all, means more mothers.”

Actually, Clinton has long maintained that position. But far from a shifting to the right Clinton, maintains that the way to decrease the number of abortions is through comprehensive sex education and access to birth control, not simply closing down abortion clinics as Terpstra astoundingly suggests. In other words Clinton wants to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies, not attempt to force unwilling women into motherhood.

To suggest that Clinton and Palin share similar views on this issue is simply bordering on the absurd. Palin is “pro-life” to the point where she has publicly stated that should her own daughter fall pregnant as a result of rape she would still “choose life”.

Clinton has always maintained that women have a right to privacy and bodily autonomy: “I am and always have been pro-choice, and that is not a right any of should take for granted. There are a number of forces at work in our society that would try to turn back the clock and undermine a woman’s right to chose, and [we] must remain vigilant.”

“Guns? Clinton talks fondly of her hunting memories too … ‘It’s part of culture. It’s part of a way of life. People enjoy hunting and shooting because it’s an important part of who they are. Not because they are bitter’. (April 12, 2008.)”