Tuesday, September 23, 2008 - Posts
-
sponsorship
Dahlia, I'm of the school that we should be easy on Todd. The campaign's description of this controversy is, of course, absurd: they claim people are criticizing him for being "an active dad who wants to be with his kids and with his wife when he's not on the slope," says a spokeswoman in the Washington Post story. But of course no one in his right mind would criticize him for that. That's all just part of the "First Dude" mythology, where he does kamikaze races with a broken arm while holding a child in the other. People criticize him for those strongarming phone calls to city and state officials, for helping to write the budget when he's just as unqualified as his wife.
Still, the reason I think we should lay off is because it's high time for a new First Lady/First Dude standard. There is some part of us that clings to the notion of First Person as arm candy, even though we know that's a fiction. In life, we expect a spouse to stand up for his or her wife or husband, to support them even to the point of thuggishness. We even admire that at some level. And yet we can't bring ourselves to transfer that attitude to politics.
I'd much prefer a First Lady who makes bullying midnight phone calls than one who runs anodyne library fairs or plants flowers, which seems like the last vestiges of the mid-century housewife. Lady Bird Johnson was able to turn her gardening into a national green crusade. But now the First Lady as domestic goddess always comes off as an awkward fit. I'd like for there to be a space for a Hillary-style wife to run a health care task force if she's qualified to do that. Or even a Cherie Blair, competent but removed. And it's hard to defend a new model if we instinctively slam on Todd.
And yes, you're right, Dahlia, our ambivalence on this question shows through. We need no more proof than the recent Greta Van Susteren interview of Todd, which is truly one of the most excruciatingly awkward conversations I've ever witnessed. Talking Points memo ran a geniusly edited version.
-
sponsorship
With today's dust-up over blocking press access to her meet-and-greet with foreign dignitaries, Sarah Palin reminds me ever-more of the vice president she is absolutely not meant to invoke ... Dick Cheney. She assumes the press has base motives and scorns its watchdog function--today's lesson was that print reporters and TV producers can't even be trusted with the handshake pleasantries. As governor, she prizes secrecy and loyalty among her aides. She hides her e-mails in a private Yahoo account. Palin's rationale may be different than Cheney's, especially when it comes to her treatment of the press. She has skated on thin talking points when trying to discuss foreign and domestic policy in the few interviews she's granted since McCain chose her, and that's not Cheney's problem. But if she makes it to the office of the vice president, might she prefer that it remain a closed box? It looks like the answer is yes. Even if that's not the fresh look the McCain campaign wants to promise.
-
sponsorship
Ewww, Nayeli, I agree with you entirely: Those ads are creepy. Worse than creepy, really: They're advertising the sexiness of violence against women. Duct-tape her! Sew up her mouth! Dominate that chick! The voting tag line reads as an afterthought to the main message that rape is just soooo hot. Maybe there's a secret plan to bring out the misogynists while suppressing the women's vote?
-
sponsorship
Why are pro-voting ads so frequently creepy? When seemingly oblivious celebrities express their views on the candidates themselves, the results can be entertaining or mildly insightful. But for some reason all of the stars' charm and charisma gets lost when they start standing up for our electoral system. These ads for Declare Yourself, which feature a gagged and sobbing Jessica Alba, Christina Aguilera, and Andre 3000 among others, are particularly frightening to look at. By the ads' logic, if I don't vote I'm essentially submitting myself to a brutal vigilante silencing technique, like having my mouth stapled or bolted shut.
Declare Yourself isn't alone in its tendency to threaten and alienate its audience despite better intentions. The "Vote or Die" campaign that began in 2000 promotes its own violent message, particularly when organizer P. Diddy gets aggressive or weirdly personal about the issues. Aguilera is actually a double offender in the scary ad game, having already taped this eerie display (those eyes! that smile!) for Rock the Vote last May. Not that Madonna's original Rock the Vote ads or Gwyneth Paltrow's stilted plug for absentee ballots were any more appropriate or appealing.
It's obviously important to get the MTV set involved in this election, and perhaps there's nothing better than a good shock to get this point across. The Declare Yourself ads' literal "use it or lose it" message is certainly attention-grabbing, but do these violent images really make people want to vote? They just scare the heck out of me.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?