Palin’s plotting

Originally published November 6, 2008.

A few hotly-contested races have yet to be resolved following Election Day, including, perhaps surprisingly, Alaska’s Senate showdown between Ted Stevens and Mark Begich. This may not sound like a big deal to some, but if you were waiting with baited breath for Sarah Palin to crawl back under the rock of obscurity from whence she came, listen up. Don’t sigh in relief just yet.

Despite all statements to the contrary prior to her selection as McCain’s VP, Sarah Palin may not be interested in just serving as the governor of Alaska anymore. The GOP found exactly what it wanted in Palin: a devout social conservative with an externally female appearance (I cannot believe that Palin represents or fights for women in this country). Though her handlers in this campaign found her perhaps a little too outwardly caustic or unwilling to stick to campaign rhetoric, there is plenty of time to reprogram her before she is put back into action in a presidential race. Now that they have her, the Republicans are not going to let her go.

In a radio interview with Rush Limbaugh, Palin said in response to a statement about her heavy open criticism of the Obama campaign, “I’ve got nothing to lose in this.” And she’s right. She has been catapulted onto the national stage even though McCain lost, and after giving her a taste of fame, the party seems comfortable with continuing to entertain her delusions of grandeur. Tina Fey’s “Palin 2012″ jokes may not be so far from the truth.

But you have to learn to walk before you can run, right? Well, that’s where Palin’s friend Ted Stevens comes in.

Stevens, who just barely led Alaska’s polls Wednesday, is in a little bit of legal trouble. In October, the senator was convicted of seven federal corruption charges because he filed false statements on Senate ethics reforms. If he wins, he would be the first convicted felon to be re-elected to the U.S. Senate. But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has already quashed this would-be first, saying that it would never be allowed to begin with, but also pressing the reality of Stevens’s having to face an ethics committee investigation followed by expulsion, regardless of his ability to appeal.

So, should he retain his Senate seat, one of two things will happen: Senator Stevens can step down from his position, or he will be expelled from it. And it’s a realistic possibility that Sarah Palin will be waiting in the wings to appoint herself in his place. After all, ethics are not an obstacle for her, as she has already demonstrated. Maybe she and Gov. Rod Blagojevich can appoint themselves together, in solidarity.

Even if she’s not willing to weather the legal storm that would surely follow a self-selection to the Senate, Palin could easily use her newfound popularity and $150,000 wardrobe to campaign her way into the spot during a special election. I wonder if she would get taxpayers to foot the bill for flying her kids back and forth to D.C. with her.

And besides, now that she’s taken the time to publicly shame her pregnant daughter and soon-to-be son-in-law by pushing them into the spotlight with her, who could possibly want to hear the end of it (hint: every discerning person in the United States)?

So, are we looking at an extended stay in the national political scene for Governor Palin? You betcha, and likely not just for 2012, despite what SNL has to say about it. Assuming Obama runs for re-election in four years, Palin stands a better chance if she decides to run in eight, especially if she “mavericks” her way into Congress. By 2016, voters will probably consider Hillary Clinton too old for the Oval Office in the same way they responded to John McCain’s substantial age. Can we count on some up-and-coming, liberal-minded female titan to stand up and truly represent not only women, but the entirety of our nation? If so, she better start now.

Chelsea is a senior in English and Creative Writing and hates that every step equality moves forward, it gets shoved four steps back: four states passed anti-gay and -lesbian legislation.

Election won’t end prejudice

Originally published October 30, 2008.

After centuries of exploitation, an arduous and bloody struggle for liberation in the United States, and a perpetual battle against discrimination, it’s finally happened. As we draw nearer to Election Day and watch Senator Barack Obama still campaigning fervently, it’s apparent. Racism has been eliminated.

Yep, that’s right. Now that a black man has been successfully nominated by a major party for the presidency, now that he’s run a powerful campaign, and now that he just might win that spot in the Oval Office, racism’s gone. Everyone is equal now. Yes, if one black man can make it to the top, everyone can!

So goodbye, affirmative action! While we’re at it, why don’t we just get rid of the technicalities of equal opportunity employment and nondiscrimination statements, too? After all, Barack Obama has gotten rid of racial prejudice. That must mean that we’re done with discrimination, no matter who it pertains to. Thanks, Barack!

If nothing else, the Obama campaign has shown the United States the exact opposite of my jokes–that is, how very racist we still are. From mainstream news media’s attempts to focus only on Obama’s “racial appeal” in the beginning of his presidential run to accusations that he isn’t “black enough,” from the disgusting suggestions that he and his wife are clearly black supremacists to the recently derailed assassination plot of two white supremacists, it is incredibly hard to believe that the Illinois senator’s success has eliminated racial prejudice.

That said, it’s also ridiculous to suggest that Obama’s accomplishments render affirmative action unnecessary, especially when people still have so many misconceptions about it: that affirmative action pertains only to racial minorities (wrong), that it is used to meet population “quotas” (wrong) and that its implementation means the selection of a candidate based solely on his or her race (you guessed it: wrong).

Let’s clear these up quickly. Affirmative action deals not only with race, but with gender, disability status, and veteran status. It isn’t used to meet diversity quotas, which are illegal. Most activity related to affirmative action deals with recruitment and outreach to qualified candidates (keyword: qualified) in underrepresented communities. Building on that, the policy can be used (not “is always used”) to consider a single, identity-based criteria as a deciding factor regarding a qualified individual.

The whole idea behind affirmative action is to ensure that we make an active effort to create truly equal opportunities for all people. Sorry, but just stating that a university or employer doesn’t discriminate doesn’t make it true. The policy is a means of rectifying this issue.

Because of mainstream misinterpretations of affirmative action, it’s easy to say that the issue would never have been brought up in response to Hillary Clinton, despite the fact that it applies to her, too. It’s certainly not being brought up against Sarah Palin now. If Clinton were in Obama’s position now, would we make any assessments about policies perceived to protect the interests of women?

Gender isn’t listed as an identity criterion in federal hate crime law. A wage gap between men’s and women’s earnings still exists. We’re kidding ourselves if we really believe that the placement of any woman in the White House means we’ve completely shattered that oft-mentioned glass ceiling. With gender inequity so obvious, it seems highly unlikely that anyone would have suggested some repeal of anti-discrimination legislation. Or maybe our silence has nothing to do with gender. Maybe it’s simply because Clinton and Palin are both white.

It’s not as though there’s been no change in attitudes about social identities, especially race, but let’s hold off on throwing confetti and proposing toasts to the “end of prejudice.” The appalling assumptions about affirmative action that still stand are testament to why we need it in the first place: people apparently can’t wrap their heads around the very real existence of qualified minority candidates applying for jobs and institutions of higher education, or that racial minorities can and do get selected without the implementation of affirmative action. Perhaps one day, we’ll reach a point when the policy is obsolete. For now, we still have a long way to go.

Chelsea is a senior in English and music and has a dentist appointment on Halloween.