She's a Democrat-ican

Angel and I got to spend some quality time together on the plane coming home from New York. Sometimes quality time is overrated.

The political discussion began when Angel, hoping to get her little sister in trouble, decided to tell her die-hard Obama-supporting father that The Boss was hoping Hillary Clinton would become President.

Comforted by the fact that 5 year olds can't vote, Hubby replied, "Everyone's entitled to their opinion, honey."

Knowing that Angel was an Obama supporter, I asked her why she liked Obama.

"Well, I just think a man should be President," she said without much thought.

O. M. G. Kill me. Kill me now. Although I shouldn't be surprised. This is the same kid who always insists on having the blue "man" peg be in the drivers side of the little plastic car when we play the game "Life." Where, oh where did I go wrong?!!!

After an unsuccessful debate about how women can do anything men can (yes, she agreed, but she still thinks a man should be the President), she asked when the Presidential election would be over. I explained the difference between the primaries and the general election and got into describing the differences between Democrats and Republicans.

"Democrats believe that our government should help people who have trouble helping themselves and Republicans believe that we should pay less taxes to the government because everyone should be able to help themselves." I explained.

"Yeah, I believe in the second thing you said," she said.

SHE'S A REPUBLICAN TOO?!!!!

So if she didn't believe in paying taxes, I challenged her, how are we going to pay for things we need like roads and schools?

"I have an idea! Ok, what if, like, every state had a state fair. And every ride could be like five dollars. And then like parking would be five dollars. And then they could sell things in the gift shop! Everyone could come to the fair, have a good time and we could make lots of money!"

I didn't have the heart to point out the overhead costs of putting on a fair. But I loved her creative thinking and told her so.

"But Barack Obama is a Democrat. How can you be a Republican and like Barack Obama?" I asked her.

She thought about it for a moment and said, "Well, I guess I'm a Democrat-ican."

I don't know. I could maybe live with that.

She's a Democrat-ican

Mamma Feminists: Take Heart in Your Success

I don't know about you, but I have been absolutely fascinated by the conversation that has emerged between our feminist boomer mothers and the younger generation it birthed about the Clinton candidacy and the state of feminism today. The older generation, frustrated with our general lack of enthusiasm to finally seize the day to elect our country's first female President, has accused my generation of rebelling against our mothers, apathy toward the female cause or worse -- total rejection of feminism to gain the approval of our "boyfriends." At the heart of it is the older generation's complete and utter horror at the suggestion that sexism in America no longer exists the way it once did for them.

I find it surprising that the older generation doesn't seem to recognize just how much second-wave feminist accomplishments shaped my generation and the world in which we live today. From birth, the question of whether or not we could achieve the same as our male counterparts was never a question. Growing up in a post-Title IX world, most of us had lots of opportunities to participate in traditionally male-dominated activities like little league and auto shop. Post Billie Jean King vs. Bobby Riggs, we celebrated female athletes like Chris Evert and Dorothy Hamill and watched TV shows like "Mary Tyler Moore," "The Bionic Woman" and "Charlie's Angels." Indoctrinated by women's lib empowerment that gave rise to that famous "I can bring home the bacon" commercial that's now engraved in our collective psyche, we were imbued with the notion that we could have it all. Most of us went to college without any hint of gender bias or restrictions. And by the time we entered the workforce, movies like "9 to5" and the Anita Hill hearings had blown the lid off and sufficiently squashed sexual harassment in the workplace, leaving us free to succeed in our careers. Through it all, we were taught to be strong, to think for ourselves and to speak our minds.

So while you can argue the imperfections of Title IX and its inconsistent application across races or the continued existence of latent or blatant sexism, especially in male-dominated fields, the reality is that my generation has come of age largely unencumbered by our gender and completely empowered by our upbringing. So if we appear to be an "entitled" generation, well maybe we are, but wasn't that the point? Isn't the vision of feminism to give rise to a generation of women that are entitled to the same freedoms as men? Are we not entitled to our own opinions about our Presidential candidates and should we not be free to express those opinions? My generation is so secure in the inevitability of a female President that yes, some of us are actually willing to wait for one we like. To suggest that our opinions are colored by something other than our own independent thinking, or to insist that we somehow owe our mothers or "the cause" a debt of gratitude by voting for a candidate we don't truly support in our heart of hearts seems somehow ironically contrary to everything second-wave feminists fought for and the way our mothers raised us.

As for the idea that the older generation has somehow failed to pass on a sense of duty to the younger generation to maintain momentum for the feminist cause, it simply cannot be done. Social movements cannot survive on moral obligation alone -- they are sparked and inflamed by personal pain and oppression. While my generation has not, for the most part, been subjugated by our gender, we have struggled to reconcile our roles as mothers and our desires to succeed in our own right. Now that we have the choice to pursue a career, we're finding that choice to be an excruciating one as our society still does not yet fully support a mother's ability to raise her children while pursuing her dreams, or even a simple paycheck for those that don't have a choice. Through organizations like momsrising.org, those of us who have crossed the threshold of motherhood are beginning to coalesce around the idea that we have to continue to challenge and change our outdated social institutions -- corporate America, our childcare and health care systems -- to truly realize the vision of equality.

So, Mamma Feminists, take heart. While you may not appreciate our choice in candidates, we feel free to make that choice based on the rights and empowerment you afforded us. And we have not abandoned the feminist cause -- the next wave may well be upon us. While this wave may not look quite like yours, it is simply feminism evolving, as it always does, to meet the challenges of our time.

Mamma Feminists: Take Heart in Your Success

Experience is Overrated

One of the most surprising things about having cancer is that you often have to choose your course of treatment. Of course, like any other medical issue, you expect that once you're diagnosed, your doctor will sit you down, tell you exactly how to deal with the problem, scribble a prescription and send you on your way. But treating cancer is alot more like plotting military strategy. Depending on the nature of the enemy, the terrain and weather conditions, there are several battle plans that offer promise in overtaking the enemy.

I was faced with planning my own offensive at the very beginning of my adult life. I had just graduated college and was in the midst of searching for my very first "real" job. Once I was diagnosed with stage IV Hodgkins disease, though, it became clear that starting my life would hinge on saving it first.

Because the disease had spread to several body parts, we had to take a carpet bomb approach and I had to choose between three different chemo cocktails. One cocktail had been the proven treatment of choice for decades. It gave me the greatest guarantee of a cure, but it was also the most toxic and I would face almost certain fertility problems later on. The second cocktail had only been around for a decade or so, but it had shown some very real promise in offering a cure with few serious side-effects. The third option was a combination of the two. Bottom line, I had to choose between a guaranteed cure or a likely cure with the probability of being able to bear children.

It was an excruciating choice. Having a family was still years away for me, but I'd always envisioned being a mother, raising my own biological children. But having children wouldn't even be an option if I wasn't alive in the first place. My family and I ultimately put the decision in the hands of someone infinitely more qualified. Thankfully, my doctor was not only a brilliant physician, but a warm and wonderful human being. My parents asked, "If she was your daughter, what would you do?" He didn't hesitate, "If she was my daughter, I would want her to have the best chance for a full and normal life. If you want to have children, I'd choose [the newer, less toxic combination]."

As I look into my daughters' faces, I often think of this fateful decision. Had I not taken a chance on the newer, less-proven option, I may have found other ways to become a mother, but I would have never known these two beautiful girls that my husband and I created. My life is everything I imagined it to be and more.

I'm also reminded of this decision as we Democrats try to choose between two highly qualified candidates to heal our country. Once again, I'm taking a chance on a newer, less proven choice. But I know that it's one that will not only get the job done, but will offer the best chance for the positive and hopeful future that we all envision for our country.

Experience is Overrated

Undecideds: Go With Your Gut

Since John Edwards stepped out of the ring last week, millions of his supporters have been searching their souls to determine how to re-cast their vote. I'm sure many of them have been listening carefully to the Democratic debates and doing their due diligence on the issues.

Truth be told, until now, I've done very little research and paid very little attention to the Democratic candidates plans. Really, there was no need. I've known I would vote for Barack Obama the minute I saw him speak at the 2004 Democratic National Convention. I remember so clearly being agape at his eloquence and his inspirational reminder about what was good about America. As shivers ran down my spine, I thought, "This is the guy. He's it. He's what we've been waiting for."

The decision was confirmed when I saw the Obamas on Oprah, months before he announced his candidacy. They talked about how Barack insisted on helping plan their daughter's birthday party. Michelle wisely assigned him the simple task of ordering the pizza because she knew he could handle it. When he insisted on doing the goody bags too, she refused saying that his "head would explode" with all the options he would have to choose from at the party store. I loved that as a young, well-educated, dual-career family, I could see our family in theirs. But I also knew that because of their heritage, they understood a harsh reality that I would never know, but would be invaluable in leading our country.

Having already cast my vote, I was curious to see just how far apart Hillary and Barack really were on the issues. I realized that by casting my vote for Barack, I was relying on intuition and trading inspiration for considerable experience in Hillary Clinton. So I figured I'd go see what I'd sacrificed. After studying both their campaign Web sites, I was surprised to learn that aside from some subtle nuances, their plans were practically identical on most of the issues. Hillary's site laid out proposals in greater depth and detail on some issues, but Barack's did the same on others. I was surprised to learn that Hillary dedicated much of her career to non-profit work and spent many years as an advocate for mothers and children.

I was almost starting to like Hillary when I finally ran into exactly what has turned me off to her as a potential President. There it was, right on her site: blogHillary. In today's post, her chief strategist, Mark Penn, takes aim at Barack Obama, laying out all of the "facts" that journalists have uncovered lately about the Senator and his "claims" on his so-called record. Reading this treatise, designed to "help" me learn more about Senator Obama with this "new information," my stomach started to churn.

Just to check myself up, I flipped back to the Obama site to see what dirt they were dishing on Hillary. Of course, I couldn't find a thing. All I found were page upon page detailing the Senator's positions on the issues, his activities on the campaign trail and his latest list of endorsements. I did land on this page, which asks me for feedback on his policy ideas and to share mine as well. Whether he actually uses my ideas or not, it sure is nice to be asked.

I don't know about you, but I can't take four more, eight more, or any more years of negative, divisive politics as usual. Penn's "new information," factual or not, is irrelevant in my eyes. I'm glad I went with my gut -- I'll take integrity over experience any day. I hope Edwards supporters nationwide heard Maria Shriver's endorsement speech for Obama. Here's the best part:

"This is a moment. It's a moment to have a conversation with yourself. Not with anyone else. Have a conversation with your own heart and ask yourself, 'What kind of America do I believe in? Do I believe in an America that's about unity, that's about coming together, that's about seeing beyond the labels that divide us?' And if that's the kind of America I want, I think it'll be very clear to you what you should do on Tuesday."

Undecideds: Go With Your Gut

Who Will You Hire?

In recognition of the Iowa caucuses today, BlogHer political contributing editor Morra Aarons asks about the politics of change and what it means to you. Oh, I don't know -- maybe it would mean a world where Americans traveling abroad wouldn't feel compelled to pretend they're Canadian? Or maybe it would mean a health care system that doesn't require a masters degree to figure out or afford.

OR, maybe it would finally mean a country that makes it possible to successfully raise a family and hold down a job without losing your sanity.

I always approach an election as if I'm hiring someone for a job. Experience, ideas and chemistry with colleagues are all critical considerations. I've hired people with great experience, but if they can't offer solid thinking, or don't play well with others, it can mean disaster. I've also hired wonderful people who were well-liked, but unless they can come up with realistic ideas and command enough respect for others to buy into those ideas, they don't last long either.

If I was hiring for this job, here's how the Democratic contenders would break down:

• Hillary Clinton: Great resume, top-notch experience. Clearly knows her stuff. But Hillary strikes me as the kind of exec whose smart, strong ideas would command respect, but her take no prisoners attitude would scare everyone sh**less. Lots of people effectively lead this way, but can it fly in DC these days, especially given the anti-Clinton sentiment that likely still lingers? And given the part of the world with which we have to mend relations, as much as I hate to say it, I wonder if a woman is right for the job right now. I know this is heresy to my kind -- I may be a woman, but I'm also a realist.
  
  
• John Edwards: Experienced. Passionate. Thoughtful. A nice guy, Edwards reminds me of a top exec at my organization who makes a point of saying hello to everyone he sees and ends every conversation by thanking you for your very hard work. Edwards has ambitious ideas, but are they too ambitious and would he command enough respect in DC to push them through? Speaking of respect, how would yet another white guy with a Southern accent play with the Middle East?
  
  
• Barack Obama: Not as much direct experience as the other candidates, but his resume contains an interesting mix. As a dark horse contender and a non-insider, Obama would initially enjoy a certain mystique in DC. A strong communicator, he could eventually win over even the toughest skeptics with his smart, pragmatic approach, calm demeanor and his rejection of negative political tactics. Could his darker skin and Muslim-sounding name intrigue our Middle Eastern enemies enough to open doors to real conversation?
  

While no candidate has the perfect combination of experience, ideas and chemistry, if I was hiring for this position, I'd extend an offer to Obama. His ethnicity holds a symbolic and unspoken promise of uniting our country and the world, but his background and natural inclination to find common ground can make change a reality. What we need most is a pragmatic approach and the promise of a new day -- a strong sign to both our foreign friends and our own Congress that America is ready for real change.

Who will you hire?

Who Will You Hire?