Home > Health > MOMania > Archives > 2007 > February > 18 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USA mother’s gut instinct in life & politics
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Recently, my husband sent me an opinions piece from The Washington Post about how women, more specifically mothers, often decide their vote.
The story, by retired women’s studies professor Linda Hirshman, examined what it would take for women to sweep Hillary Clinton into the White House in 2008.
What interested (and angered) me in this article were the author’s criticisms about how women make up their minds at election time.
Her criticisms were two-fold: The first that women are not “rational political actors.” She says they do not make decisions based on political agenda, policy or program - instead they vote on personality and character. (Her conclusions were based partially on past research, and partially on some lame and admittedly unscientific interviews with mostly stay-at-home moms in the Washington D.C. area.)
Hirshman’s second criticism is that women make decisions not through research, but rather with their gut instincts. She says that women don’t read or study about the candidates.
She actually had some statistics to support this argument. For example, studies show that “women consistently score 10 to 20 percentage points lower than men on studies of political knowledge…” Some studies show that women more often than men can’t name their senator or a First Amendment right. A 2006 Pew Research Center study showed that “Two million more men than women read either Time or Newsweek; more men listen to radio news and talk news, read the newspaper and get news online.” Apparently, the ladies like their news from the TV. (I’m hurting my own argument by admitting that it was my husband who sent me the story from The Washington Post, but we’ll get to that later.)
I actually don’t disagree with the author’s premise that women, especially mothers, do use their gut instincts to make decisions about people (including candidates). However, I think she’s wrong to conclude that this is a bad thing.
Women are instinctual about people. They have to be. From the time they are young girls, they are constantly deciding if other people are safe to be around. They go off to college and they ponder the intentions of all the new people they meet. Is it safe to go that boy’s dorm or get in that car? What are the intentions of the professor who wants me to stay after class and, later in life, the boss who wants me to stay after work?
As a mother, you’re constantly evaluating, often in mere minutes, your surroundings for the safety and well-being of your children. Is that pediatrician right for us? What about the childcare worker, preschool teacher, school teacher, and even other mom friends? Do they have your child’s best interest at heart? A mother is constantly reading people - even her own children.
It is only natural that a mother applies these fine-honed skills to the people who want to run her government. She’s evaluating: Does this candidate seem trustworthy? Does he seem smart? Does he seem understanding and sincere?
Unlike the writer in The Washington Post, I would propose that this gut instinct is a valuable tool for women voters, not something to be belittled because the political machine can’t figure out how to control or measure it.
As to the point of being uninformed, it is disappointing to me that women do statistically and anecdotally read less and are less politically informed than men. I am guilty of this as well.
However, I would like to offer a defense to this criticism. It’s not that we are stupid or don’t care. It’s that we are holding in our heads every detail of running our family’s lives that often our husbands have no clue about. My husband can name our senators (I could too if you gave me a minute - two old white guys right?), but he can’t tell you which child reacts badly to which medicine, has no idea which pair of Mary Janes are the current shoes, has no idea when our child is seeing the dentist or when the dog needs his rabies shot.
This doesn’t excuse our lack of knowledge as a group, but it does explain why it’s developed that way.
While I would encourage women to continue to use their gut instincts to evaluate candidates, I would also challenge all the moms out there to make an effort to read more and be more informed this election season. Now, where did my husband leave the Time magazine?
Permalink | Comments (61) | Post your comment | Categories: Family Life
.JPG)
-1.JPG)
Services »
Comments
By Together for 12
February 19, 2007 07:20 AM | Link to this
I would be interested to see a study that shows when men read these publications. Working people, I suspect read Time or the paper, etc. “during a break at work” or “during my lunch hour” or “during a slow work time at the office”. Perhaps “while riding to work in the carpool/on the train” or “before I start the work day”. Most people get into work earlier their 8-5 hours begin, giving them a little free time to get coffee, chat with co-workers, etc. before buckling down at the desk. During elections, co-workers often will talk politics as well and bounce information off each other.
SAHMs don’t usually get “lunch hour” or “breaks” to sit down and read a Time or Newsweek. Nor do they have co-workers to chat with. Your five year old isn’t going to be interested in the elections, and there are no adults to challenge your thoughts or bring in new ideas for you to consider. By the time your husband gets home from work, he’s already hashed through this stuff with co-workers, so he’s not likely to talk to you about it and want to debate it anymore.
By anne
February 19, 2007 07:49 AM | Link to this
It amazes me how little the women in my (intown) neighborhood know or care about their elected officials. Yes, it’s important to remember that little 18-month-old Bubba has art on Monday, gymnastics on Tuesday, chess on Wednesday, rock climbing on Thursday, etc. but being the repository for this critical knowledge does not mean there is not more room in your brain to be a participatory citizen in our democracy.
Those sad excuses about “not enough time” to read or learn about current political events just don’t ring true. Many of the women in my neighborhood have plenty of time to sit around and gossip about others, go to yoga class or to watch endlessly inane television programming every night. Being an active citizen (including knowing which issues are important to you and contacting your elected officials to share your concerns) should be priority for all mothers. We have only to look at our General Assembly, which is set to enact legislation to allow concealed weapons in automobiles, to know why.
By past50mom
February 19, 2007 08:48 AM | Link to this
I disagree with the article. I and most of my friends, men and women, working and SAHM, have strong political views, based on facts and experiences. I have voted 50-50 between the parties over the years, as I vote for the candidate, not the party. IMO there is little difference between the two parties now. Neither the Democrats nor the Republican members of Congress care about us, their constituents. All they care about is getting control of as much of our money as possible and getting themselves reelected. The older I get the more Libertarian I become, but as no Libertarian has a grasp of foreign policy yet I won’t be voting any into a national office soon. As to gut instincts, yes listen to them always. That is why I will NEVER vote for Hilary, who openly disdains our military, and who would transform our country into a socialist state. Listening to her speak raises the hair on the back of my neck. A recent example; she said she would TAKE the profits away from the oil companies and government would develop new energy technologies, umm I don’t want the gov’t seizing any private company profits. The oil companies already pay huge taxes, and to date the gov’t hasn’t done anything productive with that money to develop new technologies, so why would I trust Hilary and the gov’t to do it in the future? The fact is that the oil companies have huge profits because their businesses are huge. However, they have low profit margins, getting a return of $.10 on the dollar, where other industries get a 20, 30 or 40% return on dollars spent. As to national health care, look at Canada and England where their national health care systems are slow acting, high costing and generally failed systems. Private enterprise and competition is the way to go. a big example is how Wal-Mart is discounting prescription medicines, and explain to me how private companies can’t work it out better than big gov’t? I like Rudy Giuliani for President, a smart atty, businessman, former mayor of NYC, who handled the 9/11 crisis with calm and confidence. He reduced crime by 2/3 in NYC during his tenure. He obviously works well coordinating competing interests, and I think as President that he would work well with Congress and get past the bipartisan fighting. I am going with my gut instinct and the facts.
By abc
February 19, 2007 09:03 AM | Link to this
I think it’s a sad commentary on Americans in general, not specific to women. Don’t celebrate ignorance by calling it something else, such as intuition. That’s just ridiculous; study and learn, know what you’re talking about, know what the candidates are talking about, and vote wisely.
Women sweeping Hillary? What a horror story! The worst scenario would be Hillary vs. Jeb Bush. God forbid another Bush in the White House, and that’s a sure way to allow it to happen.
By deidreNC
February 19, 2007 09:18 AM | Link to this
go rudy g!! this counry is goin to h*11 in a handbasket no doubt about that
By Georgia
February 19, 2007 09:19 AM | Link to this
Let’s just pray that Hillary DOES NOT become our next president.
By what the heck?
February 19, 2007 10:24 AM | Link to this
Whoo! Thanks to Past50Mom for illustrating the point that “information” does not necessarily lead one to knowledge.
The government provides royalty (tax) relief to oil and gas companies when their profits are too low. This is because in some ways gasoline is seen as a public good, one that we can’t afford to do without, and important to national security.
At today’s price of $70 a gallon most experts, including economists, agree that the royalties are no longer needed. In fact, some gas companies have stopped claiming them. These royalties will cost taxpayers $28 BILLION over the next five years. Last year the REPUBLICAN Senate voted to discontinue royalty relief until it is needed. It is likely that similar legislation will pass the Congress this year.
Being informed means more than reciting by rote what you heard on Rush Limbaugh’s show - it means looking objectively at the facts and coming to your own conclusions.
By InWonder
February 19, 2007 10:39 AM | Link to this
I am amazed how people do have time to gossip, watch TV for hours, go to the gym WITH kids and then say they don’t have time to learn about what is going on in our government. They may be all about their children first, but they forget that politics DOES affect the children and the future generations. If your children are old enough to understand what is going on in the world, talk to them about the issues - all sides and teach them how to think for themselves. Get them involved…
By Justin
February 19, 2007 12:35 PM | Link to this
Most women vote according to what benefits them the most, forgot if it steps on the toes of men. Take for instance the child support issue in Georgia. Most women, especially middle and upper income women, knew the old guidelines were unfair and fought against change with the new guidelines which consider the income of “both” parents. They didn’t want their hidden “alimony” taken or to share in the “financial cost” of their children. They convinced the legislators to remove the parenting time as part of the equation relegating it to be a consideration when setting the child support. The way women do this is the yell that the legislators are anti-children and anti-woman thus blackmailing them into voting the way the women want them to vote. Women also encouraged the use of the some of the highest underlying tables in the nation in the child support guidelines. Most women will not vote for shared parenting not realizing the importance of the father being active in the children’s lives even after a divorce.
If women vote for a woman candidate just because she is a woman, then our country is in bad shape. One should look at the person as the future leader of our country and what they would bring to the office, not their gender.
By Just me
February 19, 2007 02:10 PM | Link to this
Justin, are you saying that men will not vote for a woman because she’s a woman. Hmmm, I think the genders have a lot in common.
By jsmom
February 19, 2007 02:16 PM | Link to this
I don’t think there is anything wrong with using your intuition, as long as you apply it along with some working knowledge of the outside world. I try to read up on all candidates, and I do use vote-smart.org to find out more info- but I am surprised at how many candidates don’t use that service! (Maybe they don’t WANT people to know where they stand?)
If your gut tells you that Candidate A is a straight up honest guy, but you only agree with 50% of what he says, and your gut on Candidate B is raising red flags, and you agree with 100% of his stances, what do you do?
Theresa, don’t feel bad that your husband sent you the article. If you could read every article in every newspaper every day, well, you wouldn’t have time for your kiddies!
By mwh
February 19, 2007 02:27 PM | Link to this
I tend not to trust or listen too much to anything Linda Hirshman has to say including this study. It seems she basically belittles women for choices they make for their and their families own benefits…
In regards to today’s topic, why shouldn’t women get news from tv or use gut instinct when making political decisions? Almost all news now is slated to reflect the authors point of view (or stations) and politicans side step or give whatever answer they think the audience wants to hear. When you see them giving interviews or speeches you can do alot more reading between the lines and get more of a feel for some of the other important aspects in a leader, i.e. honesty, compassion, integrity, etc.
By Tina
February 19, 2007 03:34 PM | Link to this
Our Senators? Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson. I read Time every week, cover to cover. I don’t have any great interest in politics per se because I think it has become a bottom feeding, lowest common denominator mud-fest thanks in large part to talk radio. I have issues that pique my interest, but frankly, I’m too busy dealing with my two children to do much more than I do.
I HATED Mayor Bill Campbell because I knew there was something rotten there and refused to shake his hand one day I ran into him at Lenox, right before re-election. And this was before all his s&^*t went down. Instinct can serve you right sometimes.
Too bad the woman writing the article didn’t interview my husband. He can barely name the Governor, and when it comes to election time, I have to remind him what the issues are, and that he needs to go to the polls, no matter what.
By past50mom
February 19, 2007 07:12 PM | Link to this
what the heck, The government is not giving the oil companies anything when it reduces the taxes it takes from these businesses. The businesses earned that money and it belongs first to the business and is not the property of the government. Sorry you are so confused over this! P.S., I don’t listen to Rush or Sean or any of those guys, as I am too busy working and earning my own money.
By Rachel
February 19, 2007 07:24 PM | Link to this
Thank you - great subject/blog! I get sick and tired of hearing the media telling me how I vote and what I think. The media knows nothing about me - or my friends - for that matter. I am a SAHM with two kids. I DO NOT like being called a “soccer mom” - baseball mom would be more appropriate in my case - and I certainly will not be voting for Hillary Clinton because she is a woman.
Of course I would like to see a woman as President - but Hillary Clinton is not up to the job. She is a socialist and stands for most everything I am against. I have no interest in Obama either - he has shown me nothing. I am waiting… show me something better! NEVER, EVER discount a woman and assume she will vote a certain way.
By Alecia
February 19, 2007 08:26 PM | Link to this
I am a part time SAHM and read Time(every week), the Wall Street Journal(3x week), Gwinnett Post(6x week) and watch both MSNBC and Fox(every day). It is important for everyone to know about what is happening in the world around them. Before voting, I make a point of studying each candidate. However, most of the the moms in my moms’group can converse about any current event I throw their way. In fact we discuss current events a lot, and I am not always the one bringing them up. I could safely say that most of them are familiar with the issues and candidates before voting.
By Casey
February 20, 2007 07:53 AM | Link to this
Past50mom - you’re a prime example of someone who “thinks” they know something, when they don’t. Please don’t vote - you’re as likely to make the right choice as a 3 year old child.
First - you’re guilty of lying. You said Hillary (learn how to spell, 2 l’s) “would transform our country into a socialist state.” What a crock. Extreme statements (lies) only show how full of it you are. Also, you said “she would TAKE the profits away from the oil companies” - are you really this stupid? It’s not profits, it’s subsidies. HELLO? ANYBODY HOME? They make enough money without the Government having to help them out.
You proved the point of this blog. People like you are not well informed but will vote anyway. Pathetic. You believe in Private Enterprise for medicine? Yeah, because you have money. To hell with the poor who can’t afford it, huh? You’re a bigot and a racist. Using that plan the poor would get sick and die off. Shame on you.
You think Rudy Giuliani would make a good President? What? He ran a city - get that, city. He has no clue on Foreign Policy or anything else.
I pray to God you’re sick on election day.
By Rod
February 20, 2007 08:07 AM | Link to this
Alecia - Fox News is an oximoron. Fox Broadcasting is just the propaganda machine for the Republican Party. If you base your voting on Fox, you’ll only vote Republican.
You need to realize many media outlets are very one sided.
By HL
February 20, 2007 08:21 AM | Link to this
Casey - Rudy should know something about foreign policy since he was the mayor of a VERY diverse city and one that just happens to have the UN. You don’t think they had to deal with diplomats as mayor of NYC? Also, Hillary actually was quoted as saying she would take the corporate profits away and redistribute the wealth. She is a socialist…what do you think Universal Healthcare is? I don’t see how you can call Past50mom any of those things. Just because like a lot of us believe that private insurance, etc is the best way to go for health care does not mean we do not care for the poor. The truly poor people in this country can get Medicaid or here they can get Peachcare. If you want universal care, then move to Canada where you cannot even get an MRI in a timely manner when you get a cancer diagnosis.
Your argument sounds like Liberal talking points.
By Barbara
February 20, 2007 08:22 AM | Link to this
Casey, your response to the Past50Mom is way off base. “Hitlary” (how do you like the way I spelled it?) has every intention of making this country a Socialist state. She, indeed, say she would take away PROFITS of oil companies, because I saw her say it on television. Yes, I watch those that I don’t like as well as those I do so I may know what I’m talking about. Try it sometime before you start the typical secular-progressive statements without proof to back it up!
By HL
February 20, 2007 08:22 AM | Link to this
Rod - she also watches MSNBC…
By Jeff
February 20, 2007 08:30 AM | Link to this
Casey,
Why is it that when someone disagrees with a liberal the best the liberal can come back with is name calling????
By Ann
February 20, 2007 08:38 AM | Link to this
Typical template Casey! YOU are what’s wrong with the country….”Let’s just turn everything over to the government” mentality. Coming from an European country, I can say that socialized medicine is not what you “idealists” think it is.
By Barbara
February 20, 2007 08:44 AM | Link to this
Jeff, liberals don’t take the time to delve into the facts of issues, they just listen to the far-left media with the remainder of their ilk (sheep). When they called out on something, they have nothing else to resort to but name-calling. I know, as I have a friend that is so far left, even her Democratic friends can’t discuss politics with her. I just enjoy jerking her chain. She won’t even respond to my e-mails that involve politics, because I’ve caught her in and called her on too many lies she believes.
By past50mom
February 20, 2007 08:56 AM | Link to this
Casey and anyone who disgrees with me; I respect your right to disagree with my views. However, in disagreeing with me, you chose to compare me to a 3 year old, tell me I am uninformed and pathetic, tell me not to vote and thaat you hope I am sick on election day (early voting works for me), tell me I am lying, shame on me, blah, blah, blah, blah. Gosh, I wonder why I am not convinced by your position when all you can do is call me names?! Mature debaters engage in discussing issues, not demeaning their opponents and calling them juvenile names. You are the one who is uninformed. Pick up an economics textbook, study history, and check back when you can engage in a civil discourse. The best way to help the poor is to give them a hand UP, not a hand OUT aka welfare. Johnson’s Great Society was the blueprint for the present day government entitlement programs which created no incentive to the poor to bring themselves out of poverty. We need a sea change in this country, with all people taking personal responsibility for their education, actions and for supporting their families by working, and not relying on taxpayer dollars for support. We need to stop punishing successful businesses that employ millions and contribute millions to our economy. We need to encourage more U.S. businesses so that we can compete in the future with the emerging and huge Chinese capitalist economy.
By Jeff
February 20, 2007 09:10 AM | Link to this
past50:
I’ve actually traced the roots of the welfare state back as far as 1890. Still trying to determine if it was present before that time, but as of now I honestly don’t think so. Jus thought I’d throw that in…. :)
By concerned
February 20, 2007 09:12 AM | Link to this
Take away all of Casey’s name calling and I think the point they were trying to make, is the fact that the oil companies (as well as other big businesses) are getting a form of welfare. At this time, when they receive a relief from paying taxes on the profits, think about it you do not get a relief from paying taxes on your profits (i.e. INCOME), it is a form of receiving and getting money from the government. WELFARE. Our society seems to think that it is okay for the government to give businesses money, yet it is not okay to help the people out. Have you ever taken the moment to consider that yes the businesses are hireing the people, but they are not the ones that drive the economy. The economy is driven by the consumers, yes you need money to consume. But the majority of the tax free money the businesses are given, only go to the overpaid 2 year-old CEO’s. And they generally are so rich that they really do not consume as much as the lower classes do. Anyway to answer the post, I tend to agree I can size a person up with my instincts. All people do. If they look at the studies of all people, and the old cliche, “You have one chance to make a first impression.” In that first impression most people show who and what they are about. After saying that, they also have studies that show MOST AMERICANS vote and decide on appearances.
All scientific research is a bunch of mumble jumble statistics that depending on how you ask the questions and who is paying for the research. You can always come out with a certain outcome.
Thought to ponder on: Is this information coming out now, so people can start looking at the idea of Hillary becoming president? A testing of the waters so to speak. I mean they do pay a lot of money for PR people to do things like this, and a reverse psycology attempt is not uncommon. Lastly I am a women who is educated, but do not read TIME anymore and just cannot stand Evening News. Too much drama and speculation. I vote for the person who is running and not the party. I do not research the person as much as I should but I firmly understand and believe that once a person get in a position of that much power, unfortunately a part of them is lost. They are either voting particular ways in the beginning (to prepare for themselves to be there) or they are just playing lipservice on the campaign trail. Either or they will change once they are in office, just review the history of all the past Presidents.
By Casey
February 20, 2007 09:34 AM | Link to this
past50mom - spoken like someone who has never been poor and worked with the poor. Privatization of medicine means more sick and dying poor people.
Get out of your “theories” and into the real world.
By KA
February 20, 2007 09:38 AM | Link to this
concerned, When you let a company keep some of the money it earned, and which was earmarked for taxes, then it is not welfare or a subsidy, it is their earnings, their own money! When you give a person money, a food voucher, medical care, etc. that they did not contribute tax dollars for, that is welfare. The villifcation of a CEO’s income is popular, but in truth the CEO’s earn their money which is a very small portion of the revenues of their companies. Shareholders, who are investors in companies are the ones who offer competitive incentive packages to excellent businessmen to become their CEO’s and make their companies a success. The shareholders and the employees benefit when the business is succcessful. The more people the business can employ, means more consumers with money to spend. Consumers and businesses drive the economy together. If business are successful, they can hire more workers who then are the consumers who have money to spend. It’s a chicken or the egg dilemma to be sure. But we need successful and growing businesses that employ people so that we then have more consumers out spending. Like you concered, I am an educated, employed and well read woman, who doesn’t read Time or Newsweek or watch the evening news either. I read a variety of US and international newspapers online each day and other economic and business publications. Thank you for your thoughtful discussion!
By KA
February 20, 2007 09:43 AM | Link to this
Casey, Go study Canada’s, England’s or France’s national health care prgrams and report back on their costs, efficiencies of delivery of service, and satisfaction of their citizens.
By anne
February 20, 2007 10:34 AM | Link to this
It is easy to talk about “personal responsiblity”(Gingrich redux, 1994) and the other over-used Republican terms when you are NOT poor. You ladies were lucky to be born where and when you were (DON’T tell me “God” had anything to do with it), and the majority of those who are poor were born that way through no fault of their own. Even if you “worked your way up” as so many of the new rich in the northern suburbs seemed to have done, you were still born with the basic building blocks for sucess: probably white, from a middle class family in which education was valued.
Some of you are like those unpleasant and belligerent children on the playground who won’t share their toys, who always complain that somebody else is getting a better deal and who care about nothing but themselves. Your children will model themselves after your me-first behaviour and the last vestiges of our civilized society will be lost. History has shown that a selfish society cannot succeed. Think about it.
By Jeff
February 20, 2007 10:39 AM | Link to this
anne:
History has also shown that socialism fails and causes more problems in the process than it solves.
By anne
February 20, 2007 10:46 AM | Link to this
Jeff: you stick to teaching your sixth-grade math class and I’ll stick to my job as an economist. Read the post: I’m not talking about socialism, I’m talking about the earlier days in our society in which cooperation and a hand up were valued, not ridiculed.
By past50mom
February 20, 2007 10:47 AM | Link to this
Anne, the blog is color and income blind, and you know not where we come from, nor what we have today. Every day people from other countires come to America, some with money, many with nothing. Most of these recent immigrants work very hard to learn English, establish themselves in business, in the community, and encourage their children to do well in school, which is more than we can say of a great number of American born residents.
By jsmom
February 20, 2007 10:52 AM | Link to this
Anne- I think you’ve touched on a root problem. Why isn’t education valued? Why don’t more people see education as a way out of poverty? I was looking for scholarship info last night for myself, and found that on about 75% of the scholarships, I make too much money, which is a joke.
Frankly, I don’t see what’s wrong with talking about personal responsibility. I thought that’s what this country was about- not having to play “Government May I” when you need to go to the doctor, start your own business (okay, not the best example), get a loaf of bread, etc. Why should I expect the government to do for me what I darn well should do for myself?
By Jack
February 20, 2007 11:05 AM | Link to this
I totally disagree with this article. First fathers/men do know where and when their child goes to the pediatrician and who the pediatrician is. We also know what medicians make our children sick. We do know about whats going on at home as well as at work. I have changed/fired so many pediatricians because of their lack of knowledge and their lack of not truly caring about my children. This is NOT the 50s, 60s or 70s where fathers were just financial supporters and nothing more. Today us fathers/husbands play a very big role in the family/home. I know everything about my kids, wife and family. If your going to come, come correct…..
As far as women deciding political candidates from gut feelings are from perception is a negative way of thinking. Once again in the old days women were not wanted in the high positions in major companies because they were deemed to stupid, not aggressive enough, that they made decisions based off of emotion instead of well thought out problem solving skills. But in todays time I think women do rationalize, think things through and put emotions on the back burner, not to mention they are alot more intelligent know.
If I was a woman this article would insult me and make me angry. How can the USA ever have a woman president with this type of thinking? What is society going backward in time, oppressing the women and no longer taking in account the womens rights for equality? Are women really going to accept this way of thinking? We al know that women are emotional creatures but now adays they dont think or react in that mode. The gut instincts are only gone with certain things such as is this guy really right for me? Is this guy really right for my daughter? Is my kids doing something behind my back that they shuoldnt be doing? Is my husband cheating on me? Gut instinct is not deciding important issues such as politics or business decisions for women any more…
By anne
February 20, 2007 11:17 AM | Link to this
Jsmom: I guess you’d better take some personal responsiblity and pay your own way through school instead of relying on the government to give you a scholarship.
By Jeff
February 20, 2007 12:09 PM | Link to this
Anne:
Wanna know what makes a mathematician the most powerful person in the world?
EVERYTHING truly does revolve around it. An adequate mathematician can train himself on any other subject (as I have on many) and INSTANTLY become one of the more knowledgeable people in regards to that subject.
Take “your” economics,for example. Because I know math and had ECON 1100, I know enough to be able to intelligently debate you on any economic issue we face. Whereas if we get into an economics issue and you don’t know your math, I can turn you 12 ways to Sunday before you realize what’s happened.
On the subject of the blog again though: Personally, I LIKE being able to compartmentalize things. I honestly don’t see how you ladies make ANY decision without that ability. And while it makes you kinda weird in some respects, I actually like the challenges it produces, as well as the (astonishingly often) good ideas.
By Jennifer
February 20, 2007 12:38 PM | Link to this
I understand politics and do have my own views, but the subject is really a bore. It’s a divisive subject and I avoid discussing politics in social situations. There’s a fine line between being passionate about politics and being an obnoxious jerk and most people make the leap pretty quickly. I know where I stand, I know how to make a rational decision in the voting booth, and I know how to remain polite and refrain from asinine banter and name-calling.
Theresa, check your husband’s bathroom for the magazines!
By jsmom
February 20, 2007 01:11 PM | Link to this
Anne- I am not looking for the government to give me a scholarship, I was looking at private companies that award scholarships. Mainly ones that require some form of payback, either monitarily (yes, I butchered that) or through working for them for X amount of time. But thanks for your concern.
By SNY
February 20, 2007 01:18 PM | Link to this
Ok, all of you have lost your minds. Do you really think that anyone in a position of authority really cares what we think or feel. The bottom line is that no matter who is voted in, the rich will get richer and the poor will Oh well, die. It is just that plain and simple. The Republicans don’t care about you and the Democrats want to exploit you. See,everyone is a crook. Now, I am a woman and growing up my family was Democrats all the way. So, I thought that I should be one as well. All my life, the arguments made sense because they were coming from people whom I loved and admired, but guess what, they were neither right or wrong. My husband has a saying for his employees “It is what it is”. That is how I now view politics. I listen to the candidates local and national and I don’t like any of them. It doesn’t matter to me what party they are representing. My gut told me that Bush was a liar and was very sneaky. Guess what, I was right. My gut also told me that Kerry couldn’t be trusted either. Guess what, I was right. Personally, I like Hillary. Doesn’t mean that I will definately vote for her. You never know, she may say or do something that I detest one day. Sooner or later, they all do. Personally, I don’t have a problem with helping people as long as they try to help themselves as well. My problem with the welfare is that it isn’t working. It is suppose to be there to help people on a temporary basis. Everyone that I know that needed temporary help couldn’t get it because they were worth too much money. What the heck ever. Having a car that barely gets you from point A to point B doesn’t make your net worth $1 million. It means that you have a ride to work and back. Rich white people do get on my nerves about alot of things though. They will never understand what it is or means to be black in this country and they don’t understand that we don’t have the same opportunities that they do. I actually think that they really NEED to believe that we are all equal to make themselves feel better. I’m not being racist, only realistic. I don’t ask the government for anything but I did have scholarships to get through college. I worked hard to keep my grades up so that I could keep the scholarships and I had my GI Bill. But without that, they told my mother that she made $20 too much for me to get ANY financial help with school for me. I thought that sucked but hey, what can you do? The school that I attend had a Senators daughter getting financial aid. That’s how they stay rich. People need to remember that it isn’t what you know, it is more who you know. I, personally, know no one, that is why I am working 2 jobs to take care of my family. If I did know someone who would give me a real chance, then I wouldn’t have to work two jobs. Now you tell me, do you think that any of the people that I voted for cares that I need 2 jobs to make it from week to week? H3ll no they don’t!! So, women are informed, but some of us are too busy to give a flying freak who gets put into office since they do nothing for us in the first place.
Just my 2 cents worth.
By maggie
February 20, 2007 01:29 PM | Link to this
well said, SNY! At the end of the game, nobody you can trust.
By SNY
February 20, 2007 01:32 PM | Link to this
Wow, I just reread my statement.
I sounded kind of bitter, didn’t I?
Ha Ha Ha Ha :)
By Jack
February 20, 2007 01:43 PM | Link to this
I am very hurt.. not one woman has thanked me for how well I stood up for women.. OKay ill just go cry now..
By SNY
February 20, 2007 01:50 PM | Link to this
Jack,
I’m sorry, I did mean to mention that we need more men like you who actually know and care about what is going on with their families. My husband takes our kids to the doctor, to school, to birthday parties and everywhere else I may need to take them. Our only rule is “the one that is off work, takes the kids”. As long as they get from point A to point B, we do it equally.
Men like you make being a mom and a career woman much easier. For that I give you a big KKKKKKKKKKKKIIIIIIIIIIIISSSSSSSSSS!!!
By Jack
February 20, 2007 02:14 PM | Link to this
SNY: Thank you for the sweet words… women rock and I love them…. This article should make both men and women made as *ell because it is depicting very negative things about both sex’s. Whoever wrote that article does not need to be a journalist.
By Fulton County Mom
February 20, 2007 02:43 PM | Link to this
Past50Mom I agree with most of your assessment. However, FDR’s Great Society laid the ground work for today…and the future Pres. Johnson was excellent at exploiting all of those wonderful things FDR was doing to lift us out of poverty. (yes, Past50Mom I am sure you are aware of these things.)—-if anyone is not sure what I am talking about please read Robert Cairo’s series on Johnson. (Actually the 1st book covers just the part I am discussing now).
Since FDR there has been very much a trejectory path from that particalar partisan group toward a Socialist state. VERY SAD and our Forefathers’ would be gravely disappointed in us).
Libertarian’s need to give up a few of their extremist ideas, develop a foriegn policy, and start courting the middle ground (or would that be middle class?). Then we could get back on track.
I am a single Mom, in possession of a college degree and of reasonable means (though far less than many on this board). However, I do what I can to both keep up with the things that matter, and encourage my children to take interest too. I think I was 7 when I watched the Ford/Carter debates…so saying your busy with kiddies is just an excuse.
This woman will not be voting for Hillary even if she is the only candidate on the ballot! I pray that the American people wake up and stop handing all that we have fought and died (and in Iraq are STILL proudly dying) for!
I do recall reading somewhere that education level and age have a great impact on how you vote. The more education and the older you are the more likely you vote conservative values (not necessarily GOP Candidate). If Zell Miller were to run for President and act like he did as a Senator for this great state, I would gladly campaign for him. Same for Sam Nunn.
As it is, I think that it speaks VOLUMES that VP Al Gore couldn’t carry his “homestate” of Tennessee…that man should call Maryland home and we all know it.
I believe it was Churchill who said “If you do not vote democrat when you are young, you have no heart. If you do not vote republican when you are old you have no brain.”
Before you decide to trash me: That Bachelor of Science I hold, it is in Poltical Science.
First Amendment? Relgion, Speech, Assembly and to Bare Arms. How about the 9th and 10th: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Yes, that says the people….so why are we giving the rights to the Federal Gov’t? Perhaps it is time to take a week out of Black History Month and teach the Decleration of Independence and Constitution of US to our kids….it is just as necessary.
By abc
February 20, 2007 03:04 PM | Link to this
Ha, ‘The Right to Bare Arms’… hahaha, that really cracks me up! You are entitled to that sleeveless blouse because of 1st Amendment rights.
Just sayin’, not being critical, it’s just funny!
By SNY
February 20, 2007 03:21 PM | Link to this
FCM,
Why do we need to take a week out of Black History Month? Why not any other month. Black people already have the shortest month of the year.
By Jeff
February 20, 2007 03:25 PM | Link to this
Fulton County:
Ah, but who did FDR get HIS ideas from? He got them from the “Progressives” of the 1890’s… which his cousin Teddy’s Bull Moose Party was against.
I haven’t been able to track the welfare state in American Government further back than them though….
By Jeff
February 20, 2007 03:40 PM | Link to this
hey y’all, we got a BHM discussion going on over @ Get Schooled…. check out my 9:04 post on it this morning, you in particular FCM may like it..
By Rachel
February 20, 2007 03:51 PM | Link to this
Fulton County Mom for President! This is a woman I would vote for!
By Fulton County Mom
February 20, 2007 04:38 PM | Link to this
@SNY (and anyone else who wondered why Bnlack History Month)… Yesterday was President’s Day. It happens to fall in February (Black History Month). The kids in our school got 1 day of all the Presidents and the Constitution but there is Black History everywhere in that school. I think Black, White, Red, whatever History should be taught simlutaneously….Let me learn about Washington Carver at the same time as I do 1920s History. Or MLK with the Civil Rights acts of the 60s AND Vietnam…give it meaning.
I took a Women in History class in college….they wanted to call it Herstory …personally I found it very wooden, baised and propaganda filled (and I am a woman!). If I had not had the benefit of years of History I would have not gotten a real perspective of these peoples’ struggles…
We need balance. Yes less celebrate out American Presidents (even Teddy, FDR, and Johnson), our Constitution, and the things that make this country trully the best. The first American to die in the Revolutionary War was a black one! (Crispus Attucks)…Some of the nicest Churches in Charleston were built by black slaves owned by Blacks (did you learn that in your High School History class)?
Jeff—I was over at Get Schooled but my post got crushed somehow….will have to rewrite.
Anyway, I am glad y’all liked my points…so get out the informed vote.
By abc
February 20, 2007 04:54 PM | Link to this
Black History Month is a device to raise awareness. When American History textbooks and classes start to reflect what really happened with American Indians in any kind of depth, or what really happened to black people as slaves and during Jim Crow, and make more than passing reference to great Black Americans (great Americans of ALL races) throughout our history, there won’t be a need for special designations such as Black History Month.
As far as schools go, it’d be better to focus on teaching them to read. Kids these days aren’t getting that much out of school. They sure don’t learn diddly about American History. Now, folks can debate why that is all day and night, but the fact remains.
By Fulton County Mom
February 20, 2007 05:44 PM | Link to this
Reread what I wrote…sorry about the typos…those I can blame on rushing to get my thoughts out as fast as I could…I need to proof read more…but that usually causes me timeout or something in the upload to the blog.
By Fulton County Mom
February 20, 2007 05:51 PM | Link to this
Ok,I got a brain wave and looked up Hirshman to get more backgound on her (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linda_Hirshman). “As Hirshman’s own biographical byline for periodicals proudly states, she ‘landed spot No. 77” on Bernard Goldberg’s list of 100 People Who Are Screwing Up America “with almost no effort.’” This is a fabulous book proudly sitting on bookshelf…no wonder I opposed her non-scientific theorizing…(interesting reading and hint:she slams SAHM to make the list!).
By ugh
February 20, 2007 06:14 PM | Link to this
Bernard Goldberg is a right-wing idiot.
But… that explains a lot of your “informed” views.
By past50mom
February 20, 2007 07:18 PM | Link to this
Hi all, home from work, looks like we ended up with a pretty decent discussion. Thank you Fulton Co. Mom for your experienced views!
By Casey
February 21, 2007 07:55 AM | Link to this
Why do we have Black History Month? Seriously? We don’t have a White History Month. The reason is simple - the NAACP, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, et al, would cry racism if we didn’t honor them.
Sure, there have been many great blacks in America - but there have been more great whites (simple numbers - more whites in the history of the USA). So, why celebrate Black History and not White History? That in itself is racism.
By SNY
February 21, 2007 12:09 PM | Link to this
Casey,
Shut up!
By Carol Foster
February 22, 2007 04:20 PM | Link to this
I rarely agree with anything you wirte though I read your commentaries weekly. In regards to the ‘politcs’ article; I am SHOCKED at how many of the other stay at home moms know nothing of current events. Recently I mentioned the story of the Subway hero in New York and his appearance at the state of the union address. Only 1 out of the 5 moms even knew the story. Many let the children in the house dictate when and what they watch on the television. My child is disciplined and when she is asked to leave the room so that mommy can view a grown up news show- she does!! No whining and I don’t have to put on Barney. If she did whine she would be punished for diobeying and rudeness. Most of my friends just do what they can to stop the whining or fake crying. I am amazed at how easily college educated women are reduced to letting a5 year old determine the television or reding schedule. you seem to have problems in the discipline area as well so I know I am writing to a whine controlled mother based on your articles. You have made your own Hell.