When Sarah Palin speaks, people listen. Her most strident supporters—traditional, Christian women who believe the womb should be a safe haven instead of an abortionist’s laboratory—applaud her love for Trig and the way she combines being pro-woman with being pro-child.
Her chief opponents—non-traditional, pro-Patsy Schroeder type women who believe it’s okay to treat the womb as a killing field—mock her every speech as vapid and express unmitigated outrage at the fact that she dares to imagine a world in which both women and children have rights to life and liberty.
Palin has snatched control of the pro-life vs. pro-death dialogue from increasingly obscure groups like the National Organization for Women (NOW) and brought it into the light.
With one “Well, Jeez” and a comment that the pro-death mantras sound like relics from “the faculty lounge at some East Coast women’s college,” she took the argument away from mustache-lipped women in academia and gave it to the normal mothers, daughters, sisters, and friends who attend her speeches and are sickened by the thought of killing a child for comfort, for convenience, or as means of “emergency contraception.”
Do you think I go too far by hinting at the fact that many of those who oppose Palin do so because of her opposition to using abortion as a rudimentary morning after pill? Then read the words of Jessica Valenti, who referred to Palin’s ongoing appearances around the country as an “empty rallying call to other women … who want to make abortion and emergency contraception illegal.”
Of course, we must understand that Valenti’s words aren’t novel. I could have quoted any number of angry feminists who would have said the same thing about Palin, and who are saying the same things even now. They are outraged that this woman and her message appeals to other women in way that NOW never did (and never will).
In some of the more entrenched sectors of feminism the anger toward Palin is mixed with a full-blown denial over the fact that men-haters and baby-killers are no longer controlling the debate. For example, Newsweek recently quoted Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of North America, as saying: “There’s nothing there. I don’t think Sarah Palin is going to change the national scene on choice or on feminism.”
The last time words rang as hollow as these from Richards, they were spoken by the “horny hick” from Arkansas in an effort to assure us that he “did not have sexual relations, with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.”
To be fair, Palin’s ongoing appeal to a substantial segment of American women doesn’t just offend leftist women but leftist men as well (I use the word “men” loosely). The usual suspects—Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, and Matt Lauer—either go out of their way to speak derisively of Palin or have guests on their shows to speak derisively for them.
But it’s all to no avail. For the more insulting they are toward Palin, the more protective conservatives will become of her.
It’s the same principle that’s at play behind Palin’s popularity: The more willing the left becomes to kill our unborn children for convenience sake, the more conservative women will flock to Palin’s message of keeping those children away from the abortionist’s scalpel.
Olberrmann can insult her, Schroeder can wish she was her, and Valenti can be outraged at her. But none of that will silence her.
She is Palin, hear her roar.