Just when I thought that the election was well behind us and the coming months ahead square in front of us, New York Magazine has a cover story about Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin.
I don't know if the article is true or not, or will be true in the future. It's a predictive article and largly from the author's point of view, with a few quotes from notables. File under News Analysis. My optimism, of course, stands in the way of getting on this writer's boat, but it's gotten me into trouble before. (Ever been flat out denied a phone number from a cute person in a bar? Optimism!)
Before the internet, I would have brushed this article aside as running too late to be relevant. The comments prove otherwise. Fiery, blistering criticism of Sarah Palin and a whole bunch more. I also won't quote the comments.
Like I said, I don't care about the loser candidates, but that doesn't matter! If people are worked up and commenting like crazy, we don't need to drop the issue, but keep rolling with it:
CRASH TITLES ON THE SHELVES IN MARCH 09
REALITY TV SHOWS
MOVIES, TV AND PROJECTION
MORE ALBUMS FROM THE CAPITOL STEPS
EXTRA SHOWS FROM A SHOW THAT HASN'T BEEN FUNNY FOR YEARS
I'm not sure why our society likes to dwell on things. The best I can hope for is that it charges people up to do something, such as run for office in the next four years. I don't think this study shows the whole picture (it only counts candidates who made it to the primaries of their elections and also doesn't count local elections) but this study shows that less women ran for state and U.S. office than previously.
Where's the positive angle? That's the post NY Mag Cover story question.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment