Welcome to Red Mom Blue Mom, ParentDish's special coverage of the 2008 Presidential election. Each Tuesday through November 4, columnists Rachel Campos-Duffy (Red Mom) and Ada Calhoun (Blue Mom) will take on issues relevant to parents on both sides of the aisle. You can find past Red Mom/Blue Mom posts here.

Blue Mom: The Purpling of America
By Ada Calhoun

I'll be heading down the block to my polling place at six a.m. this morning to vote for Barack Obama. This is the first time in my adult life there has been a candidate I so desperately wanted to see elected. I've always loved my country, but for the first time, I'll be able to cast a vote for a politician who embodies so much of what I love about it:

Ultimately, We're All on the Same Side
Obama has consistently emphasized our common ground. In his nomination acceptance speech, he listed a number of issues that have divided us that need not keep us apart. For example: "We may not agree on abortion, but surely we can agree on reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies in this country . . . This too is part of America's promise - the promise of a democracy where we can find the strength and grace to bridge divides and unite in common effort."

Everyone Counts, Even Young People
Obama's campaign has gotten young people involved (really young people, judging by the number of kids on YouTube saying "Obama"). More impressively, he's kept them focused and organized. Whenever anyone has started to get negative in his crowds, he's said, "You don't need to boo; you just need to vote." And he's encouraging young people to serve their country in exchange for help with college tuition, which to me seems totally brilliant.

We're Not Afraid
Obama's race speech acknowledged the anger and mistrust that exists in America, but said, "This union may never be perfect, but generation after generation has shown that it can always be perfected." You sure don't see that conversation happening in France.

If predictions hold and Obama takes as many "red" districts as predicted, we will have the proof: there is no red and blue America, only one America, a country where an optimistic black man raised by a single mother can embody the hopes of a nation. That's a good country.


Red Mom: And the winner is ... Sarah Palin
By Rachel Campos-Duffy

Both Saturday Night Live's liberal humor (and fan base) and conservatives agree on one thing: the bright spot of this election has been Sarah Palin. SNL loves her Fargo accent and offbeat biography (beauty queen, moose hunts and caribou stew). And while conservatives cheer the fact that she is the only life-long card-carrying member of the NRA on either ticket -- and liberals jeer her reasoning and readiness -- lotsa folks just, well, kinda like her.

Conservatives admire the fact that her strong pro-life record is backed up by real-life pro-life decisions; namely the beautiful way in which she handled the unexpected pregnancy of her fifth child during the first year of her first term as governor. Not exactly great timing! And while 80% of prenatal babies diagnosed with Downs Syndrome are aborted, according to the Washington Post, the Palins welcomed Trig, their special-needs son, to the world with open arms, describing him as "perfect" in their birth announcement. There's no such thing as a perfect mom, but every child is indeed perfect.

From taxes to energy, conservatives have found in Sarah Palin a strain of the unapologetically American Ronald Reagan. Like Reagan, Governor Palin is telegenic and attractive. And while few modern politicians can match Reagan's charm, Palin is a pro on the stump thanks to her unparalleled relatability to middle class Americans. Interestingly, Reagan was also underestimated and written off by critics as insufficiently intellectual. History has proved them wrong; I think the same will be true of Palin.

For conservative, pro-life women, Palin has finally given us a voice. Gone are the stereotypes of uptight, old-fashioned pro-lifers à la Phyllis Schlafly. Palin is thoroughly modern and attractive, juggling kids and career just like the rest of us. I am amazed and inspired that she has maintained her sunny conservatism and good humor despite the pummeling she has received from the media and the angry left.

The good news for conservatives like me is that win or lose, Sarah Palin is here to stay. Far from the media predictions that the conservative, religious wing of the Republican Party would be its downfall in this election, Sarah Palin's nomination has proven that no candidate can win or generate excitement without it. So what to say about that Sarah Palin 2012 T-shirt Tina Fey was hawking on SNL's hilarious QVC sketch? I say, "You betcha!"

Welcome to Red Mom Blue Mom, ParentDish's special coverage of the 2008 Presidential election. Each Tuesday through November 4, columnists Rachel Campos-Duffy (Red Mom) and Ada Calhoun (Blue Mom) will take on issues relevant to parents on both sides of the aisle. You can find past Red Mom/Blue Mom posts here.

Red Mom: Making a choice about schools
By Rachel Campos-Duffy

Even some of Barack Obama's biggest fans concede that the press has gone pretty easy on him. Consider the famous US Magazine cover of an adorable would-be first couple under the caption, "Why Barack Loves Her" contrasted with the cover and caption the Palin's received, "Babies, Lies and Scandal."

Of all the things Barack gets a free pass on, nothing gets my goat more than education, a topic of considerable importance to me as a parent and one he touts as his forte. Quite simply, when it comes to education policy, Barack and Michelle Obama are hypocrites!

While Barack and Michelle champion public schools (Michelle waxes endlessly in speeches about her own public education), they fail to mention that their own daughters attend the University of Chicago's Lab School, one of our nation's most exclusive prep schools that costs some $20,000 a year in tuition per child. In fact, according to the Wall Street Journal, Chicago's Lab School is among the top five feeder institutions for our nation's most elite universities. To be fair, the Obama girls began attending while Michelle was a University of Chicago employee and were therefore eligible for a tuition break.

Though Michelle no longer works there, the Obama's cite the proximity of this elite institution to their home as the reason they continue to attend. I get that, but I think there's more to it. Conspicuously absent from the Obamas's hard-knocks, they're-just-like-us video biographies during the Democratic convention were Michelle and Barack's impeccably Ivy League credentials. Presumably, they expect nothing less for Malia and Sasha.

Well, don't we all!

Michelle and Barack are opposed to school choice programs, also known as tuition vouchers, which would allow middle class and poor parents to also have choice when it comes to their children's educations. It is the height of hypocrisy for the Obama's to stand in the way of other families trying, as they do, to give their kids the very best education they can.

Interestingly, despite private school options in Wasilla, the Palins chose public school for their own children. And while it's not surprising that the very wealthy McCain family sent their kids to private schools, at least John McCain, who is a proponent of school choice, wants to help other parents have the same opportunities when it comes to their children's education.

So why do Michelle and Barack stand in the way of an innovative program that would give poor minority parents the power and choice that rich and privileged people like them enjoy? A big part of the reason is teachers unions, who are threatened by the potential exodus of students (and money) to private institutions. Too bad Obama doesn't have the audacity to stand up to that powerful lobby so that all families can hope to give their child the very best education they can. Now that would be change I could believe in.


Blue Mom: What happened to family values?
By Ada Calhoun

For years, the Republican party has promoted itself as two things: fiscally conservative and the sole defender of "family values."

Talk about irony. As Representative Steny Hoyer has pointed out, "George W. Bush inherited a projected 10-year budget surplus of $5.6 trillion, which he proceeded to turn into a projected deficit of more than $4 trillion." He will leave office with the country in the direst financial straits we've been in since the Great Depression.

John McCain vows to continue many of Bush's failed policies, including the continuance of huge tax breaks for the very rich at the expense of our children's and grandchildren's future. In a broad policy study compiled by the Brookings Institution, it is clear that Obama is about 100% more concerned with the well-being America's children than Arizona's senior senator. He voted yes for reauthorization of the State Children's Health Program in 2007; McCain voted no. Obama pledges to invest millions to stimulate and help fund "zero to five programs;" McCain counters, "There is no shortage of federal programs at early child care and preschool." Maybe it seems like that when your seven children from two marriages are all enrolled in the best private schools. (McCain donated more than $500,000 to his kids' top-shelf education between 2001 and 2006, according to Harpers.org. "McCain apparently received major tax deductions for supporting elite schools attended by his children." But those of us -- most of us -- who make do with public schools know that there an appalling shortage of excellence. Free or reasonably-priced quality preschool is almost impossible to find in many parts of the country.

Sarah Palin's family bills itself as "Joe Sixpack," but it's been churning out one maverick-y scandal after another. In her attempts to punish her ex-brother-in-law, Palin engaged in what the recent report called a breach of the state's ethics law. Her eldest daughter is an unmarried pregnant high-school dropout. As suggested in a recent profile in the New York Times, Palin was perhaps pregnant when she eloped, too. And yet, she maintains a more socially conservative stance than even George W. Bush.

How can the McCain-Palin ticket still be trying to claim the moral high ground?

Meanwhile, Joe Biden takes the train home every night so he can be with his family. He raised his two sons after his wife and daughter died in a car wreck, and eventually found a woman who would be a good stepmother to his children and married her. They have been together for more than 30 years.

Last week, Barack Obama suspended his campaign not to stage a failed last-ditch bid to portray himself as a non-partisan economic savior, but to pay a humble, private visit to his dying grandmother.

Together, the Obamas have decided the best thing for their family and country is to put forward Barack's pro-family policies and also -- so refreshingly! -- their family's good example. How wonderful would it be to fill the White House with the laughter of the confident, lovely Obama girls rather than the tight couture grimace of Cindy McCain or, heaven forbid, the smug hypocrisy soap operatic-lifestyle of the Palins.

Welcome to Red Mom Blue Mom, ParentDish's special coverage of the 2008 Presidential election. Each Tuesday through November 4, columnists Rachel Campos-Duffy (Red Mom) and Ada Calhoun (Blue Mom) will take on issues relevant to parents on both sides of the aisle. You can find past Red Mom/Blue Mom posts here.

Blue Mom: Who's sexier, Republicans or Democrats?
By Ada Calhoun

After weeks of financial chaos, a wearying debate, and a bit too much screen time for a certain bald plumber, we've earned a break from tax policy and bailouts. So let's indulge.

I find Republicans hotter than Democrats. That's what I learned from my time on the website TheOnlyVote.com, a political Hot-or-Not. Apparently, on a hormonal level, I abandon my Democratic brethren for the cornfed midwestern boys of the Right.

And it's no surprise. Republicans are sexy. They are the deciders! The hawks! The invaders! They have all the really good sex scandals. Even John McCain is reportedly randy; lest we forget, the New York Times reported in February on an indecorous relationship with Vicki Iseman, a lobbyist more than thirty years his junior. Democrats are nerdy and thoughtful and have trouble deciding on a course of action because they stupidly weigh things like "costs" and "benefits." Talk about killing the mood.

And yet, at the dawn of this election, suddenly, the Democratic party was sexy again. Barack Obama is steady, smart, and yet, miraculously, undeniably, hot. As the McCain campaign teased in a July 2008 video called "Obama Love," people covering him tend to fall hard (MSNBC's Chris Matthews famously said of an Obama speech, "I felt this thrill going up my leg"). In their arguably racist "Hot Chicks Dig Obama" video, they mocked the female voters flocking to him. In her first "I Got a Crush on Obama" tribute, Obama Girl said what a lot of us were thinking: intelligent, decent and foxy too? And we hummed along, "B to the A to the R-A-C-K."

Obama had the Sexiest Politician vote all locked up . . . until a certain moose-hunting, pro-drilling sexy librarian entered the picture. When it comes to a sex-appeal-off, Sarah Palin is a contender. Cue the porn film call for a Sarah Palin look alike (rumor has it a Putin look alike was also cast). And, of course, there's now a Sarah Palin sex doll.

I can appreciate the "she's so wrong she's right" argument, but those Katie Couric interviews were like one long cold shower. If she still does it for you, you're made of stronger stuff than I am. And so, my latest crush: Joe Biden. He has a dark past, catnip to those of us who grew up on novels like Jane Eyre, and yet he's funny, flirtatious and supremely confident. Also, he speaks in complete sentences. That, my friends, is a heartthrob we can believe in.


Red Mom: Does sexuality work?
By Rachel Campos-Duffy

Does sexuality as a political strategy work? The short answer is yes, in the short term. Despite having a strong night during last week's debate, viewers overwhelmingly gave the upper hand to cool hand Obama. Like Nixon before him, McCain lost in the comparison to his more attractive and telegenic counterpart. But youth and good looks can only take a candidate so far. The proof is in the pudding. Ugly, doughy white guys overwhelmingly occupy the halls of Congress and the Senate. If attractiveness really worked as a political strategy, we'd all be watching C-Span a heck of a lot more often.

In this election, there are only two people with mojo -- Barack and Sarah. In both cases, the American people quickly and sensibly got beyond the superficial. When it came to Sarah Palin, the media helped by launching attacks intended to diminish her appeal. Newsweek even put an unflattering, extreme close-up of Palin on the cover revealing facial hair and cakey make-up that garnered criticism from readers who wondered why her photo was not given the airbrush treatment that Hillary and Obama's covers enjoyed. Republican strategists called foul and surprisingly, many of my blue-mom friends agreed. At last, an issue we could all agree on -- pore and blemish revealing close-ups of women are out of bounds!

More telling about the limits of sexual appeal in politics is that this race is still very close and the short and old melanoma-scarred war veteran, McCain, is still very much in the game against the stylish, much younger and hipper Obama. In a political and economic environment that couldn't be more favorable for Democrats, Obama's cool elegance has not been able to obfuscate McCain's impressive experience, history and character. Obama is outspending McCain nearly three to one and few can deny the media's unprecedented and blatant bias for him. Still, with all that, Obama has not been able to close what should be a mammoth poll gap between them.

Look, I'm a sucker for the GQ look Barack has perfected. My personal favorite are the images of him walking off his airplane with a crisp white shirt and shades, holding his suit jacket as the wind blows. The song just goes off in my head, "Every girl's crazy 'bout a sharp dressed man." The truth is I AM crazy about sharp dressed men and Obama has definitely become a fashion and pop culture icon. But these are serious times. And in two weeks I'll be voting for John McCain for president.

Welcome to Red Mom Blue Mom, ParentDish's special coverage of the 2008 Presidential election. Each Tuesday through November 4, columnists Rachel Campos-Duffy (Red Mom) and Ada Calhoun (Blue Mom) will take on issues relevant to parents on both sides of the aisle. You can find past Red Mom/Blue Mom posts here.

Red Mom: Ohio plumber deconstructs Obama
By Rachel Campos-Duffy

Leave it to an Ohio plumber to catch Barack Obama off guard and ask the question we all want to ask:
"Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn't it?"

And lo and behold, Obama's response to this off-the-cuff question is more damning than any of the negative ads being aired about him.

"My attitude is that if the economy's good for folks from the bottom up, it's gonna be good for everybody ... I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."

It's what his most famous supporter would call an "Ah-ha moment."

This rare, unscripted and honest exchange between a citizen and a candidate did what all the William Ayers commercials with their ominous music and menacing voice-overs could not. Using Barack's own words, it explained why his association with William Ayers, Reverend Wright, A.C.O.R.N and other radicals and radical institutions matters. It cut through the noise and politics and revealed a simple truth about who Obama is and what he believes.

Yes, William Ayers is an unrepentant domestic terrorist, but that's beside the point. The reason Barack served as chairman of William Ayers' education board and used Ayer's home to kick-off his political career is that they have a shared political and economic philosophy, one rooted in socialism that advocates for wealth redistribution and radical community organizing. Ayers describes himself as "a radical, leftist, small-c communist." As chairman of Ayer's Chicago Annenburg Challenge, Obama didn't direct funds to needy Chicago schools. Instead, he directed them to left-wing radical organizations that "partnered" with schools. Obama and Ayers weren't "pal'n around," as Sarah Palin asserted in a campaign speech last week. They were working together to advance a common cause.

Obama knows that if he tells the American public the truth about his core beliefs, or if they are exposed by scrutiny of his associations, the electorate will reject him -- especially since an Obama administration comes with a filibuster-proof Democratic House and Senate.

Without a press actively pursuing these questions, McCain resorted to negative ads to inform the voters. The problem is that 30-second spots are not enough to connect the dots between Obama, his friends (Ayers, Wright, Alinsky, and Frank Marshall Daves etc.), and a shared political and economic philosophy rooted in socialism.

Without more thorough explanations from McCain and Palin, less sophisticated voters end up getting caught up in the negative ad buzz words (terrorist), and the candidate's Muslim-sounding name (Hussein); essentially, they're connecting the wrong dots.

But this time in Ohio, a plumber's unassuming, cut-through-the-bull question disarmed Barack and did what Brokaw, Couric, and Lehrer could not: get Obama to connect the dots for us.


Blue Mom: McCain's Dangerous New Direction
By Ada Calhoun

Frank Rich yesterday in the New York Times warned that the McCain campaign's fear-mongering talking points ("Who IS Obama?," for example) could have dire consequences. It's not crazy to think, as Rich points out, that "a crazy person might take a shot at him."

Indeed, anyone who's seen the videos of recent GOP rallies in Florida and New Mexico can see that the Republicans, in apparent desperation, are playing to their audience's greatest fears. Sarah Palin says Obama is "palling around with terrorists," referring to his minor professional affiliation with the former radical and current University of Chicago professor William Ayers. The campaign is irresponsibly allowing its base to connect the dots between the otherness of the name Barack Hussein Obama and the threat implied by Palin's repeated use of the word terrorist.

John McCain suggests Obama is an enigma, fueling the Muslim Manchurian Candidate insanity. To Senator McCain, Senator Obama is a mystery. But so are the economy, national security and everything else that matters to the American middle class.

And then McCain acts surprised when audiences yell out "Treason," and "Kill him!"

As Khaled Hosseini wrote in The Washington Post recently, McCain and Palin are "playing with fire." He's right that the Republicans are clearly trying "to distract Americans by provoking fear, anxiety and hatred."

The campaign's timing could hardly be more fiendish. With the economy in peril and our future uncertain, McCain's doing everything to distract us from the fact that he and his running mate are unprepared to deal with the economy. Instead, even as Obama yesterday presented a cogent, thorough economic rescue plan, McCain was doing everything he could to avoid talking about the central issue facing our nation. He's so eager to win that he'd rather take the risk of painting his rival as our common enemy than to admit what our true enemies are: fear, hatred and an unwillingness to do the hard work necessary to protect us all.

How are the negative campaign ads affecting you?

They haven't changed my mind or my vote.I'm rethinking my vote because of the ads.I'm angry with both parties for participating in this.Vote

Welcome to Red Mom Blue Mom, ParentDish's special coverage of the 2008 Presidential election. Each Tuesday through November 4, columnists Rachel Campos-Duffy (Red Mom) and Ada Calhoun (Blue Mom) will take on issues relevant to parents on both sides of the aisle. You can find past Red Mom/Blue Mom posts here.


Blue Mom: Who owns America's kitchen table?
By Ada Calhoun

When Joe Biden gave his first speech as the vice presidential nominee, he said, "Ladies and gentlemen, your kitchen table is like mine. You sit there at night . . . after you put the kids to bed and you talk . . . about how much you are worried about being able to pay the bills. Well, ladies and gentlemen, that's not a worry John McCain has to worry about. It's a pretty hard experience. He'll have to figure out which of the seven kitchen tables to sit at."

Burn!

McCain's had trouble relating directly to everyday people, especially since Biden joined the Obama ticket. According to OutTheOtherEar, Biden has the lowest net worth of all the senators, and impeccable working-class credibility.

And don't the Republicans know it. According to a September report on Politico, Karl Rove said, "The most important thing for McCain to do is find a way to show a comfort with the kitchen table issues."

Enter Sarah Palin.

Asked on Hugh Hewitt's show, "Have you and your husband, Todd, ever faced tough economic times where you had to sit around a kitchen table and make tough choices?" Palin said,"Todd and I, heck, we're going through that right now even as we speak, which may put me again kind of on the outs of those Washington elite who don't like the idea of just an everyday working class American running for such an office."

At last week's vice presidential debate, Biden and Palin worked hard to out-kitchen-table each other. In the course of the ninety-minute exchange, the phrase "kitchen table" was used five times.

The kitchen table has proved to be an especially powerful metaphor, because what we need at the moment are leaders who embody the pragmatism of a family forced into a tight spot by circumstances who together can figure out a way to get back on track.

We don't really need someone who has been broke, but a little personal fiscal suffering doesn't hurt. As Chris Rock said in a much-watched Larry King episode last week, the candidate who understands the economy best is always "the guy with one house."


Red Mom: Can't solve debt with more debt
By Rachel Campos-Duffy

Besides Texas Congressman Ron Paul, only Governor Sarah Palin is talking plainly and honestly about the role of personal responsibility in this financial crises. During last week's vice-presidential debates she said: "Let's do what our parents told us before we probably even got that first credit card. Don't live outside of our means. We need to make sure that as individuals we're taking personal responsibility through all of this... we have an opportunity to learn a heck of a lot of good lessons through this."

"Kitchen table" issues are front and center this election. Palin's statement resonated strongly with Americans on both sides of the political aisle because she spoke to the heart of the conversations so many of us are having around our own kitchen tables after the kids have gone to bed.

Since the financial crises, my husband and I have recommitted to our budget and canceled a family trip we had planned for the fall. Both of us have October birthdays and we made a pact not to buy each other gifts and to celebrate at home this year. And for the first time ever, I may actually get my Christmas shopping done early because I'm already actively seeking out sales and determined to avoid last minute Christmas impulse purchases.

American families understand that in difficult financial times they cut back. Shouldn't the federal government employ the same kitchen table common sense principals? Unfortunately not. In fact, but for a few conservative Republicans and blue-dog Democrats, our representatives in Washington thought this was a good time to spend more of our money. That's akin to Sean and I deciding that this would be a great time to hire a designer and redecorate. The supposedly do-or-die $700 billion bailout bill included more than $100 billion in additional pork spending and special interest tax breaks. And it's worth noting that the $700 billion loan is actually money we are borrowing from China since our national debt, the cumulative amount the federal government has borrowed and not repaid, is a record $9.5 trillion.

The Democrat-controlled Congress holds the purse strings and government spending is out of control. Our politicians want us to believe that going $700 billion dollars deeper into debt is going to help what is essentially a debt problem. It's like believing you can cure Joe Six-Pack's drinking problem with a case of Sam Adams.

We've been hearing a lot about soccer moms and hockey moms in this election, and about how important their voices are. Here at ParentDish, we think we have the inside track on the mom voice, because it's really our voice after all.

This past week, ParentDish columnists Rachel Campos-Duffy (Red Mom) and Ada Calhoun (Blue Mom) appeared on XM Radio's POTUS channel to discuss the Vice Presidential candidates. You can listen to the interview here, and you can read Red Mom Blue Mom at ParentDish every Tuesday through November 4.

And please, don't forget to vote.

Source

Welcome to Red Mom Blue Mom, ParentDish's special coverage of the 2008 Presidential election. Each Tuesday through November 4, columnists Rachel Campos-Duffy (Red Mom) and Ada Calhoun (Blue Mom) will take on issues relevant to parents on both sides of the aisle. You can find past Red Mom/Blue Mom posts here.

Red Mom: Stop living a lie!
by Rachel Campos-Duffy

I tried to boycott Oprah after she wouldn't invite Sarah Palin to the show, but I didn't last very long -- only three days, I think. So last week, back to my weekday ritual of watching Oprah while making dinner, I chopped vegetables while financial counselor Suze Orman ripped into a nice, middle-class couple who were in total denial about the state of their finances. Just as I began to wonder if these people would ever recover from this public lashing or venture out in public again, Suze turned, looked right into the camera and directed her words at all the home viewers who may be using credit cards unwisely: "Stop living a lie!" she yelled.

I thought a lot about Suze's words this past week as the nation's financial crisis unfolded. While many American families spent the week revising their budgets and preparing for leaner times, our "leaders" came up with yet another scheme to continue living the lie: a $700 billion tax payer-funded bailout that does nothing to reduce our $9 trillion dollar annual budget deficit. What a joke!

Common-sense Americans know that in government and families, debt is at the heart of this problem. Couple the de-stigmatization of debt with an American sense of entitlement -- "I deserve it!" -- and you start to see how we got here. The one thing the rich, poor, and middle class all have in common is a penchant for charging everything from clothes to family vacations. And on these trips, no one packs the minivan with a cooler anymore. It's drive-thrus and restaurants for America's most pampered generation.

In 1995, the Clinton administration expanded the "Community Reinvestment Act" in its eagerness to offer everyone, even those who couldn't afford it, a piece of the American dream. In exchange for boasting rights to a "more broadly shared prosperity," one of Clinton's favorite claims, the act incentivized high-risk lending practices to minorities and low-income communities.

Of course, I would like everyone to share in the American dream of home ownership, but Clinton's policy essentially offered a lie (they couldn't afford the houses!) and resulted in defaults that are the cause of our current economic woes. And while politicians on both sides of the aisle took campaign money from lending institutions, it was Democrats like Rep. Barney Frank, chair of the House Financial Services Committee, and Chuck Schumer, chair of the Joint Economic Committee, who criticized and voted against Republican legislation, co-sponsored by John McCain, that would have reigned in these dangerous practices.

During last Friday night's first Presidential debate, John McCain suggested a spending freeze on non-essential government expenditures in response to the crisis. He was widely mocked by the Democrats and the press for making this statement. But if American families must cut back and live within their means, why shouldn't we expect the government to do the same?

In a plea for a return to the concept of delayed gratification, Oprah sensibly asked her audience, "Remember lay-away? What ever happened to lay-away?" Indeed, bring back lay-away -- for Main Street, Wall Street and Washington!


Blue Mom: Bailing out the bullies
by Ada Calhoun





My favorite explanation of the U.S. financial crisis comes from Rachel Maddow. This bailout analogy casts Wall Street as a sugared-up child left with buckets of Halloween candy and no adult supervision.

It's perfect, because parenting is, in essence, regulation. How much do you get onto your kid to behave a certain way, and how much do you let him do what he wants? Do you step in and clean up his messes punishment-free, or do you make him reap the consequences of his actions?

There are kids on the playground where I spend a lot of the week whose parents are the disciplinary equivalent of small-government fiscal conservatives.

"You just gotta let it work itself out," they say, shrugging and going back to their Blackberries. "I told him not to snatch toys, but he just doesn't listen."

Meanwhile, their kid is running across the concrete with toy cars in every pocket and four in each hand, leaving a small army of weeping toddlers in his wake.

Of course, sometimes things like that do work themselves out. The preyed-upon kids get tougher and hold on tighter to their Tonka trucks. After a weekend at his old-school, no-nonsense Grandma's, the kid starts sharing. The hands-off parents are vindicated.

But sometimes, things don't work themselves out. Sometimes the kid grows into a sociopathic monster with no friends because he never learned how to be decent.

For the past eight years, the Bush administration has been the worst kind of laissez-faire parent, letting Wall Street and predatory lenders and oil companies and a lot of other grabby kids do whatever they wanted. And things worked fine, until they didn't at all.

Now all the good kids, bruised and battered and toy-less, have to break their piggy banks to help the bullies. The government has to step in -- we have to step in -- and insist on a higher standard of behavior, not just because we love our plastic fire trucks, but because we don't want to support a culture of greed, selfishness and fear.

Welcome to Red Mom Blue Mom, ParentDish's special coverage of the 2008 Presidential election. Each Tuesday through November 4, columnists Rachel Campos-Duffy (Red Mom) and Ada Calhoun (Blue Mom) will take on issues relevant to parents on both sides of the aisle. You can find past Red Mom/Blue Mom posts here.

Blue Mom: Sarah Palin -- She's not like us
By Ada Calhoun

The good news is we're popular. Women who are balancing career and family and worried about the tanking economy are this year's "security moms." Time magazine is calling us "Maxed-Out Moms" and saying we'll be deciding the election. Go, us!

The bad news is John McCain thinks he can woo us with a "Type A, antiabortion, Christian Stepford wife in a 'sexy librarian' costume," in the words of Salon.com's Cintra Wilson. Sarah Palin is George Bush in pumps. She thinks creationism should be taught alongside evolution and that raped women should be denied abortions (and pay for their own rape kits).

The worse news: McCain's cynical bid for our attention has been working. And rather than focusing on Palin's political incompetence, we've been distracted by condescending questions you would never see if she were a man (and that are 100% projections of our own tough choices), like this one from Reuters:

"Should a 44-year-old mother of five, including a newborn with special needs and a pregnant teenager, take on a job that will keep her away from her home for much of the next two months to eight years?" The New York Times called these discussions "Mommy Wars: Special Campaign Edition."

It's a ridiculous conversation to even entertain. The truth is, we have far more in common with Barack and Michelle, who only recently paid off their student loan debt, than with Todd and Sarah, whose high-paying jobs allow them what appears to be infinite vacation time in which to gut moose and shoot wolves from planes . (Jobs that are low-paying in the rest of the U.S. are highly paid in Alaska.) Alaska might as well be Scandinavia for as much as it has in common with the hard reality of trying to support a family in America today.

Let's stop worrying about her family. She can afford babysitting and sick days. Thanks to what Slate describes as "Alaska's large negative income tax (and outsize share of federal pork)," the Palins are living it up on two six-figure incomes.

Sarah Palin has it all, in the traditional sense: the hunky husband, the passel of kids, the high-power job, the financial security, the silk Valentino jackets. She's Diane Keaton in Baby Boom meets Melanie Griffith in Working Girl. Her family is living the dream.

But what about our families? Sarah Palin may be like us in certain ways. Most of us acquired our foreign policy expertise from sixth-grade global studies, for example. But judging by her right-of-Bush positions on the issues, she doesn't appear to have any intention of sharing the wealth. Every plank of the McCain-Palin platform shows that she's far from one of the girls.


Red Mom: Along comes Sarah
By Rachel Campos-Duffy

During one of the funnier moments in the Democrat primary, Barack Obama mocked Hillary's attempt to bond with Pennsylvania voters with childhood stories about hunting with her grandfather: "She's talking like she's Annie Oakley!" Obama laughed. Who could have predicted that five short months later an authentic Alaskan Annie Oakley, with pioneer-woman skills, down-home values, and sexy eyewear would shake up the race and our notions of successful motherhood.

On the left and right, much of the fascination with Sarah Palin has to do with her having seemingly accomplished the elusive female trifecta: big career, great marriage, and a brood of five kids ranging from 18 years of age to 4 months. Did I mention that she was able to hide her latest pregnancy well into her sixth month, thanks to tight abs? Just as women were giving up on being super-mom, and well-educated Gen Xers began dropping out of the work force to explore a more balanced approach to work and family ("I can have it all, just not all at the same time"), along comes Sarah. She's the successful governor of America's largest and most macho state, yet she's the most unabashed and overtly maternal politician our nation has ever seen.

How does she do it? Does she really have it all? Yes, she does have it all, but this type of high-level multi-tasking is never simple and the results are always complicated and sometimes messy, as the tabloids and her critics ceaselessly remind us.

But while her over-achiever approach to career and fertility may not be for you (as a fellow mother of five, I get exhausted just thinking about it), there is still plenty to learn and admire from how well she has managed to put it all together. The first and most important part of her success is a supportive husband. She has also chosen to live close to her extended family and believes teenagers need to pull their weight in the family (amen to that one!). Following the birth of her son Trig, Todd, not a nanny, came with her to the office to help out. As the mayor and then governor, Sarah keeps a baby swing and crib at the office and she has been known to nurse discreetly during meetings.

Not every woman is blessed with these options, but when a woman who can DOES, it says something about her priorities. Besides, with an 80% approval rating, the highest of any U.S. governor, who can credibly say she is neglecting her professional duties?

What impresses me most about Sarah Palin is the fact that she stood by her pro-life values when she found out that only one year into first term as governor she was pregnant with a Downs Syndrome baby. It was an unplanned pregnancy and she knew that that following through with it would raise serious questions about her ability to perform as governor and expose her to harsh and hurtful criticisms about her mothering. While other women may have chosen an easier road, she did not. Instead of compromising her principles for the sake of convenience or political expediency, she found creative and cooperative ways to make it work. Not a bad credential for a future VP!