<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is Bachmann a Flake, or Wallace a Pig?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2011/06/26/is-bachmann-a-flake-or-wallace-a-pig/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2011/06/26/is-bachmann-a-flake-or-wallace-a-pig/</link>
	<description>A NonPartisan Analysis of Presidential Politics</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Nov 2012 15:45:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Zach Dallmeyer-Drennen</title>
		<link>http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2011/06/26/is-bachmann-a-flake-or-wallace-a-pig/comment-page-1/#comment-19390</link>
		<dc:creator>Zach Dallmeyer-Drennen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Jun 2011 19:24:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/?p=9144#comment-19390</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I really like Anna&#039;s long comment and agree with her broader point.  Indeed, I think that by even treating Bachmann as a serious candidate, the media hasn&#039;t treated her harshly enough considering her casual relationship with reality]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I really like Anna&#8217;s long comment and agree with her broader point.  Indeed, I think that by even treating Bachmann as a serious candidate, the media hasn&#8217;t treated her harshly enough considering her casual relationship with reality</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Dickinson</title>
		<link>http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2011/06/26/is-bachmann-a-flake-or-wallace-a-pig/comment-page-1/#comment-19385</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Dickinson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Jun 2011 19:04:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/?p=9144#comment-19385</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Anna - Interesting. So, Wallace&#039;s apology which came later that day was appropriate because his question was disrespectful - but he would have been equally disrespectful had he been talking to a man?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anna &#8211; Interesting. So, Wallace&#8217;s apology which came later that day was appropriate because his question was disrespectful &#8211; but he would have been equally disrespectful had he been talking to a man?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anna Esten</title>
		<link>http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2011/06/26/is-bachmann-a-flake-or-wallace-a-pig/comment-page-1/#comment-19383</link>
		<dc:creator>Anna Esten</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Jun 2011 18:16:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/?p=9144#comment-19383</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Are women held to a different standard when it comes to running for the presidency? Definitely not a simple answer to that question. My immediate reaction is yes. But when I think about it, I really don&#039;t think it is a different or more stringent standard for women, but rather it just appears that way. Running for president is no easy task, and for good reason. If you can make it through campaigning through the primaries and the general election, chances are you at least somewhat qualified to run this country. You&#039;ve been exposed to the public, you&#039;ve been under media scrutiny for months, and you&#039;ve been asked every question you could think of (and plenty you couldn&#039;t have seen coming) on both the issues and the skeletons (or hopefully lack thereof) in your closet. The US&#039;s election system, at least nowadays, is set up to weed out those who aren&#039;t worthy to be president. Granted, the media does a lot of the weeding on its own (a lesson I learned from none other than Professor Dickinson), but presidential candidates are nonetheless subjected to a lot of pressure. 

So why do I think it only seems like women are held to a higher standard? Because in my opinion Hilary Clinton, Sarah Palin, and Michele Bachmann haven&#039;t been pushed any harder than Barack Obama, John McCain, or Mitt Romney. But in the United States, every boy is brought up and told that they are never, ever supposed to lay a hand on a woman. As an extension of that lesson, even the verbal badgering of female candidates seems like it&#039;s something our parents would ground us for. The American people are still unable to see past gender stereotypes of protecting women. When men are asked tough questions, they should be able to stand up for themselves and fight back. When women are asked tough questions, it&#039;s seen as mean. Simply, many believe that women shouldn&#039;t have to experience the harsh environment of running for president, a belief that leaves those people thinking that women are inherently unqualified to hold such an office. 

Women aren&#039;t held to a different standard than men. We just haven&#039;t yet seen a woman (in my opinion) strong-willed enough to take politics like a man, or find another way to prove their merit as a presidential candidate. 

As a woman considering running for political office in the future, I truly don&#039;t want to be seen as a female candidate when that day comes. I want to be seen as the best candidate, regardless of my gender. I&#039;m still waiting for a female politician that can prove themselves. Perhaps the setup of the system is biased toward men, but I don&#039;t see that as an entirely bad thing. 

Maybe Wallace went a little too far by asking Bachmann if she was a flake, but that comment is plain disrespectful, regardless of whether she is a man or a woman. Besides the fact that her repeated gaffes don&#039;t make her a &quot;flake&quot; as much as they make her misinformed, which is a much bigger concern I have as she gets closer to the presidency.

One of these days, a woman will be president, and that will be a historical moment for this country. However, we still want to make sure that we are absolutely certain that that woman is the right person for this country.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Are women held to a different standard when it comes to running for the presidency? Definitely not a simple answer to that question. My immediate reaction is yes. But when I think about it, I really don&#8217;t think it is a different or more stringent standard for women, but rather it just appears that way. Running for president is no easy task, and for good reason. If you can make it through campaigning through the primaries and the general election, chances are you at least somewhat qualified to run this country. You&#8217;ve been exposed to the public, you&#8217;ve been under media scrutiny for months, and you&#8217;ve been asked every question you could think of (and plenty you couldn&#8217;t have seen coming) on both the issues and the skeletons (or hopefully lack thereof) in your closet. The US&#8217;s election system, at least nowadays, is set up to weed out those who aren&#8217;t worthy to be president. Granted, the media does a lot of the weeding on its own (a lesson I learned from none other than Professor Dickinson), but presidential candidates are nonetheless subjected to a lot of pressure. </p>
<p>So why do I think it only seems like women are held to a higher standard? Because in my opinion Hilary Clinton, Sarah Palin, and Michele Bachmann haven&#8217;t been pushed any harder than Barack Obama, John McCain, or Mitt Romney. But in the United States, every boy is brought up and told that they are never, ever supposed to lay a hand on a woman. As an extension of that lesson, even the verbal badgering of female candidates seems like it&#8217;s something our parents would ground us for. The American people are still unable to see past gender stereotypes of protecting women. When men are asked tough questions, they should be able to stand up for themselves and fight back. When women are asked tough questions, it&#8217;s seen as mean. Simply, many believe that women shouldn&#8217;t have to experience the harsh environment of running for president, a belief that leaves those people thinking that women are inherently unqualified to hold such an office. </p>
<p>Women aren&#8217;t held to a different standard than men. We just haven&#8217;t yet seen a woman (in my opinion) strong-willed enough to take politics like a man, or find another way to prove their merit as a presidential candidate. </p>
<p>As a woman considering running for political office in the future, I truly don&#8217;t want to be seen as a female candidate when that day comes. I want to be seen as the best candidate, regardless of my gender. I&#8217;m still waiting for a female politician that can prove themselves. Perhaps the setup of the system is biased toward men, but I don&#8217;t see that as an entirely bad thing. </p>
<p>Maybe Wallace went a little too far by asking Bachmann if she was a flake, but that comment is plain disrespectful, regardless of whether she is a man or a woman. Besides the fact that her repeated gaffes don&#8217;t make her a &#8220;flake&#8221; as much as they make her misinformed, which is a much bigger concern I have as she gets closer to the presidency.</p>
<p>One of these days, a woman will be president, and that will be a historical moment for this country. However, we still want to make sure that we are absolutely certain that that woman is the right person for this country.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
