Politics and sex, an apt combination in light of the deep economic and political turmoil currently rippling through the United States.

Controversy abounds in the U.S. with less than a week away from the National Presidential Election. Carl Rove has instigated a last desperate attempt to demoralize voters and disenfrancise Democrats by spinning the hate-mongering wheel he does so well.

From late night comedians to political commentators, the jokes are rampant regarding Sarah Palin’s wink in Obama’s latest campaign ad, further combined with last week’s fiasco with Palin’s wardrobe, which costs the Republican National Committee a whopping $150,000 at taxpayers’ expense.

Rovians working on Sarah Palin’s camp has a few more campaigning days before Election Day, which has edged the party to desperation mode. In the latest attack, Conservatives are calling the Obama camp sexist for including an image of her winking in his recent ad. Nevermind the fact that the underlying message in his ad was the substance, or lack of, in McCain’s choice of VP. Here’s a suggestion, perhaps Palin should just stop winking at the camera.

Calling foul and spitting mad, the Conservatives have now embraced feminism. Their message seems somewhat counter-intuitive, vote for the candidate that you can relate to as a mother, woman, feminist. Counter-intuitive since Palin has little in common with the vast majority of women voters.  Yet, Rovians are resorting to sex and gender to galvanize women voters to empathize with Palin’s model as a wife, working mother of five, and politician.

This pure desperation attack is a last ditch effort to revive a campaign that shows Barack Obama leading in almost double digits in most national poll. Obama has taken the lead by focusing on having a dignified and intellectual stimulating campaign, a position that the Republican Party has been unable to maintain in the last few months. Obama has avoided being drawn into meaningless and distracting discussions of Palin’s exterior portrayal and has consistently stayed on the issues. Not once did he say about his running mate that he was “proud” of him, something that McCain has used in a few instances when referring to Palin. That is sexism.

It’s finally official that Barack Obama will prevail in the Democratic nomination for the Presidential election in November ‘08. Perhaps now the overzealous media will cease chattering on about when Hillary Clinton will concede, how will she do it, and why she has not done it already. Instead of focusing on meaningful issues such as her substantial overhaul of health care, education, social security, and the puttering economy, the last few months has been about irrelevant, superficial headlines aimed at targeting the woman, not the candidate.

While Barack Obama is a strong candidate,with an idealistic attitude about the new direction for the White House, much more publicity has been focused on Hillary Clinton’s other running mate, Bill, her misty eye moment on the trail, her comment regarding Martin Luther King Jr. (which was taken out of context), and debate on her ability to lead because she is a female - rather than Barack Obama’s association and loyalty to his volatile, racist minister and his light experience in politics.

The media outlets have lambasted Clinton and have been screaming for her to quit when statistically, she was leading in the popular vote and had substantial votes from delegates. She was not without bargaining power and her legitimacy was ratified by the strong support of women voters and workers of all ethnicity across the nation.

Rather than target pertinent, contentious issues such as the war in Iraq, commentators such as correspondent David Shuster from MSNBC interviewed two guests about Chelsea Clinton’s role in her mother’s campaign as in some way “pimped out in some weird sort of way.” This sort of language and dialogue is reminiscent of the Rush Limbaugh days during Bill Clinton’s administration where he insulted Chelsea Clinton by calling her ugly and compared her to a dog. This sort of exchange is infantile and belongs in the school yard.

It is a personal attack with sexist undertone to debate an topic such as looks from a candidate’s family, absolutely impertinent to the how effective that candidate may be in office. Further,  Chelsea Clinton is an adult and was supporting her mother’s campaign which has been insinuated that it is in some way a form of prostitution. Barack Obama’s wife, Michelle Obama, who has appeared on numerous news outlets in support of her husband’s campaign was not mentioned in the same program from MSNBC.

Again, we recall that Bill Clinton was dragged into the political foray when he made some comments about his wife’s substantial political experience and a better candidate for the presidency than Barack Obama - yet the media bombarded Hillary Clinton with questions regarding whether she would be able to “control” the other candidate if she were in office. Barack Obama was not attacked with the same furor regarding whether his wife would be a power player distraction in the White House. Not to say that Michelle Obama should be waging war with the media for the same treatment, but lets play fair. What’s good for the gals is certainly good enough for the guys.

Perhaps Hillary Clinton was an easier political target than Barack Obama, and it could be possible that Clinton made a harder sell for the White House due to her previous track record. Yet, throw in there media bias and a journalist’s preference for Barack Obama and we have a sexist, unfair campaign that has run rampant in United States media outlets in the last few months. Now journalists will focus on the divisive effect Hillary Clinton caused because she waited till now to concede - lets focus on this instead of actual issues people care about.