Is Palin, Like Nixon, Going To Rise Like a Phoenix?
I was watching Fox and one of their nutty commentators said that it would be a mistake to write off Sarah Palin's chances of becoming President. "The liberals wrote off Nixon too. But he wasn't a quitter and neither is she."
Let's look at the record.
Nixon. 1952. Eisenhower asks him to quit GOP ticket over Checkers scandal. He refuses to quit. 1956. Eisenhower asks him to quit the VP job and go into the cabinet. He refuses to quit. 1960. Nixon runs for President. Loses. Refuses to quit. 1962. Runs for governor of California. Loses. Refuses to quit. 1968. Runs for President again. Wins. 1974. After a two year fight to withstand Watergate, Nixon resigns. Spends rest of his life trying to redeem his reputation. Writes 20 books. 1994. Dies. Quits.
Palin: 2009, After a half term as governor. Quits.
Both Palin and Nixon said, "I am not a quitter." One was telling the truth.
PS This is not a Nixon apologia. After Andrew Jackson, James Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Woodrow Wilson and George W. Bush, he is the President I dislike the most.
Writes 20 books. Dies 1994. Still gets his face on a stamp.
Terrible man, criminal. But not a quitter.
July 13, 2009 10:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I want Palin to run. It's time for a show down between the forces of the Enlightenment and the Mythological/Fundamentalist Nationalists.
It would be the Scopes Monkey Trial of our generation.
July 14, 2009 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Both Palin and Nixon said, "I am not a crook." Neither one was telling the truth.
July 13, 2009 10:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nixon had one real advantage. He was smart, capable and recognized as such even by his opponents. His flaws and inherent meanness never eclipsed that.
Palin is known to be a flake and is recognized as such even by many of her "friends." Her obsessions have nothing to do with being smart or capable of performing in government.
July 14, 2009 12:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
From the point of view of those who sympathize with neither Nixon or Palin, what should worry us about Palin is her natural charisma. Nixon had none. Nixon had to work harder and hustle more than anyone to get where he got, everything about him was forced, sweaty jowled and unnatural. Palin on the contrary irradiates whatever it is that makes (some, a lot of) people like or identify with her.
That we don't like her is nothing for her to worry about. That, despite the Republican establishment's disparagement, Palin's base still supports her gives the GOP a lot to worry about and should probably trouble the rest of us too.
I think that Sarah Palin is frightening many Republican "realist" (read pro-business) commentators because they realize that she is a monster that the party has been creating since Nixon's "Southern Strategy". The fiscal conservatives have been using the social conservatives and the just generally resentful and racist elements as cannon fodder to win elections and now they finally see what Nixon hath wrought.
The Republican rage against her is because they see that they have fallen into a trap of their own construction: the party of the rich, which catered to the yokels is now in danger of being taken over by the yokels... which could be catastrophic for American business interests all over the world.
Certainly continuing high unemployment with no relief on the horizon is the recipe for populism. Since left wing populism is out of the question in America, then it would have to be right-wing populism. Palin would be a perfect poster girl for such a movement.
The rise of socially conservative populism would be a joker in the deck that could derail globalization and interrupt the pantomime of American politics. The idea sounds fun, but the reality could be pretty terrible.
July 14, 2009 1:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Good comment. She is someone we should fear especially if the economy continues going south. If in 12 months official unemployment is above 11% and U6 is at 25% she could become the leader of a serious political force.
July 14, 2009 4:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Now that the gorilla from Wasilla has been given a platform by the Washington Post, she and her handlers appear to be positioning her to appeal both to the "realists" and the conservative rabble with a bet that unemployment will continue to rise and it can all be blamed on Obama.
July 14, 2009 9:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Socially conservative populism is an oxymoron. The essence of social conservatism is exclusion.
July 14, 2009 11:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Now there is one stimulus that I happen to have a prepared speech of response for, a thing which does not happen often:
Not to confuse Democracy and Populism!
Though populists want to get ninety-five (say) percent of the votes that we mere democrats and Democrats want to get, they do NOT want 100.00% of the vote, because their mythology or shtyk or persona or ‘narrative’ is not about "We, The People" simply, it stars The Enemies Of The People™ as well. That is what makes Pops different from Dems.
In rightist and neorightist paws, Populism, like Attic tragedy from Sophocles, requires three actors:
(1) Wunnerful US is (are?) of course the protagonist.
Excluded from Wunnerful US by their fiendish designs and outrageous moustaches are (2) the aforesaid Enemies of the People.
The vast majority of holy-Homelanders™ are (3) also excluded from Wunnerful US by the different sort of exclusion that Mr. Poster legitimately has in mind, the blackballed-for-the-country-club or "social conservatism" sort as opposed to the Evil-versus-Good sort.
The double exclusion makes excellent sense dramatically: if ‘we’ are to stage The Perils of Pauline, somebody has got to play Pauline, even though the nominal title rôle makes the portrayer more like a section of the scenery than a member of the cast. (Fortunately, there is never any acute shortage of Dan Quayle Brand® Couch Potatows.)
Happy Bastille Day!
July 14, 2009 5:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
What a factual article. Thanks for the nice update. Keep it up! But aside from that breaking and sizzling report let me impart something new concern to you. The car industry is not in the greatest shape these days, and that would kind of explain all the giveaway tangents the car industry is going on these days. A few TV shows have given away free cars, like the Ellen DeGeneres show and the GMC Yukon drawing, Oprah Winfrey's car giveaway. OK, a free car is pretty awesome – the price of gas is hard enough to bear without needing a payday loan for the insurance and loan payments. The car market is flooded right now, but it's hard for customers to get the credit they need, and the entire car industry is heading into debt consolidation or worse.
July 14, 2009 2:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Classic MJ Rosenberg, tiressly chanelling his literary idol, Ann Coulter: cover up a complete lack of his own original ideas by ripping off the ideas from others (Fox, Brook, et al). Then make it sound as bitchy as possible.
Shilling for Progress. And loving it.
Who would have thought the old hangers-on like MJ would make Hope/Change sound as tired as anything republicans wrote for the past 20 years.
Don't give up MJ! In a few years' time you might finally catch up with Ann Coulter and get as snappy as she was back in her day.
July 14, 2009 9:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
Uttly empty of content.
July 14, 2009 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Make that: Utterly empty of content.
July 14, 2009 11:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Peggy Noonan was right about at least one thing - referring to Palin as a "retail politician". The erstwhile governor blabbers what she's fed; she's a cog in the spin machine and has no original, distinct platform. This kind of paper mache politics - in which voters are presented with quickly fabricated empty shells bearing a passing resemblance to "leaders" - can only function in calm waters, times in which voters fret over minute details of public policy, not desperately cast about for missing chunks of their future, their security. This economic meltdown, and our ongoing foreign policy crises, will shake out a lot of the chafe. In "Downturn '92", Dan Quayle helped Bush the First not one bit. Palin's a goner.
July 14, 2009 11:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm really amused at the recurrent memes you all adopt -- case in point, "Palin's a quitter!!!"
Great fun (check out today's Washington Post -- some quitter, eh?)
And, to correct your memories of Richard Nixon (I'm old enough to remember it all quite vividly), Nixon did quit politics after losing his gubernatorial bid in California (remember, "You won't have Nixon to kick around anymore!" ?). His retirement was brief, however, as will be Sarah's.
She really is your worst nightmare, isn't she? All you self-styled "intellectuals".
OBTW, I've been meaning to ask, how does one become an "intellectual". Is there a certification body? A test? (how many parts?)
What fun!
July 14, 2009 7:09 PM | Reply | Permalink