Reader Posts

« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »

You Want Snide, Ms. Palin...I've Got Your Snide Right Here

First off, allow me to congratulate the Republicans on their splashy “Hollywood” production last night. With Old Glory waving, and not one Greek Styrofoam column in sight, they thoroughly convinced me of Sarah Palin’s preparedness, at least on this score. From day one of a McCain administration, Sarah Palin will be ready to read from a teleprompter. Of what else I was to learn from her cynical speech last night, I remain unaware. That she can be snarkey and snide? Has there ever been doubt regarding that truth when it comes to the Republicans of our generation?

You know, it has always been part of the American myth to have our hero characters appear out the backwoods in whole cloth. Abe Lincoln splitting rails comes to mind, Paul Bunyan, Andrew Jackson as the unsullied defender of everyday folks. And now we have Sarah Palin appearing suddenly on the American political scene as if made from angelic robes and Lenscrafter glasses. Why, think of it. Just last week she was busy ‘raslin’ beaaars up in Skagit and locking up all those no good frontier rapscallions.

It brings to mind Christopher Lasch’s foreword to the ’73 edition of The American Political Tradition, where he addresses the progressive interpretation of American history popular at the time Hofstadter’s groundbreaking tome first appeared in print. As Lasch put it, a resurgent American cultural chauvinism had taken hold in American letters, a tiresome celebration of the American past, and quotes Hofstadter saying how this had helped bring into being a “literature of hero-worship and national self-congratulation.”

I am well aware of these delusionary notions about our founding fathers. I grew up having them spoon fed to me and have watched the Republican Party pawn off to the same myopic American mythology to public over the past thirty years, until I begin to feel like one of those hapless characters in a Kurt Vonnegut novel. Always the flag waving with those folks, this longing to return to a once unsullied American past. It’s George Washington cutting down the cheery tree and Abe Lincoln splitting rails, and more recently, Ronald Reagan riding in on a white horse of conservative principles. Never mind that Reagan was once the head of the Actor’s Guild Union and one hair’s breadth removed from being a member of the Communist Party.

So it is with Sarah Palin. When she tells us adoringly of her sons and nephews going off to war, and speaks of that extra prayer she says for them every night, and gushes warmly about her three daughters, and notes how husband Todd is a lifelong commercial fisherman and a production operator in the oil fields of Alaska's North Slope and a proud member of the United Steel Workers' Union, just an everyday kind of guy, she conveniently leaves out Todd’s roughly decade long stint in Alaskan Independence Party  or her own fling with secession, or that when you peel away her cheap family veneer and their purported Christian values, Sarah Palin and the whole lot of them start to sound more like Desperate Housewives meets Northern Exposure than anything else.

Why is it, I wonder, that Republicans feel forever bound to disparage Democratic principles today, only to idolize one of our members who’s no longer around to defend himself? It wasn’t enough that Sarah Palin hearkened to the memory of her parents growing up in a small Missouri town, and how they had both worked at the local elementary school and how proud she was to be their daughter. No, that had to be a tie-in to a young farmer and habber-dasher from Missouri named Harry Truman, who happened to follow his own unlikely path from a small town to the vice presidency.

Well, to paraphrase the famous words of Lloyd Benson, you’re no Harry Truman, Sarah, and you can bet there was no love lost between our dear Harry and your beloved Republican Party. In case you have any doubts on that score, here’s a direct quote from his acceptance speech in 1948.

Senator Barkley and I will win this election and make these Republicans like it — don't forget that! We will do that because they are wrong and we are right, and I will prove it to you in just a few minutes.”

Yes, Sarah, we’ve all heard how you’re just an average hockey mom, who signed up for the PTA because she wanted to make her kids' public education better, but your claims about running for city council and the mayor’s office and eventually for governor without any thought of focus groups and voter profiles just doesn’t wash. As noted recently online, in your campaign for mayor of Wasilla, you were found to be a “highly polarizing political figure who brought partisan politics and hot-button social issues like abortion and gun control into a mayoral race that had traditionally been contested like a friendly intramural contest among neighbors.” Yep, by dragging in the state GOP and bringing “big-time politics into a small-town local race" your career as a politician in Alaska got off a lot more like that “pit bull with lipstick” you described in your acceptance speech last night than your friendly community organizer. Even Vicki Naegele, the managing editor of the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman, and a person who shared your Christian faith found your methods contemptible. As she recalled, the average friendly small-town race, "turned into something much different…" "I just thought,” Naegele said, “…she should concentrate on roads, not abortion."

And speaking of community organizers, they may not have actual responsibilities, as you suggest, but they do know the duties of a vice-president without asking, and I know one who’s not known for calling people dumbass behind their backs.

Yes, it all sounds very noble, this portrait you create of yourself not being a member of the permanent political establishment, and how you’ll head to Washington to serve the people of this country, not just mingle with the right people and to seek their good opinion. I heard your pledge to continue the same spirit you brought to the governor's office, where you took on the old politics as usual in Juneau and you stood up to the special interests, the lobbyists, big oil companies, and the good-ol' boys network. But in truth, your politics were just the same old game of clashing parties and competing interests. The integrity, good will, clear convictions you swore to uphold went right out the window when someone got in your way.

No, Sarah, there just wasn’t much of anything truthful in that venom you attempted to disguise with a smile last night. You spoke of your willingness to drill anywhere to get that oil, but dismissed your rival as an impediment to energy independence for our nation, when in fact Barack Obama stood up early with his support for a natural gas pipeline in your state, and when in fact you praised him for it. You said Barack Obama had never reached across the aisle and had not sponsored one piece of important legislation, when a simple Google of his legislative career would have proven you a liar.

To paraphrase your own invective, Sarah, you could give an entire speech about wars, and never use the word "humility". In fact, when the cloud of your rhetoric has passed, and the roar of the crowd fades away, and the stadium lights go out, and that Nazi like symbolism of flags waving behind your head is hauled back to some Third Reich studio lot, what exactly is your plan for this country’s future? You didn’t tell us one thing about what YOU plan to do to turn back the waters and heal the planet?

All we know for certain is this. While you’d like to make government smaller, you will without fail make the coffers of your fat cat donors bigger. You will raise the taxes on the poorest of us and lower the taxes on the rich. You will tell us victory in Iraq is finally in sight but never fail to leave the average American cowering in fear. You will make American weaker abroad by dismissing the importance of observing the constitutional rights of others around the world.

Yes, you are absolutely right, Sarah. There are those candidates who will change anything about their beliefs in order to get elected. Who will one day call the religious right “agents of intolerance” then go back and lick their boots the next year. Who will acknowledge the obscenity of giving the wealthiest people in this country a tax break in times of war and then come back and say it’s a great idea. As you so aptly said, there are those who will use their careers to promote change and those who put politics in front of leadership. There are those who have done great things, who are capable of great things and those who are simply in the hands of lobbyists and special interests.

It’s true that John McCain was once a man who did not run with the Washington herd, but that man is nowhere to be found today. He is a man who, unfortunately, lost his gift of "personal discovery" on his way to the American presidency.

The fact is, Sarah, in the cynical house of mirrors that is the Republican talking point machine, you and your minions have made a man’s ability to inspire others a liability. You have made hope an unwanted orphan. You have narrowed the criteria of worthy experience in life to only those who have so-called “executive experience”, thereby relegating to the trash bin half the men who have presided in the Oval Office.

Hey, come to think of it, in attempting to find some
way, any way, to diminish the value of your Barack Obama’s life experience, you
have left your own ticket open to an unthinkable charge. As the only with
“executive experience” in this Presidential race, you’re more qualified than
your own running mate.


Comments (22)

I understand McCain's own David Davies [sic] said the VP speech had been written and was waiting for a nominee to read it. When Last-Minute-Sarah was given the nod, some tweaks were made, and some lipstick added, to make it more girly.

Nice, but the problem is this: Palin's resume was like a pious super magnet to thousands of evangelical metal filings. She didn't have to say a word to win them over; she had them at 'anti-choice'. What she did have to do with her speech, and what she didn't begin to accomplish, was to win over the Independents and Undecideds (not entirely the same people). That little sliver of electoral gold wants persuasion, wooing, moderation, generosity, good sense.

Alas, for Sarah and her mentor Karl, those weren't the words she read to the 37 million of us watching. If she'd done Hillary's speech of last week, we might be all over her like lox on a bagel. But she didn't. She was sarcastic and condescending. She reminded many of us of the mean girl in 8th grade who's already so empty inside she can't interact with her classmates other than cruelly.

In a word: we didn't like her.

I understand McCain's own David Davies [sic] said the VP speech had been written and was waiting for a nominee to read it. When Last-Minute-Sarah was given the nod, some tweaks were made, and some lipstick added, to make it more girly.

Nice, but the problem is this: Palin's resume was like a pious super magnet to thousands of evangelical metal filings. She didn't have to say a word to win them over; she had them at 'anti-choice'. What she did have to do with her speech, and what she didn't begin to accomplish, was to win over the Independents and Undecideds (not entirely the same people). That little sliver of electoral gold wants persuasion, wooing, moderation, generosity, good sense.

Alas, for Sarah and her mentor Karl, those weren't the words she read to the 37 million of us watching. If she'd done Hillary's speech of last week, we might be all over her like lox on a bagel. But she didn't. She was sarcastic and condescending. She reminded many of us of the mean girl in 8th grade who's already so empty inside she can't interact with her classmates other than cruelly.

In a word: we didn't like her.

Nice first comment.

Don't worry about the double posts -- it's a temporary situation that should improve soon. Stick around!

ooops. Sorry for the duplicate comment. This is my first time . . .

I've clicked the recommend because you obviously worked on this piece, it has some valid points and because it's well written, but I would like to caution you and others against taking wide swipes at large parts of the country. (They may not literally "rassle bears" in Wyoming, Montana, Utah, Idaho, the Dakotas, New Mexico, Colorado, Maine, New Hampshire or the upper peninsula of Michigan, but I'm sure a lot of those folks can identify with the concept)

I also think too much is being made at her obvious attempt to lightheartedly sidestep the VP speculation and her husband's membership in a relatively benign group. Sure, both of these things can be fodder for blog and talk show derision, but they aren't real critisms that'll have life beyond the converted.

And finally, just because you weren't familiar with her prior to Friday, it doesn't mean that she sprang-up whole cloth or that the same couldn't also be said about Obama.

It is legitimate to question her positions on the issues or to compare her record to the things that she says, but we've all got to avoid painting her with too wide a brush or making her life into a too much of caricature because when you cut right down to it, it'll only play to the elites.

I would like to caution you against taking wide swipes at large parts of the left. I am not an "elite" nor are most of the folks voting for Obama. Speak for yourself.

BTW, she IS a caricature. She made herself into one. "Hockey Mom?" "Pitbull with lipstick?" It plays here, there, and in Peoria, too. How it plays is another matter.

It certainly seems, at least from polls I've seen, that it doesn't play among women all that well. McCain might have the RW zealots, they're loud but few. The GOP can't even fill the Excel Center. That's pretty pathetic.

Uh... I'm a Democrat and a card-carrying member of the left.

My caution actually goes back to some concerns that I expressed during the primary season; As far as I'm concerned, one of the biggest threats to victory in November are Obama's online supporters and because there's still hope of some semblance of a 50-state strategy, we really shouldn't be doing anything that belittles or implies superiority to rural voters.

Oh, and if I may... Please add TN, KY, West Virginia, western NC and VA to my list of people who might fancy themselves bear rasslers.

With the scandals she has breaking... Even the rural voters will be making fun of her soon. There is a lot of stuff that really hasn't even begun to get primetime news slots. Not everybody are politics and news junkies and are way out ahead of the big stories like Blog readers.

I give it another week and the news will start seeping into the mainstream. There is just too much potential for ratings for the traditional media to pass it up.

Uh... I'm a Democrat and a card-carrying member of the left.

My caution actually goes back to some concerns that I expressed during the primary season; As far as I'm concerned, one of the biggest threats to victory in November are Obama's online supporters and because there's still hope of some semblance of a 50-state strategy, we really shouldn't be doing anything that belittles or implies superiority to rural voters.

Oh, and if I may... Please add TN, KY, West Virginia, western NC and VA to my list of people who might fancy themselves bear rasslers.

(If this is a dupe, I apologize)

I respectfully disagree with Mr. Corcoran. These speeches are all rah-rah and never contain any substance. That's true for the Dems and the GOP conventions.

She rightly went after Obama's fundamental weakness - that he's never done anything. At least she has held an executive office.

One must review Obama's political rise in Chicago. His opponent Blair Hull mysteriously had sealed court documents concerning his divorce leaked to the Chicago Tribune. So Hull resigns and Obama wins! Then the same thing happens to Jack Ryan and he's replaced by Alan Keyes, who Obama happens to defeat.

Obama's rise to office was mired in Chicago back room politics.


And anyone's move to the Independence Party - what's wrong with that? We need to move away from party labels and focus on the issues.

"And anyone's move to the Independence Party - what's wrong with that?"

Only a political neophyte would ask that question. One who doesn't know either political history, or the difference between moderate and extreme. Or that, in fact, the political SPECTRUM has numerous points on it, grey to grey; reality is not made up only of "left" and "right" and the fringe parties which have such adherents.

There is left, right, and middle -- and the vast majority are MIDDLE. The "Independence Party" walks the fine edge of the cliff between on the political spectrum and falling out of it.

The "Independence Party" is as much a nut-party -- the traditional term for which is "lunatic fringe" -- as the "Libertarian". Read the Constitution, then compare that with the rhetorics of each. You'll find they either don't know what they're talking about -- or are lying.

And in practical terms: you aren't going to get anywhere voting for a third party candidate of a party that has essentially five hard core members. You'll only waste your vote. Like it or not, that is political reality in the US today.

Glad to see someone note the Lenscrafters. She has on a different pair in every photo I've seen so far.

Gary:

Brilliant post... THANK YOU!

"And anyone's move to the Independence Party - what's wrong with that?"

Only a political neophyte would ask that question. One who doesn't know either political history, or the difference between moderate and extreme. Or that, in fact, the political SPECTRUM has numerous points on it, grey to grey; reality is not made up only of "left" and "right" and the fringe parties which have such adherents.

There is left, right, and middle -- and the vast majority are MIDDLE. The "Independence Party" walks the fine edge of the cliff between on the political spectrum and falling out of it.

The "Independence Party" is as much a nut-party -- the traditional term for which is "lunatic fringe" -- as the "Libertarian". Read the Constitution, then compare that with the rhetorics of each. You'll find they either don't know what they're talking about -- or are lying.

And in practical terms: you aren't going to get anywhere voting for a third party candidate of a party that has essentially five hard core members. You'll only waste your vote. Like it or not, that is political reality in the US today.

"And anyone's move to the Independence Party - what's wrong with that?"

Only a political neophyte would ask that question. One who doesn't know either political history, or the difference between moderate and extreme. Or that, in fact, the political SPECTRUM has numerous points on it, grey to grey; reality is not made up only of "left" and "right" and the fringe parties which have such adherents.

There is left, right, and middle -- and the vast majority are MIDDLE. The "Independence Party" walks the fine edge of the cliff between on the political spectrum and falling out of it.

The "Independence Party" is as much a nut-party -- the traditional term for which is "lunatic fringe" -- as the "Libertarian". Read the Constitution, then compare that with the rhetorics of each. You'll find they either don't know what they're talking about -- or are lying.

And in practical terms: you aren't going to get anywhere voting for a third party candidate of a party that has essentially five hard core members. You'll only waste your vote. Like it or not, that is political reality in the US today.

JNagarya - well thanks for your education. And thanks for using ALL CAPS for a neophyte like me.

It's not even clear that she was ever part of the AIP.

Can we stick to the things that Obama has accomplished in his career? What has he done? (or should I type What has he DONE?)

And please don't try to compare him to Pallin. I don't think it's fair to compare a VP's credentials with a President's credentials.

September 2, 2008, 10:32 pm
Alaska Party Official Says Palin Was Not a Member
By The New York Times
The chairwoman of an Alaskan political party that advocates a vote on the state’s secession from the union said Tuesday that she had been mistaken when she said Gov. Sarah Palin was a member of the group.

A front-page story in The New York Times on Tuesday and articles in other news media reported that Ms. Palin was a member of the Alaska Independence Party for two years in the 1990’s.

The information in the Times article was based on a statement issued Monday night by Lynette Clark, the party’s chairwoman, who said that Ms. Palin joined the party in 1994 and in 1996 changed her registration to Republican.

On Tuesday night, Ms. Clark said that her initial statement was incorrect and had been based on erroneous information provided by another member of the party whom she declined to identify. The McCain campaign also disputed the Times report, saying that Ms. Palin had been registered consistently as a Republican.

After checking the party’s archives, Ms. Clark said that she could find no documentation that Governor Palin had been a member of the party. She said Ms. Palin attended the party’s 1994 and 2006 conventions and provided a video-taped address as governor to the 2008 convention.

September 2, 2008, 10:32 pm
Alaska Party Official Says Palin Was Not a Member
By The New York Times
The chairwoman of an Alaskan political party that advocates a vote on the state’s secession from the union said Tuesday that she had been mistaken when she said Gov. Sarah Palin was a member of the group.

A front-page story in The New York Times on Tuesday and articles in other news media reported that Ms. Palin was a member of the Alaska Independence Party for two years in the 1990’s.

The information in the Times article was based on a statement issued Monday night by Lynette Clark, the party’s chairwoman, who said that Ms. Palin joined the party in 1994 and in 1996 changed her registration to Republican.

On Tuesday night, Ms. Clark said that her initial statement was incorrect and had been based on erroneous information provided by another member of the party whom she declined to identify. The McCain campaign also disputed the Times report, saying that Ms. Palin had been registered consistently as a Republican.

After checking the party’s archives, Ms. Clark said that she could find no documentation that Governor Palin had been a member of the party. She said Ms. Palin attended the party’s 1994 and 2006 conventions and provided a video-taped address as governor to the 2008 convention.

MiddleClassBill

The reason Obama is the Democratic Party Candidate is because he got more delegates than any other Democratic primary candidate. Remind me how many republican delegates voted for Palin. Obama has been out convincing voters that he is qualified to be the president for the last 18 months. Palin has been resolving one personal problem after the other during that time. While Palin has been spending the windfall revenues related to the high cost of oil by rebating the states rainy day fund to its citizens, Obama, with help, shepherded landmark legislation addressing the "loose nukes" problem into law. I will not educate you on his substantial legislative record, since you seem to want to believe it does not exist, but you can find it with a simple google search.

The earlier response to your Independence party question may have been a bit harsh, but anyone belonging to a party that portrays the US govt as evil and advocates the violent secession from the United States should probably not be the candidate for vice president of those same United States. You are aware of the difference between the Independence party and being an Independent?

MiddleClassBill

The reason Obama is the Democratic Party Candidate is because he got more delegates than any other Democratic primary candidate. Remind me how many republican delegates voted for Palin. Obama has been out convincing voters that he is qualified to be the president for the last 18 months. Palin has been resolving one personal problem after the other during that time. While Palin has been spending the windfall revenues related to the high cost of oil by rebating the states rainy day fund to its citizens, Obama, with help, shepherded landmark legislation addressing the "loose nukes" problem into law. I will not educate you on his substantial legislative record, since you seem to want to believe it does not exist, but you can find it with a simple google search.

The earlier response to your Independence party question may have been a bit harsh, but anyone belonging to a party that portrays the US govt as evil and advocates the violent secession from the United States should probably not be the candidate for vice president of those same United States. You are aware of the difference between the Independence party and being an Independent?

If the media wasn't so quick to create the problems, she wouldn't be so busy resolving them. First we had people saying that Trig was not Sarah's son, but actually her daughter's baby. Then we had everyone reporting that she was a member of the AIP.

What's going to be the next unsubstantiated rumor that the media creates?

The reason why Sarah is busy resolving personal problems is because the media is working so hard to create false rumors.

First they started a rumor that Trig was not Sarah's son, but actually her daughters baby???

Then everyone reported that she was a member of the AIP without checking the facts (like her voter registration records).

What's the next rumor the media is going to create?

Post a Comment

Advertisement
Please disable your adblocker!
Ads are how we pay the bills!

Subscribe

The Coffee House
TPMCafe's regulars

House Brew
From Your Cafe Editor

Special Guests
Big names and big brains

Special Features
Pressing topics and trends

Table for One
An expert's week-long talk.

All Reader Posts
TPM readers discuss.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address