I started reading the Vanity Fair hit piece on Sarah Palin yesterday. I printed the thing out and carried it around, reading whenever I could catch a few moments. Like Pundette, I've stayed out of the Palin fray. I've been reluctant to confront the many Palin bashers out there, and there ARE so many of them. Andrew Sullivan is simply delusional about her and Stacy McCain does a great job smacking him down when needed. And there were plenty of people available to smack down the nasty blogger who distored pictures of Trig Palin with her Photoshop "skills".
Yesterday, Andrew Sullivan blasted the MSM for failing to get the details on Trig Palin's birth. He concluded his post with "I believed then and I believe now that the MSM is too concerened with their own reputations and too deferent to power to even ask the questions. Which is another betrayal of their core purpose. And why they are dying. And deserve to."
"Too concerned with their own reputations"? Really!? Wow. I haven't noticed the MSM displaying a lot of concern with their reputation as they fawn and slobber over every move Obama makes. That doesn't do much, in my eyes, for their reputation as serious journalists, but as Sullivan sees it, maybe if they asked Sarah Palin about her uterus they'd be more professional.
As for Todd Purdum's Vanity Fair piece, I'm still trudging through it. What I've read so far is vapid and adds nothing new to the Palin story. Purdum holds off until paragraph three before his first nasty jab, "What does her prominence say about the importance of having (or lacking) a record of achievement in public life?" I could be mistaken, but I thought being governor of a state indicated some level of achievement.
The double standard is most obvious when he says, in the same paragraph, that John McCain was crazy in picking "a person whose utter shortage of qualification for her proposed job all but disqualified him for his". I believe she had as many qualifications for the job she was seeking as Obama had for the job he was seeking. But, that's just a rehash of what we all talked about during the campaign which is all this article really is.
By paragraphs six and seven (page 3), Palin is described as an "indisputably fertile female" and shows "deep ignorance" about foreign and domestic policy. We only paid attention to her on the national stage because she's good looking. Purdum tells us this is a "pheromonal reality."
That's when I had to take a break. I'll keep plodding through it until I can't take any more. Why are people so delusional about Sarah Palin? Is it because she's threatening? Interesting? Intimidating? If she's so insignificant and ignorant, why are people still writing about her in this way rather than just letting her "go home, keep her head down" and do her job?
Thoughts?
5 comments:
What you smell here is what I wrote Sullivan in my email to him: this is the color of fear.
Purdim's hit piece was thinly sourced and had so many "anonymous" contributors that Joe Klein could have written it.
Yes, it's mostly rehash, and most if it is Fiskable garbage. Sullivan, as is his wont, has descended into madness when it comes to Trig Palin.
Madness. He's trying to rationalize being conned for his money and his vote by a sophisticated Used Car Salesman who never intended to come through with any promises to the gay community regarding gay marriage and Don't Ask, Don't Tell. So he's in a lather at Palin to substitute for Obama's failure to follow through.
Andrew Sullivan, like so many other Obama partisans, voted for Change and are waking up to find out that they got the Third Bush Term. They would rather be angry at Palin than admit that they were had.
Sarah Palin is beautiful and ambitious and doesn't fit the Dem party's feminist mold. She is a force to be reckoned with, whether you agree with her politics or not and she does it all while smiling. I say be afraid leftist fringe. Be very afraid.
It's hard to understand the Palin Derangement Syndrome. But I think that the fact Palin has made the critical error of defying the values and expectations imposed by leftist thinkers, is partially to blame. She doesn't behave and believe in the value system they have laid upon women. So she's not REALLY a woman in their eyes, or worse she's a "self-hater" who has "betrayed her own kind." And the reaction for this defiance is unbridled hatred. Couple this with the fact that she's respected and liked by many conservatives (who they believe are uniformally racists/misogynists), and you start to get the idea. She upsets their precious view of identity politics.
If she we black, they would call her an "oreo," and if she were Asian they would call her a "twinkie" or a "bananna" as they attack her at every opportunity.
I don't have terribly strong opinions about Palin one way or the other, but she gets a great deal of sympathy from me simply because of the amount of animosity that is heaped upon her for not following their "Party" line.
This is my first time to your blog - came here through Pundit & Pundette. And if you promise to keep posting pictures of Sarah, I promise to keep coming back!
Great work on the W-M Job-Killing Prosperity-Draining "Climate" Bill, too!
So, i'm back, after many months away. I just finished reading the Vanity Fair article yesterday and couldn't resist reading what you had to offer Pat. There are some new post-ers here, but it seems like the level of vitriol has not subisded.
Section9, its impossible to even respond to the great leap in logic that Obama supporters' supposed anger at Palin is a consequence of betrayal over Obama's actions (or lack thereof) on gay rights. It's quite ludicrous, honestly.
Red: As a liberal, who voted for Obama, i can confirm that your assessment of the "left's" feelings toward Palin is off-base. Palin is disliked by the Left because her Politics is tinged with ultra-conservative values to which MOST of America doesn't relate. I have the utmost respect for McCain, but he lost me when he chose Palin. He's a moderate policy-maker. She was everything he wasn't. She's Evangelical, extreme pro-life (meaning, under all circumstances), has a mayoral position and less than one term as a governor (now that she's resigned). Whether you want to believe it or not, she has radical beliefs. Not that she's "wrong", but MOST Americans don't believe what she believes. I certainly don't. And dare i say it, i've never seen one public display on her part that made me think that she was very smart. She comes across as a savvy opportunist, who's found her way in the least populated, most detached (except for maybe Hawaii) state in our country. Alaska is not like MOST of America. So, to respond to your comment. I, as a liberal, would LOVE it if she were the Republican nominee in 2012. At least then, the Conservatives might see what MOST of America saw last fall.
And Yukio, what a distorted view of what "leftist-thinkers" expect from women. You might recall, there was highly-contested race for the Democratic nomination between Obama and Hillary Clinton. Hillary is educated, experienced, tough, and everything one would expect out of a Presidential candidate. MOST of Hillary's supporters, who voted for HER in the primary against Obama, eventually voted for Obama in the Presidential election. So, how does this fit into your view of "leftist-thinkers" view of women? I don't understand.
Pat : Lastly, you are correct. We can debate the validity of experience and credentials 'til eternity. I will always (and time and events seem to confirm) think that she was not very smart, and way in over her head. But that's of little consequence now.
What illogical, however, is the incessant defense of Palin by conservatives as if she were the standard bearer for Conservative values. If she IS the standard bearer, then Conservativism is in really dire straits. She raises the criticism of the Left because she validates all of the negative (and often unfair) stereotypes of Conservatives held by non-Conservatives. Her folksy, down-home, non-intellectual, Evangelical, radically pro-life, and non-worldly sense of Foreign Policy is simply everything that Liberals dislike about Conservative Politics. She is the embodiment of all that, in its worst form. THAT'S why the Left doesn't like Palin. Whether the Right wishes to embrace reality or not, she's an Evagelical radical with little education, and a little experience in governance.
In light of her resignation, you should hope that she just goes away quietly. And i would suggest reading the VF article, if for nothing else than balance. The sad part is that it confirms what most Americans fear, that even our most trusted politicians (McCain) often succumb to the allure of victory, despite the dire consequences at stake. Although, i suppose if McCain/Palin were elected, Conservatives would be ensured of minimal taxation which, after all, is all that matters, right?
Post a Comment