printThat’s Sarah Palin. The Age of the Idiot means that, as I write, no transcript is available of Sarah Palin’s address to the Tea Party Convention. I would have preferred to speed read through the thing, but I am forced to view this. Thanks BAB readers for your solid comments on the speech in the previous post.
• Plenty babble about democracy being beautiful. The founders founded a republic, not a democracy, because they feared majorities as much as they detested monarchy.
• National security. More nonsense. The response to the pantie bomber is far more dangerous than the Mirandized man could ever be. Terrorizing the American sheeple at airports began under Sarah’s man, Bush. She repeats the asinine idea that the American military bestriding the globe, a presence that cost us a $1 trillion a year, is protecting our constitutional rights. Poppycock.
• Terrorists are trying to destroy the American Constitution, says she. Nonsense. American governments have beat them to it. To all intents and purposes, the Constitution is dead. If the lady doesn’t get it, then…
• Support for democracy and its dissemination across the world, now that’s an idea I’ve heard before. Bush branded the United States as the world’s “partner for a better life.” He also recommitted “our nation” “abroad” “to an historic, long-term goal”: seeking “the end of tyranny in our world.” If the Tea Party doesn’t reject root-and-branch this odious neoconservative formula; I’m out of there.
• “We need a strong national defense.” Middle America, or is it Meathead America, erupted in cheers when Sarah got militant. Uttered by Sarah this is code for gallivanting around the world, which Ronald Reagan, whom she invoked, did not do. He withdrew from Lebanon, remember? I’m for strong defense—of America’s borders, of her neighborhoods via local militias and well-armed citizens.
• I’m against sanctions, which Palin trumpets. We killed enough kids in Iraq through sanctions. “Trade, not democracy, is the best antidote to war. The more economically intertwined countries are, the less likely they are to go to war. Boycott Iran less and barter with it more and it’s bound to tone down its belligerence.”
• I liked the mention of Barry Goldwater, naturally. “We can be conquered by bombs, but we can also be conquered by neglect, by ignoring our Constitution.”
• TARP and bailouts. Didn’t her ticket support the Bush bailout? Isn’t she preparing to stump for McMussolini, the man who’s all for this Keynesian kookiness?
• Only twice did Palin get worked up in a real good way, and that was when she spoke of the effects of the bailouts and TARP on the states and the toll it would take on the Tenth Amendment. She should have remained a governor. She was good at that. The other instance was when she delved into energy issues—yet another of her strengths. If you read her book, you’ll know that, “when it comes to the ins-and-outs of the oil and gas industry—ownership, extraction, contracts and leases—Sarah Palin is as sharp as a tack.”
• The federales keep “making us take these steps toward insolvency.” Good. Palin did say that the federal government was printing dollars, funny-money, or worthless paper. More of that was in order.
Someone pick up from here. I’ve had enough.
Update I: GLORIOUS GIMPS. There, I’ve said it. In her advocacy, repeated in last night’s address, on behalf of “special” children, Palin is strengthening the contemptible tradition, embraced by “traditionalists,” of a politically correct tyranny, to say nothing of statism (when she ran as VP, Palin promised a department devoted to the developmentally challenged. Have I used all the right lingo?).
Palin is no different from her buddy, blond bubblehead Elizabeth Hasselbeck, in galvanizing the PC police to mete justice to mouthy individuals.
(Sarah Palin, the former Republican vice presidential hopeful, demanded on Monday that President Barack Obama fire his White House chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, over a reported expletive [“f—-ng retarded”] he is said to have uttered, CBS News reported.)
Palin is pathetic on this front. She also has it all wrong. If anything, a traditionalist ought to defend manners. I find the plain rude “f-cking” more offensive than the legitimate colloquial “retarded.”
Update II: Palin a product of affirmative action? I can’t begin to think why anyone would so assert. Not true. Palin comes from a poor, hard-working, wonderful family. She worked like a dog for everything she has, including catching and gutting fish, and eventually owning a fishing concern with an equally rugged mate, Todd. In her family, the college-goer paid for his or her education. What parent that you know (or who partakes on this blog) has done that bit of character- building for their brats?
Read her book before you declare Sarah a product of affirmative action. Her political career is also anything but. Campaigning for governor involved getting in the pick-up with Todd and the kids—and if Todd was on The Slope in a hard hat, then without the remarkable hunk—cranking up the music and traveling for hundreds of miles around Alaska to meet the folks.
The woman is fearless.
Anyone who doesn’t recognize Sarah for the remarkable lady she is a plain fool. I challenge him or her to read Sarah’s book, the worst sections of which entail her entanglement with the man Barry Goldwater despised, McMussolini; the best tell of her early familial and political years (and too little of the Love of her Life).
The press lied about the content of Going Rogue. Despite the shoddy treatment Palin received at the hands of a bunch of sleazy McCain handlers, she remained gracious and genteel. Moreover, the book is substantive. Liberals simply consider the kind of ideas Palin expresses and the way of life she likes an abomination.
Having said all that, problems remain with her stunted politics.
Update III: I’m shaking; Iran and Sudan are talking. (In reply to the odd comment hereunder, which I had hoped someone else would do on my behalf). And in reply to “Ms Palin’s advice for Mr Obama, on Sunday, to attack Iran”:
WHY on earth? Iran is no danger to the US. If it sends a missile our way, we’ll intercept it. But if the missile lands on a city (DC?), Iran will be communing with the 12th Imam in a matter of minutes. One push of the button is all it takes for the US to nuke Iran out of this hemisphere. Obama, who has been very active in bombing Afghani terrorists, their families and villagers with the aid of drones, will press the button.
Any American who says he’s afraid of Iran is lying, is chicken, or is really afraid for Israel.
I too am afraid for Israel. As I’ve said, Israel has been threatened by Iran. If the Jewish state perceives an impending danger of a nuclear attack from Iran, then the Israelis must do what it takes to defend themselves.
Since backward, poor Iran poses no danger to the US, what our somewhat disingenuous neoconservative contributors are in fact suggesting is that the US fight Israel’s battles. I cannot condone that—certainly not while pretending that Iran poses a danger to the US, when it does not.
Update IV: PALIN STATISM. Other than perpetual war and a department for the disabled, Sarah Palin is a staunch supported of some other big-government items.
Larry Auster notes that “she is a passionate advocate of Title IX, the federal statute barring ‘discrimination’ against females in education which, in Atlas Shrugged manner, [I don’t get this obfuscating reference Auster has inserted] by requiring that there be an equal number of girls’ and boys’ sports teams in each school, has forced hundreds of schools around the country to discontinue boys’ sports teams. And she supports an expansion of federal aid to education–the very essence of the big government, socialist mindset!”
Update V (Feb. 8): BACK TO IRAN.
WALLACE: How hard do you think President Obama will be to defeat in 2012?
PALIN: It depends on a few things. Say he played—and I got this from Buchanan, reading one of his columns the other day – say he played the war card. Say he decided to declare war on Iran or decided really [to] come out and do whatever he could to support Israel, which I would like him to do, but – that changes the dynamics in what we can assume is going to happen between now and three years. Because I think if the election were today I do not think Obama would be re-elected. But three years from now, things could change if—on the national security front …
WALLACE: But you’re not suggesting that he would cynically play the war card?
PALIN: I’m not suggesting that. I’m saying if he did, things would dramatically change. If he decided to toughen up and do all that he can to secure our nation and our allies, I think people would, perhaps, shift their thinking a little bit and decide, “Well, maybe he’s tougher than we think he’s—than he is today,” and there wouldn’t be as much passion to make sure that he doesn’t serve another four years.
Naturally I oppose a Palin foreign policy whereby we send our men to die for the safety of our satellite states.
One more pesky detail, for those of you itching for some war games (as you are not going to be fighting the war you promote): The US can’t afford the wars it’s in.
That said, you’d have to be an idiot to deny what Iran has been broadcasting: The Islamic Republic is cooking-up a Bomb. The French are afraid. So are the Germans.
So for America, war is out. All else is in. Get the IAEA’s ElBaradei working. He did a good job in Iraq before Bush kicked him out and flattened the place. Have the Europeans strain their nukes on Iran and create Cold-War deterrence. The peaceful options are endless.
The appeal to her son’s military service threatened to bring up a little of the lunch I had today (Caesar salad), but luckily I keep a glass of Alka-Seltzer close to hand when listening to Republicans. It really is cheaper when you buy it in bulk.
And I know she can’t help it, but that wiss-CAN-sinn esque accent could grate carrots. Why couldn’t she have had the decency to be from the South?
Thank you for your sacrifice of forty minutes of listening and at least twenty minutes mentally questioning things like “Is she really that dumb? Why did she say…” Those are the questions I would have asked out loud and annoyed my wife to no end if I had had to watch it. Your synopsis will be sufficient to keep peace in our home.
However Yahoo News did mention. “Palin suggested the movement should remain leaderless and cautioned against allowing it to be defined by any one person.” http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100207/ap_on_el_ge/us_palin_s_people
That was a commendable comment from her and them (for mentioning it); they did do the normal smear picture though.
I mean did you ever see a Republican or Independent speaker smile in a MSM article?
Palin wouldn’t have remained a governor, because she’s all about looking for her next, higher-profile job. That is why she won’t abandon the Republican Party and work to create a viable third party option. She will use her superstar status to try to make the Tea Party into a viable Republican Party force, which will of course kill the former. It has already started: http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2010/02/06/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry6181989.shtml
That Ms. Palin has ability is evident by her knowledge on subjects which interest her; that her interests are limited is evident by her resorting to boilerplate on subjects that don’t.
Her strengths are her youth, attractiveness, exuberance, she is steadfast in her religion and family, unequivocal and unapologetic on abortion – a heroic stance considering this single position has made her the target of the most vile attacks. She is simpatico with and a reflection of ordinary working people. Though she is fully formed as a cultural phenomenon she is only raw material as a political force – a force of the type to fight for a political and philosophic restoration.
If Sarah Palin is content with ‘cultural phenomenon’ she’ll accept being used by FOX as one of its sideshows. If there’s more to her she’ll dump the boilerplate and use her time and abilities – and FOX – to reflect, formulate, and present an entire credo. I’d like to hold my breath… but I won’t.
Both of the political establishment’s competing divisions are absolute enemies of America’s foundational principles. The threat posed by Obama and his neo-Marxists is obvious. The danger posed by the War Party’s neo-Fascists appears to be less understood. In the long run, the War Party’s stealth tactics pose a greater threat to what little remains of American liberty than do Obama’s parasitic idiots. Palin’s speech demonstrates that the War Party is trying to coopt the Tea Party movement by steering it into support of the mythical “war on terror” (including the use of torture and imprisonment without charges)while mouthing opposition to Washington’s fiscal insanity. Here’s hoping that the effort fails.
I have no love for Sarah Palin and it’s nice to see someone on the right take her down.
That said:
I’m wondering what the reasoning behind this is. Iranian proxies are using mushroom clouds as their flags. The Iranian regime has boasted openly about their use of that weapon, and its dissemination to the genocidal regime in Khartoum.
Palin’s speech demonstrates that the War Party is trying to coopt the Tea Party movement by steering it into support of the mythical “war on terror” (including the use of torture and imprisonment without charges)while mouthing opposition to Washington’s fiscal insanity. Here’s hoping that the effort fails.
Well said, Mr. Brady. This is why idiots like Palin and Bush are promoted as potential conservative leaders, while politicos like Paul and Buchanan are excluded. It is the same in journalism as this blog demonstrates. It is far better moderated and more intelligent than Bill O” Reiley, Mr. Hannity et.al., but inanity is now the essense of what is expected of the masses, from the masses and for the masses. Thoughtful dissent or representation will be punished not rewarded, by the duopoly that selects our leaders!!
[Email is required with posts, see Posting Policy.]
As I posted on 1/9: ” I agree that politics, a corrupting force, will corrupt the Tea Party movement (like D. B. Norton did to the “John Doe movement” in the movie “Meet John Doe”).”
“Bush in a Bra” – BRILLIANT. In fact, Palin and Obama are examples of affirmative action in politics – oh, wowwie, there is (a) pretty articulate woman // (b) handsome articulate black – giving political speeches [YAWN]! Oh, its soooo different! Really, it’s the same right/left wing pap with a little rhetorical maverick/change frosting thrown over the stale statist cake. And if a parrot could read from a teleprompter, that would be different too!
We are sliding into a dollar bubble and national default and Palin spends her time worrying about Abdulpantsabomber’s Mirandizing! This shows her callous exploitation of the whole Tea Party. Meanwhile, virtually NO Republicans propose any SPECIFIC spending CUTS beyond the rhetoric: agribusiness, prescription drugs, Dep’t of Education, Iraq war, ethanol, HUD, DEA??? Nothing but EMPTY POLTICAL RHETORIC aimed at the (eeeek eeeek) liberal democrats.
Rahm Emanuel was privately talking about running “retarded” campaign ADS, NOT about children. Would “stupid” been any different?
IM- Great points on the pluses & minuses of the Palin factor, time will tell, but it sure looks like she is setting the table for a prez run.
Off Topic- Debra Medina running for Texas Gov. & is running a Constitutional-Freedom-Liberty campaign, that is gaining traction like I have not seen since Garry Johnson in 94 in NM
If Medina gets elected & does what she has campaigned on, it would go a long way in turning back the tyranny the Feds have been inflicting on it’s Citizens
http://www.nolanchart.com/article7300.html
http://www.medinafortexas.com/
Well, the DoD does say it would be able to intercept a scud. A scud. Not ninety-nine dummies with one that’s the real thing. Not a crate delivered to one of the ports. Nor a nuke smuggled in by an Iranian proxy. And that’s not even taking North Korea into the equation.
And all of that doesn’t take into account the possibilities of biological weapons, which are getting easier to make every day. I work in Molecular Biology, and I can attest to that personally.
Technology changes, and with it the old rules change.
I happen to agree with you about much of this, but I do think that the non-negligible problem of psychopaths with apocalyptic weapons requires more than “if they nuke us, we’ll nuke them back”.
Ilana, I cannot disagree with most of your thoughts on Palin. (That is, I agree :)) I do, however, disagree with the statement that Iran is not a threat to the US. Not only Iran, but also N. Korea, and any country that can put together a simple nuke, put it on a freighter off our coast undetected (not hard), and fire it over our nation for detonation. That would be the end of our country, even if we destroy half the world afterwards.
See here:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/congress/2004_r/04-07-22emp.pdf
At least read the Abstract if you cannot stomach the rest.
Whatever her qualities, I’ll not ‘follow’.
Neocon statists think with two minds: One mind says the state is too big, can’t be trusted for anything, and has too much unconstitutional power. The other mind thinks the state is all-knowing and should trample the constitution and fleece the people into destitution in order to pay for a superstate that kills huge numbers of people with impunity.
Leave me out of it.
This attempt to co-opt the grass fire that is the awakening of a huge number of citizens will fail.
See you in Washington on Tax Day. Notice how the ‘organizers’ of that big-money shindig are trying to ignore the Tax Day protest out of existence. Those of us who refuse to be led around by the nose will be there anyway.
From an article at the Daily Bell:
We would tend to think Palin is mostly after a main chance. She wants the money and she loves the attention. She is indeed a kind of American “Evita Peron” in our opinion, a nationalist by virtue of her rhetoric … someone who will speak of American virtues, espouse limited government and freedom but at the same time support the endless expansion of the American military state with all its lawlessness and bloodshed.
Full article link:
http://www.thedailybell.com/796/Sarah-Palin-and-the-Desperation-of-the-Elites.html
A quote from Palin on Fox News Sunday:
“When the GOP strays from the planks in the platform, a peoples movement like the tea party movement is invited in to kinda, hold these politicians accountable again and remind them of their constitutional limits there on the federal level.”
Maybe only a poor word choice, but “invited” and “reminders” is rather indicative to this reader.
El-Baradei has been replaced, but not before years of obfuscations and lies about the progress of the Iranians’ nuclear efforts.
[Not according to my records, but then, Haym, I substantiate my claims.]
I have honestly have had enough of Sarah Palin and wish she would go away. I don’t think she is as clever as the FOX\GOP types would have us believe. To the contrary, I have heard nothing interesting or original from her. She seems only capable of parroting the usual Republican slogans.
Permit me to clarify about Sarah and “affirmative action” – her rise to Mayor of Wasilla and against the Murkowski machine in Alaska was on her own. McCain’s decision to annoint her was largely (if not entirely) because she was an attractive woman with conservative bonafides and to jumpstart his moribund campaign (which it did). Much of the heroine worship and media attention (pro and con) comes from this. It is not that much different than Bush # 1 choosing Clarence Thomas for the Supreme Court over more experienced “conservative” jurists. In fact, it points out the difficulty of affirmative action in that those who even APPEAR to benefit from it have a hard time of erasing that “stigma” – ask Thomas about that.
Thank you, Jack, for the interesting reading on “Evita” in the Daily Bell. It is true that Sarah is a comely collection of multiple CONTRADICTIONS such as:
(a) limited government vs. neocon empire, (b) duty to country vs. walking off the job as governor, (c) support of McCain and the bailout vs. “rogue”….
She will, for better or worse, SUCK OUT ALL THE AIR (media spotlight and grassroots support) from any other “conservative” alternative in 2012.
“She will, for better or worse, SUCK OUT ALL THE AIR (media spotlight and grassroots support) from any other “conservative” alternative in 2012.”
MP- Maybe maybe not , my overall point is we all should be working on getting Constitutional/Liberty minded candidates elected on Nov. 2 2010
If Everyone would quit worrying or focusing on every little thing Palin does, like she is some kind of cult hero, we will all be better off
The more Liberty minded peeps we can get elected in Nov. will help shift the focus to the issues, instead of individuals & their super star status
HAYM is correct, a simple nuke is easy to smuggle into the US. Take the tour to the top of the Empire state building, fire it off. Add a little virus or bacteria on this side of a city’s water supply; contaminate a bottled water plant, spread disease in envelopes through the mail. I can really get to thinking, release gasoline out of a crop duster at five thousand feet, toss out a flare, good clean bomb that will wipe out a two square mile area without an EMP. Once Pandora’s Box is opened, we can never close it again. We have tried to keep it shut for years and the number of countries that want nukes, keep getting them. In the last eight years we watched North Korea do it. I can’t distinguish between an Arab breakfast and a Jewish breakfast; nor can I make foreign policy for either of them. Iran is within striking distance of Europe. European’s know what kind of danger Iran poses. Israel is comprised of bright intelligent people. Why not respect the people that are involved and then have the courtesy to let them make the decisions.
[And don’t enable them.]
…say he played the war card.
The War Card. At the moment I can’t think of a more vile turn of phrase than that.
Regarding an Iranian suitcase bomb, rather than invading every Muslim country that posed a nuclear threat, wouldn’t it be easier to cease the flow of Muslim immigrants and travelers into the United States?
The list of sources verifying the mischievous El-Baradei are numerous. Example: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1108564.html. Just do a search.
But I understand that it can be difficult to accept that the Paulian approach to foreign policy [on this site we discuss my approach, which is certainly not the same as Paul’s] is naive and misguided, and that reality sometimes makes it is necessary to take out an opponent before he can take you out. (The libertarian religion is blinded by its own dogma.)
The Israelis preempted in 67 [this was a just, preemptive war. Here, I discuss Just War]; did it again with the Iraqi nuclear plant Osirak in 1981 (???? ??????, Mivtza Opera), and did it again with the reactor in Syria. Had Paul been Prime Minister of Israel, the country would have ceased to exist in 1967, if not earlier. And there are many Paul-like Jews in Israel. Delusion and naivete can flourish even in the line of sight of an enemy’s gun pointed at your head.
In the US, we are fortunate to be relatively safe, mistakes are not life threatening, so we can survive – for a while at least – the left’s inanities, and the right’s incompetences.
The way I see it, there is not much difference between Paul/libertarian foreign policy and Carter foreign policy. In both cases we get stepped on. In both cases, our plan for survival is a defense of the nation when the attack reaches our shores.
That plan stopped working in WWII.
Robert, I disagree with your statement that if you “release gasoline out of a crop duster at five thousand feet, toss out a flare, [you will get a] good clean bomb that will wipe out a two square mile area without an EMP”
I can’t imagine being scared of a gallon of gasoline, even aerosolized, over 2 square miles. Looking at Wikipedia I’m seeing 132 MJ energy in a US gal of gasoline. Which is equivalent to about 62 sticks of dynamite (at 2.1 MJ per stick). Then this is released in open air? Maybe I can see fires starting if the area is dry, but wiping the area out? Do you have a web page showing the calculations for this? That’s 132 MJ of energy released over 111 million square feet (or 22 billion cubic feet of air at 200 feet for the crop duster) – It seems you’d hardly be able to measure the temperature increase.
I raise this point because so often the people in charge who want to go to war overestimate [you mean overinflate–IM] the threat posed and then that information gets spread around as fact.
Here I am speaking of Iran. One can make the case that where nuclear weapons are about to be placed in the arsenal, the line between a just preemptive war and an unjust one is hard to place before the fact. After the fact it will be too late.
Thus, an Israeli preemptive destruction of Iranian nuclear facilities can be supported, since the Iranians have repeatedly promised to destroy Israel given the opportunity. [We agree.]
The case for an American action of this type can be made in light of the devastation that is possible with very limited nuclear capabilities. (And why not North Korea you may ask? That is a good point. And one day we may regret not removing their offensive capabilities. Especially since they help the Iranians. But at least they keep their wishes hidden, and their culture does not appear to be immune to the threat of mutually assured destruction, as the Iranian and Muslim belief system appear to be.)
Too much is at stake here. And regardless of what one thinks of the Iraqi war, there was some belief that this was the case then as well. Not just by Americans, but apparently by most Western and other intelligence. And if we were wrong then, that does not mean we are wrong now.
The War Party’s hyperventilation over Iran’s alleged proximity to nuclear weapons development has reached the hysterical stage. There’s not much to love about the Mullahs–but there’s nothing to be gained by lying about their capabilities or the meaning of their pronouncements, a tactic engaged in by War Party spokesmen at every opportunity. Enriching uranium to below the 20% level (which is required to fuel Iran’s US-built medical isotopes reactor and which is what the Iranians actually announced) is a long, long way from the 90% enrichment level required to produce nuclear weapons. Please see the article at http://tiny.cc/3jjyJ about the since-withdrawn AP article that provoked the latest furor.
In the race to see who can tell the most audacious lies, it’s too close to call between Obama’s idiot Marxists and the War Party’s lunatics.
@Greenhell. “I can’t imagine being scared of a gallon of gasoline” A crop duster carries a lot more than a gallon of pesticide. A Lockheed 18 Loadstar has a 5K pound capacity; however, the specific of how much gasoline is necessary to burn up all the available oxygen and cause death of all breathing things in the local area was not the intent of my comment. The comments about dropping the Nuke were equally non practical. I’m not a scientist.
The point is just because the potential for harm exists, there is “NO REASON FOR THE US TO GO TO WAR WITH IRAN.” In fact the danger I see is for us to continue an open border policy along the US and Mexico/Canada borders and rampant immigration. If Germany, France, Israel, Syria, Egypt believe that the problem warrants action, they and not us should take it. If they want help, they can ask, but we shouldn’t make the decisions for them.