Category Archives: John McCain

‘He’s One Of Them – She’s One Of Us’

Affirmative Action, Barack Obama, Elections 2008, John McCain, Media, Sarah Palin

MSNBC’s Barack Brigade—Chris Matthews (said Obama sends a chill up his leg), Norah O’Donnell (like Campbell Brown, she too is not working with much) and wild man Keith Olbermann—attempts to speak over MSNBC analyst Pat Buchanan whenever he opens his mouth. Fortunately, the man writes up a storm. In the process, Buchanan manages to say it all about the Palin factor and human nature:

“Why did the selection of Sarah Palin cause a suspension of all standards and a near riot among a media that have been so in the tank for Barack even ‘Saturday Night Live’ has satirized the infatuation?

Because she is one of us – and he is one of them.

Barack and Michelle are affirmative action, Princeton, Columbia, Harvard Law. She is public schools and Idaho State. Barack was a Saul Alinsky social worker who rustled up food stamps. Sarah Palin kills her own food.

Michelle has a $300,000-a-year sinecure doing PR for a Chicago hospital. Todd Palin is a union steelworker who augments his income working vacations on the North Slope. Sarah has always been proud to be an American. Michelle was never proud of America – until Barack started winning.

Barack has zero experience as an executive. Sarah ran her own fishing fleet, was mayor for six years and runs the largest state in the union. She belongs to a mainstream Christian church. Barack was, for 15 years, a parishioner at Trinity United and had his daughters baptized by Pastor Jeremiah Wright, whose sermons are saturated in black power, anti-white racism and anti-Americanism.

Sarah is a rebel. Obama has been a go-along, get-along cog in the Daley Machine. She is Middle America. Barack, behind closed doors in San Francisco, mocked Middle Americans as folks left behind by the global economy who cling bitterly to their Bibles, bigotries and guns.

Barack has zero foreign policy experience. Palin runs a state that is home to anti-missile, missile and air defense bases facing the Far East, commands the Alaska National Guard and has a soldier-son heading for Iraq.

Barack, says the National Journal, has the most left-wing voting record in the Senate, besting Socialist Bernie Sanders. Palin’s stances read as though they were lifted from Reagan’s 1980 “no pale pastels” platform. And this is what this media firestorm is all about.”

[Snip]

Those who dare not speak honestly will omit the following: When you and I look at the Obamas we see accusing, blaming eyes. This, even though they are better off than we and have had opportunities we’ve not had because we’re the official “oppressors” and they’re the sanctioned “oppressed.”

Unrelated: Palin must muster a fresh speech; she keeps regurgitating her Convention address while campaigning. The lines sounded stale the first time she reused them.

Update II: Sliming Sarah (& On Feminism Vs. Individualism)

Barack Obama, Democrats, Elections 2008, Gender, Individualism Vs. Collectivism, John McCain, Journalism, Sarah Palin, War

CNN’s Campbell Brown has been a woman possessed even since Palin appeared on the political scene. As I write, she is “investigating” how Sarah Palin’s Pentecostal faith and the practices of her church may impact her political outlook. (The segment was evidently aired earlier today. It didn’t cause Blitzer such apoplexy.)

By logical extension, does Brown—who is not working with much, if you know what I mean—wish to imply that hanging around a Black Liberation Church for 20 years—a church that states its members “are an African people, and remain ‘true to our native land,’ the mother continent, the cradle of civilization”—might poison a presidential candidate’s worldview?

At the time, she and her ilk denied that being a proud, long-time member of a separatist, white-hating “Black-Value-System” community had any bearing on Barack’s worldview.

Update I (September 10): INDIVIDUALISM VS. FEMINISM. our long-time, valued reader, young Alex (see his comments below), seems quite confused lately, inundating the blog with dogmatic comments asserting Sarah Palin’s feminist bona fides.

Sarah Palin is an individualist, not a feminist. Fulfilling one’s potential doesn’t make one a feminist. Sarah Palin is not a woman’s issues liberationist; but an individualist; a doer. She sees a problem in her community and she sets about solving it. She’s an individual doing her best, as she sees it, to improve herself and the community she lives in. That seems to be her calling. She is not doing this qua woman, but as an individual. Since when is fulfilling one’s potential always a manifestation of a feminist mindset when a woman is concerned?

I suspect that the conservative prattle about sexism, which Alex has correctly derided, has confused our friend. Alex is right about the stupidity of conservatives adopting feminism rather than articulating Palin’s achievements in the language of individualism.

Does the fact that I wish to fulfill my potential as a writer make me a feminist? No; I’m an individualist through and through.

As to the gender roles in the Palin household: In the early years of their marriage, the very manly first Dude supported his wife and their children. Sarah Palin then got involved with the school—an involvement that led to a career. As her career evolved, the family organization changed. Is this feminism at work? Hardly! These are individuals interacting and completing one another at different stages of their lives.

I’d like one day to retire my brilliant husband and see him cook for me and play guitar all day. Does that make me a feminist? Au Contraire; that’s the give and take between mature, loving individuals.

Update II (Sep. 11): The Silly Sex continues to sound off over Sarah Palin. This time a Salon.com feminist evinces what in our household is known as the “V” Factor. “V” stands not for victory, but for the inability of a woman to transcend her genitals. Quite common among distaff America. Here are the histrionics of a uterus named Rebecca Traister:

“Palin’s femininity is one that is recognizable to most women: She’s the kind of broad who speaks on behalf of other broads but appears not to like them very much. The kind of woman who, as Jessica Grose at Jezebel has eloquently noted, achieves her power by doing everything modern women believed they did not have to do: presenting herself as maternal and sexual, sucking up to men, evincing an absolute lack of native ambition, instead emphasizing her luck as the recipient of strong male support and approval. It works because these stances do not upset antiquated gender norms. So when the moment comes, when tolerance for and interest in female power have been forcibly expanded by Clinton, a woman more willing to throw elbows and defy gender expectations but who falls short of the goal, Palin is there, tapped as a supposedly perfect substitute by powerful men who appreciate her charms. …”

“The pro-woman rhetoric surrounding Sarah Palin’s nomination is a grotesque bastardization of everything feminism has stood for, and in my mind, more than any of the intergenerational pro- or anti-Hillary crap that people wrung their hands over during the primaries, Palin’s candidacy and the faux-feminism in which it has been wrapped are the first development that I fear will actually imperil feminism. Because if adopted as a narrative by this nation and its women, it could not only subvert but erase the meaning of what real progress for women means, what real gender bias consists of, what real discrimination looks like.”

Update II: Sliming Sarah (& On Feminism Vs. Individualism)

Barack Obama, Democrats, Elections 2008, Gender, Individualism Vs. Collectivism, John McCain, Journalism, Sarah Palin, War

CNN’s Campbell Brown has been a woman possessed even since Palin appeared on the political scene. As I write, she is “investigating” how Sarah Palin’s Pentecostal faith and the practices of her church may impact her political outlook. (The segment was evidently aired earlier today. It didn’t cause Blitzer such apoplexy.)

By logical extension, does Brown—who is not working with much, if you know what I mean—wish to imply that hanging around a Black Liberation Church for 20 years—a church that states its members “are an African people, and remain ‘true to our native land,’ the mother continent, the cradle of civilization”—might poison a presidential candidate’s worldview?

At the time, she and her ilk denied that being a proud, long-time member of a separatist, white-hating “Black-Value-System” community had any bearing on Barack’s worldview.

Update I (September 10): INDIVIDUALISM VS. FEMINISM. our long-time, valued reader, young Alex (see his comments below), seems quite confused lately, inundating the blog with dogmatic comments asserting Sarah Palin’s feminist bona fides.

Sarah Palin is an individualist, not a feminist. Fulfilling one’s potential doesn’t make one a feminist. Sarah Palin is not a woman’s issues liberationist; but an individualist; a doer. She sees a problem in her community and she sets about solving it. She’s an individual doing her best, as she sees it, to improve herself and the community she lives in. That seems to be her calling. She is not doing this qua woman, but as an individual. Since when is fulfilling one’s potential always a manifestation of a feminist mindset when a woman is concerned?

I suspect that the conservative prattle about sexism, which Alex has correctly derided, has confused our friend. Alex is right about the stupidity of conservatives adopting feminism rather than articulating Palin’s achievements in the language of individualism.

Does the fact that I wish to fulfill my potential as a writer make me a feminist? No; I’m an individualist through and through.

As to the gender roles in the Palin household: In the early years of their marriage, the very manly first Dude supported his wife and their children. Sarah Palin then got involved with the school—an involvement that led to a career. As her career evolved, the family organization changed. Is this feminism at work? Hardly! These are individuals interacting and completing one another at different stages of their lives.

I’d like one day to retire my brilliant husband and see him cook for me and play guitar all day. Does that make me a feminist? Au Contraire; that’s the give and take between mature, loving individuals.

Update II (Sep. 11): The Silly Sex continues to sound off over Sarah Palin. This time a Salon.com feminist evinces what in our household is known as the “V” Factor. “V” stands not for victory, but for the inability of a woman to transcend her genitals. Quite common among distaff America. Here are the histrionics of a uterus named Rebecca Traister:

“Palin’s femininity is one that is recognizable to most women: She’s the kind of broad who speaks on behalf of other broads but appears not to like them very much. The kind of woman who, as Jessica Grose at Jezebel has eloquently noted, achieves her power by doing everything modern women believed they did not have to do: presenting herself as maternal and sexual, sucking up to men, evincing an absolute lack of native ambition, instead emphasizing her luck as the recipient of strong male support and approval. It works because these stances do not upset antiquated gender norms. So when the moment comes, when tolerance for and interest in female power have been forcibly expanded by Clinton, a woman more willing to throw elbows and defy gender expectations but who falls short of the goal, Palin is there, tapped as a supposedly perfect substitute by powerful men who appreciate her charms. …”

“The pro-woman rhetoric surrounding Sarah Palin’s nomination is a grotesque bastardization of everything feminism has stood for, and in my mind, more than any of the intergenerational pro- or anti-Hillary crap that people wrung their hands over during the primaries, Palin’s candidacy and the faux-feminism in which it has been wrapped are the first development that I fear will actually imperil feminism. Because if adopted as a narrative by this nation and its women, it could not only subvert but erase the meaning of what real progress for women means, what real gender bias consists of, what real discrimination looks like.”

Update III: Sensational Sarah

Barack Obama, Conservatism, Democrats, Elections 2008, John McCain, Republicans, Sarah Palin, War

An excerpt from my new WND column, “Sensational Sarah“:

“With the Liberty Bell on the big screen behind her, Sarah Palin was the Belle of the Ball at the Republican National Convention. The governor of the State of Alaska was more than picture perfect, she was pitch perfect. She’s a pit-bull with lipstick, alright—lipstick, and sharp stilettos. A potent mix of style and substance. …

Palin has what Washington harpies, Democrat and Republican, lack: authenticity, character and a personality. She’s a mensch. There are plenty of plastic people doing the Republican Party’s biding—vicious, vacuous, vain men and women who’ll embrace her and try and change her. Consider the consummate Court Courtesan, Peggy Noonan. This Washington insider, lapdog to the powerful, was caught on an open mike trashing Palin, decrying her appointment as ‘political Bullshit’ and ‘Gimmicky.’ Palin is not a member of Noonan’s claque—not yet. ‘The permanent political establishment’ Palin decried is a bipartisan plague. Let us hope she remains on the outs with “the Washington elite,” Democratic and Republican alike. …”

You can read the complete column, “Sensational Sarah,“ on WND. Comments are welcome.

Update I (September 6): An interesting analysis from Gerard Baker of the Times is “Sarah Palin: it’s go west, towards the future of conservatism.”
I must say Sarah Palin is sounding a little repetitive today as she regurgitates her Convention speech on the campaign trail. Perhaps most Americans can’t remember it by now.

Update II: “‘I think the best thing about Todd Palin, he’s a man’s man,’ family friend Kristan Cole told ABC News. ‘He knows how to fix the boiler or the toilet or the sink or whatever,’ Davis agreed. ‘It’s very common in Alaska. We don’t have the luxury of calling the Roto-Rooter guy. We just do it ourselves.'” That reminds me of someone I know. As I said in my column, “Sensational Sarah,” “Real women who’ve raised children with good men know exactly what Sarah Palin means when she speaks about her man.”

Update III (September 8): Did I read somewhere in the comments to this post that Sarah Palin was masculine or “manly”? That’s insane. Take it from a feminine female (who happens to wear spectacles too); Palin is feminine alright. Her attire is feminine; the hair classic and soft—unlike Hillary’s hardened helmet—the mannerism the direct opposite of … Ann Coulter’s. Ditto the voice—although it’s not soft, it certainly is much less shrill than your average female foghorn on Fox News. Palin is very feminine. Men who are not hip to her womanly wiles are probably not very masculine themselves.