printI defended the woman effectively in “Sensational Sarah,” “Who’s Stupid? Not Sarah,” and “The Left’s Gallery of Cretins.” I did so mainly because her detractors were so much more odious and pretentious, and because I saw in Sarah Palin something, a spark. That glimmer has fizzled. Her philosophical ignorance was unaided by the trashy family dramas, played out in public; the interviews (and no, Bristol is NOT “a bright young woman,” despite what Mother says), the shrill inflection she has developed, the propensity to talk without stop in senseless, rambling, run-off sentences.
And now, in her “uprising” against Dave Lettermen—a veritable storm in a C-cup—Palin comes off as a cross between a less intelligent Gloria Steinem and that ding dong Carrie Prejean (who too refers to herself adoringly as a “bright, intelligent young woman”; I don’t think so). That “young woman” sobriquet is enough to trigger a conniption.
Update I (June 13): Palin has good instincts and a sinewy intelligence. She is, however, too ambitious for her own good, and has shown herself to be, unlike Ron Paul, “an easily co-opted politician, [who’ll abandon] her conservative core beliefs and restrain her political persona for a ticket and candidate that [had] neither: This [was] likely the reason for the mangled, mixed massages, absent from the governor’s Alaskan record.
Palin [also] slammed a cause she had, at one time, saluted: that of the Alaskan Independence Party. That she was once affiliated with said party speaks to her visceral feeling for freedom. That she has since denounced the IP, and seems to have imbibed no political philosophy to speak of since the McCain escapade, also speaks volumes.
However, don’t write her off yet. Where her expertise lie is in energy. She knows what she’s talking about. In a better world, Palin would know her weaknesses and cultivate her strengths. This would mean assuming control of the energy portfolio in a Ron Paul administration, just before he dismantles it.
Given her own boundless energy, Plain could also take charge of the Department of Fish and Wildlife, prior to Paul’s scattering of the critters and cretins who infest the place. As the real Diana, the goddess of the hunt, a Palin subservient to a Paul would allow men to kill and hunt wild life that encroaches on—and endanger—communities (like bears, etc).
Alas, Palin will not attach herself to Paul, because she possesses few enduring, important passions and principles, other than for retards: young women and disabled children.
When Palin runs again, she will cling to the most powerful ticket, or she will be That Ticket. She will then overreach, well beyond her ken. And she will absorb and emit the requisite statism.
Update II (June 14): A couple of Palin faithful have made little of the substance of my disappointment in the woman. Let me reiterate the point people are so willing to forget (frightening that). Put it this way: Do any of her fans remember the policies promoted by the man Palin supported blindly? Anyone recall the kind of mammoth government expansion “McMussolini” advocated? You need a refresher! This woman did not confine herself to yammering about a tiny Department for Retards. Perpetual war, anyone?
I gave Palin a great deal of support. I loved the way the sissy media televised images of her speaking against the backdrop of a man feeding turkeys into the grinder—the food liberals gladly eat, but never hunt or gut. But Palin showed zero conviction; she failed to defend her natural, unperturbed pose with an honest worker in the background. She apologized for who she is—a girl who has hunted, skinned, and then cooked what she kills, and who sees nothing wrong in that great, gory, picture-perfect prop (the slaughter of turkeys).
Palin allowed herself to be “handled.” And now, she’s jumping on some bandwagon that is bringing to her side feminists of the left-liberal and “conservative” ilk—the usual cows. Puke.
Update III: There is on BAB a Sarah Palin archive. To check it out, click Sarah Palin under Categories.
David Letterman is a detestable person, a fact once more illuminated with his vulgar and sexually perverse jokes about Sarah Palin and her daughter (something he’d never do to, say, Barack Obama’s daughters). The relentless attack on Sarah Palin by the liberal media is almost enough (but not quite) to cause me to actually to like her.
I would advice Mrs. Palin to not stop to respond to every one of these stupid and petty attacks, but rather use the next few years educating herself on the issues (esp. economics) so she doesn’t have to rely on GOP hacks and goons like Newt Gingrich, John McCain, and Joseph Lieberman. Rather she should become acquainted with Dr. Ron Paul and some of the popular Austrian economists (like Tom Woods and Peter Schiff) so that should she run in 2012 she would be able to offer real economic solutions and expose Obomo’s fascialism for what it is.
Perhaps the “bright young woman” sobriquet reflects a relative assessment. The women on display may not warrant “bright” in a vacuum but amongst the flotsam of the deviant entertainment world, Lettermen and Prejean’s pansy boy attacker, they at least give off an occasional pulse/wave of light.
So right! Palin was the target of undeserved female bitchiness for obvious reasons, but she never deserved support as a conservative, neither does she deserve personal support after all the, as you say, ‘trashy family dramas’. She is just not politician-material.
Certainly I think that politicians are fair game. That Sarah Palin, a 45 year old grandmother, is quite attractive (but not on the outer edge of the “intelligence” curve) – might invite comments on her sexuality – especially from middle-aged and older guys who have fantasies about schoolteachers, librarians, or (in Letterman’s case) stewardesses. Difficult to say whether it is better to be an attractive woman and receive “slutty” jokes or to look like Madeline Albright. Of course, I would wager that the media morons would react entirely differently if some sexual “Mandingo” comment was made about our Messiah’s sexuality. However, as a father, I think the comments on her daughter servicing Spitzer and getting knocked up by A-Rod were repulsive (and I am not that prudish on sex jokes). Since the “humor” targeted a specific 14 year old girl, it was arguably more disgusting than the infamous “Nappy Headed Ho’s” comment of Don Imus. The Rutgers women had a celebrity status on their own and were adults – even if they didn’t do anything (other than having their skin color and hair) to deserve the slur. Letterman’s pathetic joking non-apology apology afterwards just compounded the situation.
It seems to me that a lot of “female bitchines,” which A. Graye referred to, above, was directed at Palin on account of her good looks and non-liberal stances. Her elder daughter, however, does not qualify as “bright” in my book.
That said, I’m fairly sick and tired of Palin’s “folksy” manner of speech, which seems increasingly fabricated to me, rather like a character in a play who specifically cultivates that type of expression. I like the fact that she’s fiscally responsible, and has done well by Alaskans, but I’m not sure she has the intellectual hardware to be a major candidate on the national scene.
Two other observations: (1) Palin’s braininess doesn’t seem much better or worse than Mitt Romney or Joe Biden or John McCain or Chris Dodd. I’ll stick with Ron Paul who combines brains with sound philosophy and a decent character. (2) Concerning Bill Maher and the other leftist “humorists” – I notice that when there is a rightwinger to skewer, it is OK to get out the old sexist jokes (for Palin), racist jokes (for Clarence Thomas), and when Larry Craig was caught in the bathroom sting – every old “fag joke” just about literally leapt out of the closet. The truth is that the leftwing elites are as bigoted (and possibly more so) than most “conservative” Republicans.
It dosen’t appear that McCain had any intention of winning the election. When Palin was introduced, the shock and awe seemed to stun the media and the Obamunists and it appeared McCain might actualy win.
Palin was made to look bad and the rest is history. I am tired of my Governor being put down. Obama cannot even speak coherantly without a telepromter and the thought that Biden is a heart beat away from the presidency is a nightmare.
Is there anyone who could survive being president and in fact threaten the status quo of the established special interests?
For America to get out of the mess its’ in will take a very wise and talented person for chief executive. True conservatives that will not buckle under extreme pressure are very rare.
Finally Ms. Grant brings up the right point. “I like the fact that she’s fiscally responsible, and has done well by Alaskans” Mr. Obama looks good on television while he and his friends are shoving the most devastating bills (Global Warming) through Congress right now. Just one of the many suicide laws and regulations this administration has given us in the last six months. But we would rather discuss, “Personalities” and who has the best language skills on bottom feeder shows like Letterman, rather than job skills like Governor. If she can do a good job of running a state, what could she do with a country even with a little mommy whine in there now and then. Maybe when the American Titanic turns perpendicular we can watch Dave and the boys, sacrifice Sarah’s great granddaughter to the fish off the fantail.
I don’t think Sarah Palin is much worst than many of her political contemporaries. She’s a quick learner, and as pugnacious as they get. Sadly for her, she’s always face an uphill struggle on account of the fact she’s just so ‘white’. She is thus deprived of the relative immunity granted to that arrogant Sotomayor woman, let alone her ‘new American Idol’ supporter. On the other hand, the ‘slutty flight attendant’ quip was bang on, which is not bad for a 45 year-old grandmother.
[I don’t think she look in the least slutty. She’s a lovely looking, modestly dressed woman in her prime.]
You make a very important observation. Sarah Palin has demonstrated very good political instincts in the past, from supporting the Alaska Independence Party and Pat Buchanan, to saying nice things about Ron Paul during the Republican primaries (but not John McCain). Her instincts, unfortunately, are marginalized by her extreme political ambition which causes her to throw her political principles out the window and ally herself with some of the worst sort of people.
It seems that she is very interested in running for president in 2012, but she has so far demonstrated absolutely no reason for someone like myself (paleo-conservative\paleo-libertarian type)to support her should she run. Aside from South Carolina governor Mark Sanford, none of the frequently mentioned names for 2012 Republican primaries is very impressive (Bobby Jindal, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Mike Huckabee, etc.), in fact most are quite repulsive.
I saw the clip and looked up what transcripts I could find and there’s nothing to convince me Letterman didn’t merely make the mistake of thinking Bristol, the adult, was at the game with Palin.
And correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t Palin accept the Republican nomination knowing full GD well that her oldest daughter Bristol had been, for all intents and purposes, knocked up? [She even celebrated the event publicly.] Thus she knowingly exposed her to infamy for her own personal career ambition. Nice.
Get over yourself Palin. Hardly anyone knew which daughter you dragged 3,000 miles across the country to make some appearances.
Way to go, updates one and two are what I want to hear about. I need to know who to support and work for. If she’s not the right choice, I need good information why. We, I assume that ‘we’ exist, have three and a half years to find an alternative to whom we have in the President’s chair now. One and a half to find someone to run for congress. I don’t see anybody but Mr. Paul and Mrs. Palin (for good or ill) on the horizon. I’ve heard a name or two of conservatives mentioned but no one that could get the Democrats to have a bad dream. From the attacks on her that continue even after the election, I assume the opposition considers her their only competition. They’re only nice to doormats, so who else makes them foam at the mouth.
I think you have said it perfectly; a tempest in a c-cup.
From FOX News:
What the heck do “the troops” have to do with David Letterman? Why can’t Republican politicians address one subject without using it as a chance to worship the US military? The US military has nothing to do with protecting David Letterman’s “right” to make an ass of himself. American soldiers in Iraq, Kosovo, and Afghanistan are not putting their lives on the line to protect free speech in America, and I wish people would stop peddling this “noble lie.” Neither Taliban tribes in Afghanistan, nor the Ba’ath Party in Iraq, nor Serbian paramilitaries in Kosovo ever threatened freedom of speech in America. In America our freedom of speech is not threatened by terrorists or insurgents in far-flung third world nations (though they may threaten life and property in a very limited manner), but by politicians, bureaucrats, and judges in Washington D.C. It wasn’t Saddam Hussein that forced McCain-Feingold upon us, or championed such causes as the “Fairness Doctrine” or “Hate Crimes” legislation. Sarah Palin needs to dump the dishonest GOP talking points and try to exhibit a little intellectual independence for once.