She Broke the G.O.P. and Now She Owns It
That resentment is in part about race, of course. When Palin referred to Alaska as “a microcosm of America” during the 2008 campaign, it was in defiance of the statistical reality that her state’s tiny black and Hispanic populations are unrepresentative of her nation. She stood for the “real America,” she insisted, and the identity of the unreal America didn’t have to be stated explicitly for audiences to catch her drift. Her convention speech’s signature line was a deftly coded putdown of her presumably shiftless big-city opponent: “I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a community organizer, except that you have actual responsibilities.” (Funny how this wisdom has been forgotten by her supporters now that she has abandoned her own actual responsibilities in public office.)
The latest flashpoint for this kind of animus is the near-certain elevation to the Supreme Court of Sonia Sotomayor, whose Senate confirmation hearings arrive this week. Prominent Palinists were fast to demean Sotomayor as a dim-witted affirmative-action baby. Fred Barnes of The Weekly Standard, the Palinist hymnal, labeled Sotomayor “not the smartest” and suggested that Princeton awards academic honors on a curve. Karl Rove said, “I’m not really certain how intellectually strong she would be.” Those maligning the long and accomplished career of an Ivy League-educated judge do believe in affirmative-action—but only for white people like Palin, whom they boosted for vice president despite her minimal achievements and knowledge of policy, the written word or even geography.
Its voice can be found in the postings at a Web site maintained by the fans of Mark Levin, the Obama hater who is, at this writing, the No.2 best-selling hardcover nonfiction writer in America. (Glenn Beck is No.1 in paperback nonfiction.) Politico surveyed them last week. “Bottomline, do you know of any way we can remove these idiots before this country goes down the crapper?” wrote one Levin fan. “I WILL HELP!!! Should I buy a gun?” Another called for a new American revolution, promising “there will be blood.”
These are the cries of a constituency that feels disenfranchised—by the powerful and the well-educated who gamed the housing bubble, by a news media it keeps being told is hateful, by the immigrants who have taken some of their jobs, by the African-American who has ended a white monopoly on the White House. Palin is their born avatar. She puts a happy, sexy face on ugly emotions, and she can solidify her followers’ hold on a G.O.P. that has no leaders with the guts or alternative vision to stand up to them or to her.
Needless to say, these are the same people throwing tea parties against the first black president. They had nothing to say when Bush increased the national debt unnecessarily--the only president to do so during wartime. But they're full of mock outrage when Obama increases the national debt to counter the worst recession since the Depression.
No news here. Conservatives are hypocrites, and the sun rises in the east.
For more on the subject, see Good-Bye and Good Riddance to Palin and The 2008 Presidential Campaign.
"Needless to say, these are the same people throwing tea parties against the first black president."
If they're racist for protesting Obama then you're sexist for criticizing Palin and anti-semitic for criticizing Israel.
"They had nothing to say when Bush increased the national debt unnecessarily--the only president to do so during wartime. But they're full of mock outrage when Obama increases the national debt to counter the worst recession since the Depression."
And it can also be said that leftists threw fits over the Obama chimp cartoon but were silent over a vile anti-Cuban American cartoon. Partisan hypocrisy exists on both moronic sides.
Interesting. The article (and the record) has no indication of any racial subtext in Palin's campaign. They apparently feel it is sufficient just to state that something is there and provide no evidence of it.
As for Palin being an "idiot", it looks like she is smarter than Obama, because indications are that she would have vetoed the earmarks bill that Obama signed and focused the stimulus on actually helping the economy. I doubt she'd be one to try to further trash the economy with a carbon tax. Yet, the supposedly smarter Obama is doing that.
"They had nothing to say when Bush increased the national debt unnecessarily--the only president to do so during wartime"
The national debt increased during the administrations of Presidents from Obama back at least to the first Bush. Every one of them had the national debt go up, and every one of them had "wartime" during their administration.
Post a Comment