Sarah Palin, WWE Star
Obama knows the long odds against a right-wing populist winning the presidency, no matter how good she looks in a skirt or running clothes, brandishing a gun. He shouldn’t be too cocky, however, because the death of the center is ultimately a problem for him and the whole country. If the Palinistas seize the GOP, they probably cannot take the White House. But their brand of no-prisoners partisanship sure can tie up Congress.
via How Sarah Palin Hurts the GOP And the Country | Newsweek Politics | Newsweek.com.
A woman reads Sarah Palin's book while waiting in line for an autograph in Grand Rapids, Michigan on November 18 (Bill Pugliano/Getty)
The really beautiful thing about the culture war, from an entertainment standpoint, is that it is fundamentally irresolvable. There isn’t a concrete set of issues involved, where in theory both sides could give in a little and find middle ground, reach some sort of compromise.
That’s because there are no issues at all. At the end of this decade what we call “politics” has devolved into a kind of ongoing, brainless soap opera about dueling cultural resentments and the really cool thing about it, if you’re a TV news producer or a talk radio host, is that you can build the next day’s news cycle meme around pretty much anything at all, no matter how irrelevant — like who’s wearing a flag lapel pin and who isn’t, who spent $150K worth of campaign funds on clothes and who didn’t, who wore a t-shirt calling someone a cunt and who didn’t, and who put a picture of a former Vice Presidential candidate in jogging shorts on his magazine cover (and who didn’t).
It doesn’t matter what the argument is about. What’s important is that once the argument starts, the two sides will automatically coalesce around the various instant-cocoa talking points and scream at each other until they’re blue in the face, or until the next argument starts.
And while some of us are old enough to remember that once upon a time, these arguments always had at least some sort of ideological flavor to them, i.e. the throwdowns were at least rooted in some sort of real political issue (war, taxes, immigration, etc.) we’ve now got a whole generation that is accustomed to screaming at cultural enemies as an end in itself, for the sheer dismal fun of it. Start fighting first, figure out the reasons later.
Sarah Palin is the Empress-Queen of the screaming-for-screaming’s sake generation. The people who dismiss her book Going Rogue as the petty, vindictive meanderings of a preening paranoiac with the IQ of a celery stalk completely miss the book’s significance, because in some ways it’s really a revolutionary and innovative piece of literature.
Palin — and there’s just no way to deny this — is a supremely gifted politician. She has staked out, as her own personal political turf, the entire landscape of incoherent white American resentment. In this area she leaves even Rush Limbaugh in the dust.
The reason for that is that poor Rush is an anachronism, in the sense that his whole schtick revolves around talking about real political issues. And real political issues are boring.
Listen to Rush any day of the week and you’ll hear him playing the old-fashioned pundit game: he goes about the dreary business of picking through the policies and positions and public statements of Democrats and poking holes in them, arguing with them, attacking them with numbers and facts and pseudo-facts and non-facts and whatever else he can get his hands on, honest or not, but at least he tries. The poor guy nearly killed himself this summer trying to find enough horseshit to arm himself with against the health care bill, coming up with various fairy tales about how state health agencies used death panels to try to kill cancer patients who just wanted to live a little longer, how section 1233 is Auschwitz all over again, yada yada yada.
Rush is no Einstein, but the man does research. It may be fallacious and completely dishonest research, but he does it all the same. His battlefield is world politics and most of the time the relevant action is taking place in Washington. As good as he is at what he does, he still has to travel to the action; he himself isn’t the action.
Sarah Palin’s battlefield, on the other hand, is whatever is happening five feet in front of her face. She is building a political career around the little interpersonal wars in the immediate airspace surrounding her sawdust-filled head. And in the process she connects with pissed-off, frightened, put-upon America on a plane that’s far more elemental than the mega-ditto schtick.
Most normal people cannot connect on an emotional level with Rush’s meanderings on how Harry Reid is buying off Mary Landrieu with pork in the health care bill. They can, however, connect with stories about how top McCain strategist and Karl Rove acolyte Steve Schmidt told poor Sarah to shut her pie-hole on election day, or how her supposed allies in the McCain campaign stabbed her in the back by leaking gossip about her to reporters, how Schmidt used the word “fuck” in front of her daughter, or even with the strange tales about Schmidt ordering Sarah to consult with a nutritionist to improve her campaign endurance when she herself knew she just needed to get out in the fresh air and run (If there’s one thing Sarah Palin knows, it’s herself!).
Complaining about the assholes we interact with on a daily basis is the #1 eternal pastime of the human race. We all do it, and we get to do it every day, because the world is full of assholes. Me personally, I waste an enormous amount of time seething over people who get onto crowded subway cars with big backpacks on and/or talk in the Amtrak quiet car and/or drive 57 mph in the fast lane or, my personal favorite, walking with glacial slowness in a horizontal row four overweight tourists across on a New York City sidewalk. We all get into furious arguments at work that make us want to explode in self-righteous fury (in my office dramas I always realize I was actually the asshole a day or so later) and when we get home from work, this is usually what our loved ones hear about for at least the first hour or so.
Not health care, not financial regulatory reform, not Iraq or Afghanistan, but — assholes.
Sarah Palin is on an endless crusade against assholes. It’s all she thinks about. She doesn’t really have any political ideas, in the classic sense of the word — in fact the only thing resembling real political convictions in Going Rogue revolve around the Trans-Alaska pipeline and how awesome she thinks it is.
Most of the rest of the book just catalogs her Gump-esque rise to national stardom (not having enough self-awareness to detect the monstrous narcissistic ambition that in reality was impelling her forward all along, she labors in the book to describe her various career leaps as lucky accidents or mystical acts of Providence) and the seemingly endless parade of meanies bent on tripping her up along the way. The book is really about her battles with these people, how much they did and do suck, and how difficult and inherently unfair life is for a decent hardworking American gal who just wants to live life, serve God, and try to be president without being bothered all the time.
Viewed through the prism of this particular brand of insanity (Palinsanity? does that work?), Katie Couric’s notorious Palin interview last year really was a cheap shot. After all, Katie was trying to nail Palin — which is mean! Who among us can’t sympathize with the experience of being sandbagged by some slick professional rival who catches you in a moment of weakness and, instead of lending a helping hand, drives a fireplace poker through your eye?
You’d have to be thinking about the broader picture, about the fact that the president of the United States ought not to be a drooling yahoo whose two favorite Supreme Court cases are Roe v. Wade and Roe v. Wade and who thinks living near Canada counts as foreign policy experience, to not see what an asshole Katie Couric was being. And that other reality, the reality where one worries about a national political candidate having the brains of an innertube, is less immediate than the five-foot airspace radius around the Palin bobblehead. It’s harder for the average person to connect with, I guess.
Palin’s extraordinary ability to inspire major national controversies around these injustices done to her immediate person is going to guarantee her some kind of major role in American politics for the next dozen years. In this regard she is going to have a willing ally in her supposed keen enemy, the mainstream media, which likewise loves nothing more than a political narrative that has nothing to do with politics. It’ll be a virtually endless war over nonsense like this latest Newsweek cover, which hilariously is being seen as one or the other of a) a liberal media plot or b) a sexist assault on a prominent female politician by the male-dominated media world when in fact, as all of us in this dying print media business know, the magazine’s motive was grounded entirely in the nihilistic desperation to sell newsstand copies.
And Sarah Palin sells copies. She is the country’s first WWE politician — a cartoon combatant who inspires stadiums full of frustrated middle American followers who will cheer for her against whichever villain they trot out, be it Newsweek, Barack Obama, Katie Couric, Steve Schmidt, the Mad Russian, Randy Orton or whoever. Her followers will not know that she is the perfect patsy for our system, designed as it is to channel popular anger in any direction but a useful one, and to keep the public tied up endlessly in pointless media melees over meaningless nonsense (melees of the sort that develop organically around Palin everywhere she goes). Like George W. Bush, even Palin herself doesn’t know this, another reason she’s such a perfect political tool.
With Going Rogue, the 2012 reality show has already begun. As brainless political theater, she can’t be topped. It’s just too bad for conservatives that she happens to be unsustainably divisive and, as Newsweek points out, a really good bet to permanently marginalize the Republican party by reducing it to a pissed-off, semi-coherent mob that repulses independent voters on a visceral level. To paraphrase John Doman’s Deputy Ops Rawls character from The Wire, she’s “brilliant — fuckin’ shame it’s gonna end our careers, but still.”
late p.s. Someone forwarded this highly amusing video of a group of Palin fans queuing up for a book signing. To quote the Russian expression, Ostavim bez commentarii (We leave without commentary).
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
Palinsanity is a great term!
It is, however, getting to the point where even a good article on the wasted media attention bestowed upon this idiot comes across as just another useless mention of her name. We should all just let her do her silly thing and ignore her.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by meesha v, greychampion. greychampion said: newStream ©: Sarah Palin, WWE Star http://tinyurl.com/yaa5yyg [...]
[...] And while some of us are old enough to remember that once upon a time, these arguments always had at least some sort of ideological flavor to them, i.e. the arguments were at least rooted in some sort of real political issue (war, taxes, immigration, etc.) we’ve now got a whole generation that is accustomed to screaming at cultural enemies as an end in itself, for the sheer dismal fun of it. Start fighting first, figure out the reasons later. via trueslant.com [...]
Matt,
SuperFreakonomics has an all-too-short section blaming the rise in crime in the 60’s on watching TV. I blame Sarah Palin on TV induced solipsism. When TV turns all our social interactions into one large echo chamber, a politician who can only think of herself is the epitome of the connected individual. When Sarah hijacks the national media with her own petty problems, TV is the co-dependent that enables our addiction.
Fight Palinsanity, turn off your TV!
Throw Away Your Television,
In response to another comment. See in context »Red Hot Chili Peppers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ptj2qKIswLw
Actually, the first WWE politician was quite literally Jesse Ventura, and he tapped into the same vacuous populist rage that Palin is frothing right now. Unlike Palin, however, Ventura can now carry on a mildly salient conversation that might feature an intermittent fact, a wisp of perception, a windblown insight. Jesse proved that while being governor, one can actually learn a thing or two.
Palin seems well on her way to disproving this theory.
Actually, the first WWE politician was quite literally Jesse Ventura, and he tapped into the same vacuous populist rage that Palin is frothing right now. Unlike Palin, however, Ventura can now carry on a mildly salient conversation that might feature an intermittent fact, a patina of perception, a windblown insight. Jesse proved that while being governor, one can actually learn a thing or two.
Palin seems well on her way to disproving this theory.
Her brilliance is short lived, probably because she’s a quitter. Again.
Angry Wingnuts Boo Sarah Palin, Call Her “Quitter”, Chant “Sign Our Books”-Political Carnival http://tinyurl.com/yeha83n
How quickly the zombies flip.
[...] from Taibbi Jump to Comments Comedy gold and sharp political insight in one: And Sarah Palin sells copies. She is the country’s first WWE politician — a cartoon combatant [...]
This is great. Well said.
Palin is America’s pettiness superstar.
Also, people walk like they drive. Those lumbering tourists are most assuredly the same people that are cruising at 45 in the 60 zone, stopping without warning, and making abrupt turns at right angles because they just want to see What’s Over There.
They drive & walk like that because they do not understand that they are not the center of the universe. The entire culture and our living arrangements do nothing but reinforce that notion.
In response to another comment. See in context »Pretty much captures my views too. What I find amazing is that her self-absorption touches other people on such a visceral level, but it does. I know educated, intelligent people who “like her” – whatever that means. It’s clear from her scatterbrained life trajectory that she’s managed to fail upward on a constant basis at an alarming rate, but what I can’t for the life of me put my finger on is what that quality is that people see in her that allows this parade of upward failure to go on.
The guy who mentioned TV above is on to something. Not that it’s going to happen, but all of America turning off its damn TVs and radios would solve the vast majority of this. I’ts hard to imagine a public not inured to raging and constant reality TV drama and 24 hour news drama actually going for someone like Palin. Still, the likelihood of TVs turning off is surpassed by the likelihood of teenagers not screwing without condoms or the likelihood of kids enjoying broccoli, so there’s nothing to be done. Living outside the bubble is nice, but peeking back inside is terrifying in large part because no one inside the bubble knows it’s a bubble.
“..but peeking back inside is terrifying in large part because no one inside the bubble knows it’s a bubble.”
Great comment, and I fully agree with you. When one turns on the obviously propagandistic NPR, it’s mostly Sarah Palin. When one turns on that pseudo-”progressive” misdirection known as “Airhead American” it is Sarah Palin, any time, ALL THE TIME!
CNN and Foxtard I never listen to — any clown, draft dodger or half-wit who listens to them has already announced themselves as substandard.
But why? Because we have no real news anymore, as you well know, and anyone else – who, like myself, has at least several neurons to rub together (that would exclude Palin and company).
In response to another comment. See in context »The commercialization of both news media and politics has now reached a point where no one really knows where it will end up, but the road signs all point to somewhere bad. It’s H.L. Mencken’s populism nightmare about how “one day the people will elect a complete moron” and then some, our having fulfilled that particular prophecy eight years ago we’re now into grooming the even less qualified and intelligent for the highest office.
Or, the Republicans are anyway. I think your last section is the right assumption, this will mostly just destroy the Republican party, possibly forever, more than our entire political system. After all, in the midst of this trend toward elevating the sensational and stupid, we did just elect a supremely qualified and highly educated candidate to the highest office who, whatever his flaws, seems to be an adult with if anything an overcommitment to wonkiness over vapid and demagoguery-laced rabble rousing.
Back to the first point however, no one really knew what would happen when mass media, money, and the complete breakdown of the old political and journalism establishments would all collide, and we’re only now really seeing the results of the wreck. Some of it is like the Bermuda Triangle, with entire flagships simply vanishing overnight, other parts of it are like some Demolition Derby with wrecks lying all around as a few survivors gun their engines to try to survive the next collision– the WWF was good also, yes it’s like that too.
Where it’s going next, no one really knows. Is my point. As the old punchline that Kurt Vonnegut quoted somewhere goes: “Hold onto your hats, we could end up miles from here.”
Remember: you can’t spell “complaint” without p-a-l-i-n….
We shouldn’t have to turn off our TVs. They are our airwaves and we should be able to vote on how we want them used. Just like we should be able to vote on how we distribute our wealth in the economy.
[...] Palin’s lack of self awareness is like the binding agent for all her crazy. Matt Taibbi hits it: Most of the rest of the book just catalogs her Gump-esque rise to national stardom (not [...]
The Taibbi drills down again to a painful and ashamed reality… excellent piece.
To quote Omar from The Wire, “Fo’ Sho”
So, in a nutshell you’re calling Palin the Paris Hilton of politics
Matt –
I love your ability to describe the big picture. This sums her (and our society) up completely (and terrifyingly).
. . .the world is full of assholes.
that’s it, screw Hobbs, now I get it.
Thanks.
Great piece. People who can write will always have a job, with or without newsprint.
Palin reminds me of a more ditzy version of Ross Perot; folksy, with the ability to turn a phrase but not much else.
(Palinsanity? does that work?)
Yes yes yes, that works just fine.
Unfortunately you’re wrong about one thing. Rush does make a large number of Yahoos care at an emotional level about how Harry Reid is buying off Mary Landrieu with pork in the health care bill. The ones who are smart enough to do Internet research use Rush and O’Reilly as a gateway to find and print out partisan screeds from respectable-looking web pages about the subjects, and then hand them to me. This is a minority of his listeners. The ones who aren’t smart enough to operate a printer, however, walk away from his show with a deep emotional conviction that “Rush was just sayin’ the other day about how that Reid guy did something really bad and unconstitutional, and so that’s just another example of how the Democrats hate America.” The emotional conviction cannot be erased by any amount of argument. They just can’t back it up with references.
On the other hand, you’re right that Sarah Palin achieves the same effect while skipping the tedious middle step of assembling an actual argument, facts or no. Much faster and more efficient that way.
), Katie Couric’s notorious Palin interview last year really was a cheap shot. After all, Katie was trying to nail Palin — which is mean!
_____________________________
Ok, you lost me HERE.
How is it MEAN? PALIN WAS VYING FOR THE SPOT OF VP of the USA???
Couric asked her WHAT DO YOU READ. Mrs. Palin answered the question for Sean and badly…she said she absorbs NEWSMAX.
Mrs. Palin sites that Couric ANNOYED her…well, welcome to the real spotlight, Mrs. Palin. What would you do if someone ANNOYED you at middle eastern peace talks?
(http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/facetious)
In response to another comment. See in context »Thanks! I typed thr first ‘F’ then saw your entry!
In response to another comment. See in context »Naahhh. Couric knew she was dealing with an imbecile. By any standard she was an asshole by pressing the question. Relentlessly.
By the same token, as you say, she was a VP candidate. Is it the journalist’s job to deliberately expose the obvious flaws of the person being interviewed? If so, most of them fail at the job.
In response to another comment. See in context »“brains of an innertube..” Now that’s one great line. Thought-provoking riff. Really engaging.
Brilliant insight as usual Matt- and your piece itself slyly reinforces you thesis. Just belly up to the keyboard and let ‘er rip- no issues, no research, no muss no fuss… the future of journalism is secure. You’re now mainstream- congratulations. ;>)
I doubt Taibbi will ever be considered “mainstream” after this piece:
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/29127316/the_great_american_bubble_machine
great insight about Palin, Matt. Write on with your bad self!
In response to another comment. See in context »With the lackluster intelligence of W and now Palin, it might be time to call Ray Bradbury and find out if someone stepped off the path in real life. And/or the Mayans were on the mark.
I just ignore her and wish intelligent folks like M. Taibbi did the same. Matter of fact, no matter which news site I visit, I stick a ‘post-it’ on her image — only read this article because I respect Matt’s views. Well written, as always.
Very funny lines: “saw-dust filled head”, “pie-hole.” Love you.
Taibbi is exceptionally adroit at dissecting and analyzing the issues at hand. We need more writers like Tabbi to help crowd out the fluff piece writers of today, who are really enough to make you sick. These writers include those
who are so wedded to the establishment that they will seldom rock the boat, or they are engaged in writing about the silly nonsense that Taibbi does a good job of mocking in this post/article. Keep up the good work Matt. We need you more than many people realize.
[...] Matt Taibbi deconstructs Sarah Palin: [...]
Sarah has elevated ignorant to the level of performance art. She channels ‘dolt rage’ in an endless media-assisted loop. She is the walking, talking metaphor for the Republican Party.
Fortunately for us, her Gump-esque rise, as Mr. Taibbi puts it, foretells a spectacular Macbeth-like fall, or more aptly McNugget-like fall. Think about it: the secessionist husband, Levi, troopergate, Wasilla meth capital of Alaska. Shakespeare would give his left ball for this kind of material. Buckle your seatbelts, kids, this is gonna be some kind of ride!
Brilliant analysis of Palin syndrome spreading across the country faster than H1N1
God, you nailed Palin. Re: “my personal favorite, walking with glacial slowness in a horizontal row four overweight tourists across on a New York City sidewalk”
As one who works in Manhattan, I hate that too. But the worst is those who get on a subway car and then park themselves in the doorway even though they’re not getting off at any stop soon, thus impeding the flow of traffic on and off the car.
Wow! I just got my copy of Sarah’s book in the mail! Awesome. I was thinking of holding it in front of me while I walked down Market Street at high noon – it would be priceless to watch the heads of every other San Franciscan explode a split second after they glanced at what I was holding in front of me. Ah, the joys!
I’d like even more to explain to all of you why it is that I and so many millions more absolutely adore this woman – but, well, it just strikes me as a tad useless to try that on a group that describes her as having the ‘brains of an innertube’. And, yes, I DO realize that in supporting her, my own intelligence is rated at the same level – not helped by my stubbornness in refusing to thank someone for revealing what a brain dead clueless moron I am for supporting Palin.
Okay. But I would like to respectfully point out something. It seems a small thing but it isn’t – to the contrary, it was a ground shaking event. Hoffman vs. Scozzafava. It was ground shaking because it was a warning from people like me to the political world that caring only for election and not for principles just isn’t as much fun as it used to be. And since you asked, yes, we DID hear the RNC laughing its head off at us because we were so disorganized, not to mention the fact that our candidate was as exciting as watching cement dry. Added to that, we started late and to top it off, the RNC sunk nearly a million in a candidate who was the human equivalent of a subprime mortgage (with the same return). And yet for all that we damned near got the dull-as-cement politico elected.
It is no small thing that the greatest jump in Hoffman’s campaign (and the simultaneous death knell of Scozzafava’s) was when Palin endorsed Hoffman. Within 48 hours of her endorsement (and on Facebook, no less!) his campaign exploded with contributions while Scozzafava’s plummeted down the toilet like a rat with a rock around its neck. Folks – the ability of a politician to cause a shift of such power for a candidate she endorses and to wreck such damage on one she doesn’t is not something to be laughed at. I assure you Steele isn’t getting the giggles – and next November a lot of other RINO’s aren’t going to be any more amused. Trust me, folks. Laugh at her all you will – but Sarah is a force and we’re following her.
Now, please excuse me while I go read Palin’s book and contribute to her PAC.
Good job Carolyn, you managed to prove everything that any thinking person knows about Palin’s supporters – you are clueless drones who don’t even know what it is you’re supporting.
In response to another comment. See in context »“Hoffman vs. Scozzafava…was ground shaking because it was a warning from people like me to the political world that caring only for election and not for principles just isn’t as much fun as it used to be.”
____________
That’s progress, I suppose. Now if you would only find it a bit less earth-shattering, and work on making it unacceptable, the American political climate would really start to improve.
Of course, were your party to begin to shift its primary focus to principles like honesty and competence, and not solely on winning, Sarah Palin would fade faster than a Polaroid lying in Sen. McCain’s Arizona back yard. But that shouldn’t be a problem, because as we know, she’s already proven that she’s more than willing to sacrifice her career for the good of the people. Isn’t that right, Carolyn?
In response to another comment. See in context »Umm you do realize that Hoffman lost and that a district that had been solidly Republican for a century voted for the Democrat instead right?
In response to another comment. See in context »So you are proud of losing a seat that has been GOP since Abe Lincoln was alive.
How are you going to change anything to your views and ways, with an ever-shrinking minority?
Has any Club for Growth primary challenger every actually won a general election?
On the other hand, you could just be a parody troll…
In response to another comment. See in context »Nice job Carolyn. Neither Matt nor most anyone else in the media, right or left, seem to get Palin. Like Reagan, she’s just not really smart enough to even consider seriously. What they prefer is someone like Obama, with his Harvard law degree and Marxist philosophy–at least it is sophisticated, and that seems to be what they are all about. Same could be said of many of the Republican pundits–we need someone who is nuanced and sophisticated on the issues. They simply cannot grasp that that attitude is what got us in the mess we are in. What we need is someone with a littly common sense and moral sensibilities–perhaps someone like Gov. Palin!!
In response to another comment. See in context »I hope Palin stays in currency and even bolsters her base. Because she might win the nomination. That would be a Godsend for progressives and even for truly compassionate Christians. It’s odd that her supporters view her as strong; what she does best and incessantly is play the victim. And it’s not her ignorance or Beckesque platitudes that bother me most. It’s her dishonesty and vindictiveness. Those blinding flaws will be her doom.
In response to another comment. See in context »Say, carolyn, if you choose not to remain ignorant for the remainder of your life you might wish to actually read a book covering the important issues of our time, namely Nomi Prins’ “It Talkes a Pillage”.
Of course, it will involve a lengthening of your usual attention span…..
In response to another comment. See in context »Carolyn,
In response to another comment. See in context »Sarah Palin is to conservative politics as Taylor Swift is to country music. They’re both pretty to look at, they have the appropriate twang, but both Hank Williams and William F Buckley jr are rolling over in their graves.
Mr. Taibbi, I doff my cap to you once again: calling out the wingnut comments = brilliant. They illustrate the lunacy that quickly descends when people decide they aren’t going to pay attention to any political nuances and just “root for their team” better than even your commentary could (although “The Great Derangement” is, as I’m constantly telling people, essential reading).
So instead of debate about policies, we get people bragging about walking down the street with a Palin book, as if this constituted a political act. You’re a very funny guy, Matt, but point taken: you’re not as funny as these people.
In response to another comment. See in context »Carolyn:
You and others can back Sarah Palin all day long, but I hope you also recognize (but probably will not) that her interference (and that of other out-of-staters) in NY-23 is the primary reason why Scazzofava was able to siphon off enough votes from Hoffman to enable both of them to lose, and propel the district’s first Democrat since the Grant Administration into Congress.
Thus, if this sort of thing is Palin’s notion of a grand strategy to propel the GOP forward, she’s going to take the lot of you straight off a cliff.
In response to another comment. See in context »[...] Matthews should have turned to Matt Taibbi: [...]
Brains of an innertube…cartoon combatant…unsustainably divisive…Empress-Queen of the screaming-for-screaming’s sake generation…her battlefield is whatever is happening five feet in front of her face…on an endless crusade against assholes…not having enough self-awareness to detect the monstrous narcissistic ambition that in reality was impelling her forward all along…a decent hardworking American gal who just wants to live life, serve God, and try to be president without being bothered all the time…that cements it.
Sarah Palin: the Roseanne Barr of American politics.
Interesting piece.
First, I want to congratulate you. You’re the first liberal media member I’ve seen who has actually acknowledged that a group of Obama supporters did in fact wear t shirts calling a woman a cunt, in public and in front of her daughter no less. Now, does the fate of the Republic hand on such issues? No.
Still, it was interesting to see the media pretend it never happened, straight out of some Ministry of Truth from Oceania. Somehow, if a group of McCain supporters had worn a t shirt to an Obama event calling him a n—-r, I have a feeling we would have heard about. Non-stop, as the lead story on every news cast and the lead story in every Newspaper. McCain would have been forced to resign, end his campaign and turned into a national villain.
Not one media person ever asked Obama or Biden one question about those shirts. They never issued one statement. Even Biden, who always brags about writing the Violence Against Women Act. Biden, BTW, also never piped up when Obama supporter Sandra Bernhard was calling for someone to be gang-raped in NYC by a bunch of brothers. I guess degrading and threatening women is ok by him, as long as it’s the right type of woman.
I like your WWE comparison. Particularly apt since Linda McMahon may well be the next Senator from CT. Then the two of them could team up. Maybe Sarah should start using Rick Derringer’s “Real American” as her entrance music, like Hogan did. “What you gonna do brother, when the Sarah-mania comes for you?”
Although, I always thought Obama was a WWE type candidate as well. He always reminded me of The Rock. I kept waiting for him to open his rallies with “Finally, Ba-Rack has returned to Iowa to be with the millions…and millions of Ba-Rack’s fans”.
Obama and Palin are actually very similar similar on a number of levels, shocking as that might be for you to hear. Both are more popular and gained nootoriety for their charisma, persona and story more than for their policies or legislative backgrounds.
Both are outsiders, from way outside the US. Obama from Hawaii and Indonesia and Palin from Alaska. Both thousands of miles away from the DC-NY corridor US power. From places that relaly have played no role in US politics ever. Neither were groomed for politics or played any role in it growing up. Neither came from privilege(cf W Bush, Gore, Romney, Kennedy, McCain, Bush 41, etc…) Obama has a secretary named Palin and Palin has a secretary named Obama. Obama’s father herded goats, Palin’s father hunted moose. Both elicit an intense visceral dislike from the other side that really is hard to understand. Both played HS Basketball and athletics and sports are a part of their image. Palin ran track in HS. Obama smoked crack in HS. Both admit to smoking pot. Both married a spouse who is bigger and more macho/manly and muscular than they are, and who could probably beat them in a fight.
Both are the 1st real natl figures in each party from the post baby-boom generation, with no issues over Vietnam, the 60s, the draft, WW2 or everything else that dominated the scene for so long.
No one would ever call either of them a policy wonk like a Bill Clinton/Al Gore was or a Jack Kemp/Newt Gingrich on the GOP side. No one would say they had a wealth of legislative experience like a McCain, Kerry or Dole. They don’t really have any new or innovative ideas. They don’t have any new or guiding policy agenda like the New Deal, the Great Society, even Reagan’s set of overarching conservative themes that he had.(Well, I guess you could say that Palin’s ideas are pretty much the same as his, sort of like how Lenny Kravitz’s whole career was based on ripping off Hendrix). Palin is basically trying to be the best Reagan tribute band out there
Both made their mark through a stemwinder of a speech at a convention on natl tv that had more to do with optics, pizzazz and style than substance. Through appearances and speeches that exude personality and charisma. Both are young and attractive. Both are really like no other politicians we’ve seen before. Both made history. Both came from obscurity and overcame long odds. Neither of them is from political royalty like the Kennedy or Bush(or Romney or Gore)families. Neither is there because their spouse had a position of power(Clinton, Elizabeth Dole). They’re both their own man(or woman), soley responsible for their achievements. They both created their own personas and didn’t trade on nepotism or favors or the usual political rigamorale. Both have a huge ego and climbed the ladder very quickly.
If the economy hadn’t collapsed in September/October 2008 Palin would be where Obama is now and he’d be where she is. I doubt he’d have remained in the Senate if he lost. He clearly never really cared about it, it was just a stepping stone to bigger things.
Neither of then had any real experience like the 2 terms as Gov of CA Reagan had, the 10 yrs as Gov of AR that Clinton had, the 8 yrs as VP, head of CIA, UN Amb, Amb to China, RNC Chair that Bush 41 even had. Even the 20+ yrs in the Senate and military service that McCain, Kerry, Dole all ahd.
You write of her Gump-esque rise to stardom and her monstrous and narcissistic ambition. . Perhaps, but are you saying that doesn’t remind you of anyone else? Scrawny guy, big ears.
I mean, certainly a guy who goes from State Senator to a keynote spot at the DNC to Senator to appearing on Oprah to hawk his best-selling book to media messiah to running for President in 2 years time doesn’t have any monstrous ambition/ No ego there, no sir.
Nothing Gump-esque about that DNC Speech, about that State Senate opponent being DQed because of a fluke techincality incolving ballots, about his career being launched in Hyde Park hero Bill Ayers’s living room, about Jack Ryan imploding over that sex scandal, about Oprah annointing him The One, about the Wright tapes not coming out until well after IA and NH, about all those moment where Obama just happened to be in the right place at the right time, the center of attention.
Certainly a guy who made that HOPE picture of his face an iconic image, who attended rallies with millions chanting O-Ba-Ma! O-Ba-Ma! over and over again(surprised he didn’t stop in Nuremberg when we went to Germany instead of Berlin), who offered himself up as the vessel of change, who wrote in his book “people project themselves on to me” and he welcomes that, who said that his election alone was a sign of the change the country had made, who flies out at the last minute so he can soak in the personal glory for bringing the Olympics to his hometown, who established that faux Obama seal, who gives an outdoor convention speech with a Greek Columns backdrop as if he was Pericles doesn’t show any signs of narcissism. Nothing to see, just move along.
The truth is that both of them really gained their fame for who they are, not what they are. Obama because of his racial background and personal story and Palin because of her sexual background(and yes, lets face it, because most of the older guys who run politics and the media have probably had very, very naughty thoughts about her, those glasses, and letting that long chestnut mane down)and personal story. Obama would have gotten nowhere if he was just your usual white liberal from Illinois. Ask Dick Durbin and Paul Simon how that worked out for them. Nor would Palin if she was your avg middle aged white guy.
Both connect with their supporters more on an emotional and gut level than a policy level. People don’t support Obama because of his brilliant ideas on the tax code or his studious analysis of Sarbanes-Oxley. Or his incredible insights into Afghanistan or terrorism. Or his heroic miltary service. They support him because of who he is, what he represents, what his story represents, because he represents them, their generation, their stories, their background, etc… Because he connects and resonates with them.
Just as for a bunch of other people(albeit at this point probably less than the Obama group)Sarah Palin represents them, their background, their story. Because she connects and resonates with them.
Now, neither of those two groups on their own is enough to win. Obama needed the group in the middle who was totally fed up with Bush and the GOP and for whom the financial meltdown and market crash was the last straw. After less than a year, they seem to be showing some reservations about him. If they get fed up with him and the dems and the debt, the deficit and high unemployment(as they did with Carter), they’ll shift back over to the other side(the GOP) and the Palin group will have enough to win in 2012. That’s how politics works.
And Palin stoking white resentment? Maybe. Are you honestly saying though that Obama wasn’t any vessel for black resentment? For finally being able to get back at the man, at Whitey as Homey the Clown would say. There was no black pride when it came to Obama?
Him going to SC in a must win spot and doing his best Denzel/Brother Malcolm impression and telling the overwhelmingly black crowds that “You’ve been hoodiwnked! You’ve been bamboozled!” and then catching himself and laughing nervously when he realized what he was doing in a stae where he need huge black turnout and support was just a coincidence. No racial element there. No stoking the fires. Lets see what happens if Palin starts quoting the white version of Malcolm X to redneck audiences in Dixie. I doubt it will be glossed over like Obama’s Malcolm X act was.
For those who think he didn’t know what he was doing, read Dreams From My Father. Malcolm X wsa a huge influence on young Barry Obama nd he knows all about him. He’s seen the movie. He knows the hoodwinked/bamboozled line.
And once upon a time, as if this personal thing new? Do you remember the dems going after Bush for his natl guard thing, his DUI, everything having to do with Bill Clinton, Al Gore and Love Canal and the Internet and sighing, Edwards’ haircut(which the Obama team now admits they spread), Bush41 and the supermarket scanner, etc… Politics has been focused on these extra-curricular things for years.
As for the Couric interview, yes there’s sour grapes. Just like Obama sent his team after FOX News, just like he goes after Glenn Beck, just like his people spread talking points about Limbaugh and Hannity. Obama has a thin skin as well, another thing they share in common.
However, Palin does have a legitimate point when you consider that they filmed hours of footage. (Why Palin or the GOP/McCain team would ever agree to hours of footage with someone so far up Obama’s ass her bob is touching his colon is beyond me, but so be it. Obama and the dems would never agree to hours of footage of Obama and Hannity or Beck, for example. And certainly not to leave them full editorial control)
Does anyone honestly believe that if Obama or Biden had said a “what do you read” comment or some of the other things she said that The Perky One would have ever aired the footage? Hell No. It would have stayed on the cutting room floor and no one would have ever known. They’d have aired other footage.
She does have a point when you consider that Couric didn’t ask Biden 1 question about his multiple instances of plagiarism. About his blatnt lying over his academic record. About his cheating in Law School and almost being expelled. Nothing about any of that.
When you read the transcript Couric asked her close to 100 questions. 95 of them have perfectly fine answers. 2 or 3 are bad answers and the other 2 or 3 are so-so. If it was Obama or Biden the entire story would have consiste dof the 95 good answers and no one would ever have seen the bad answers. In baseball a 300 avg gets you to the hall of fame. I’d say a 950 avg with a hostile interviewer like Couric is ok.
She does have a point when she points out Couric asked her 12 times about abortion and the morning after pill. When Couric brought up these absurd hypotheticals like 12 yr old girls being raped by their father. When she kept badgering her endlessly about it. Liberals always bring up the 12 yr old raped by her father. That happens about as often as Couric finishing out of last place in the ratings, which is to say virtually never.
Or what about when Biden told Katie how FDR went on TV to reassure them about the Stock Crash. Never mind FDR wasn’t President until 4 yrs after the crash or that TV wasn’t invented and in the US until 10 yrs after the crash, let alone most Americans having one in their homes which didn’t happen until the 59s. But The Perky One never reaired that one a thousand times, nor did the media or SNL make a big deal over it. It also shows how dumb Couric herself is. If she had realiized Biden’s blunder she never would have aired it. She believed him 100%. Nice to know a major news anchor is so misinformed. Maybe she should go on Jeopardy like Wolf Blitzer.
Or how CBS and Katie Couric blatantly lied on their transcript in regards to her answers. For example, how she clearly tells Couric “I’m Ill(as in sick) about the position America is in” in regards to the economy and bailout. But Couric and CBS say on their transcript that she said “I’m ALL about the position that America is in” which is totally nonsensical. No apology or correction from Couric. None.
Here’s the sum total of her questions to Joe Biden on abortion:
Katie Couric: Why do you think Roe v. Wade was a good decision?
That’s it. No, “Sen, if a 30 yr old woman is perfectly healthy and decides to kill her baby because she simply doesn’t want the hassle, why is that a good thing?” “Do you agree with that?” “Should that be constitutional?” No 12 different questions or badgering on abortion for Biden.
Or take this line from her:
“Polls show that Sen. McCain and Sarah Palin are making inroads among white female voters who are less educated,”
Sure, Katie, because all those blacks that voted for Obama just finished their PhD dissertations. All those 18-29 yr olds just back from Cambridge. But she gets the meme out there.
I wonder when Katie will report on Biden’s 32% approval rating among Independents in the latest Gallup poll? 9 points lower than Palin’s 41%, as amazing as that sounds.
Whatever. The Couric interview had no impatc on the election, on polls. The economy and the market crash decided it(along with Bush’s huge unpopularity, the Iraq War, the huge Obama spending and ad edge and a few other things).
I hope Katie is happy in dead last place 4 yrs running, with the worst ratings in tv news history. I only wish Sarah had mentioned that to Oprah. “I actually feel sorry for her now, Oprah. She has the lowest ratings in the history of TV News. It must be tough for her”
As for Newsweek, why can’t it be all 3? A liberal plot, sexist, AND a desire to sell magazines. The options aren’t mutually exclusive. Of course it’s sexist.(Or maybe Newsweek will put Gov Paterson’s(NY) shoot that he did for Runner’s World on the cover soon. I mean, if it’s not sexist we should be expecting to see his any time now) And Newsweek is clearly liberal. They themselves admit it. No point in hiding it. I just hope Sarah takes solace in the fact that Newsweek is doing so badly and bleeding so many subscribers that they need to use her to boost their newsstand sales and actually try and make some money. BTW, I believe Newsweek recent laid off a good amount pf people. I wonder if they’ll get any of the money from the sales of the Palin cover?
As for repulsing Independent voters, Obama and Biden and the dems seem to be taking care of that all by themselves. Just look at VA, NJ where Is flocked to the GOP(inlcuding for McDonnell, a candidate endorsed by Sarah Palin and one who she donated 2500 dollars to and made calls for. She didn’t seem to hurt him in a key swing state). Look at Bidens 32 among Is, down from 59 earlier this year. Look at I low support of health care and their grades for Obama on the deficit, jobs, and Afghanistan. A number of recent polls have even shown Obama himself below 50 and dropping among Is. Obama and Biden need to worry about themselves, not Palin.
But all in all, an insightful article on Palin from a liberal viewpoint. Just thought she deserved some defending. Again, thank you for being the only liberal to ever acknowledge the truth that Obama supporters wore tshirts calling a woman a cunt, in front of her own children no less. I hope they’re proud of themselves.
I did like your WWE reference. Battle Royal 2012. Jim Rosss with “Good God! Is that Sarah Palin’s music!…My God! Obama has just been slammed through the Spanish Announcer’s table!…” Should be good times.
Unlike Palin, Obama has a long and distinguished academic record, and was a professor of Constitutional law. Palin, as she demonstrated in several of her excruciating interviews, doesn’t even seem to have read the Constitution.
In response to another comment. See in context »The President doesn’t have to read The Constitution, that’s what The Department of Law is for.
In response to another comment. See in context »Being a professor of constitutional law means never having to make a decision of any consequence. Obviously, it hasn’t prepared him for the presidency. Also, he hasn’t released his academic records. Why won’t he release them if they’re sooooo distinguished?
In response to another comment. See in context »Maybe you should write Harvard and ask them their requirements for president of their law review. Or go here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvard_Law_Review#History) for a quick fix.
In response to another comment. See in context »Your link is generic. What did Obama do to deserve it? Apparently, he was a compromise choice. And, he never published anything in the review while president of it. Sort of like voting present.
In response to another comment. See in context »I love how the right tries to always turn the criticism around, and never addresses it substantially. What does Obama’s academic record have to do with Palin? I was simply pointing out to Jon Meachem that, unlike Sarah Palin, Obama had substantial accomplishments and demonstrable knowledge and intimacy with our system of government going into the election. Comparing Obama and Palin on superficialities is kind of ridiculous, because it ignores the real differences between the two as candidates. One obviously knows what they’re talking about, and the other sounds like a Morton Downey Jr. audience member.
In response to another comment. See in context »“One obviously knows what they’re talking about,”
Well, at least when he uses his teleprompter. He’s cringe worthy without it.
I’d prefer to have fewer lawyers in government, and more citizens that have actually worked for a living. You know, the people that have to deal with the laws that politicians pass.
In response to another comment. See in context »Jeebus, you folk really hate to lose at anything, dontcha? A simple question like “what do you read?” becomes a provocation worthy of countless whining. As for the shirt thing, let me quote you on being “so far Obama’s ass” — did you pen that with your little ones in the room? Or did you read that outloud at the kitchen table before you sent it off?
In response to another comment. See in context »Relax Jonmeacham, the nasty liburls won’t come to take you to the FEMA re-education Centers, you guys are way past re-education.
Bitter much? So much of this rant exactly reflects what Matt describes in his post.
Oh – and your description of Michelle Obama is both offensive and grade schoolish. But don’t let your obviously deep southern roots stop you.
In response to another comment. See in context »You know, as a lifelong resident of the South, a white guy who had a black college roommate in Louisiana in the 1970’s, and who voted for Obama in 2008, I truly appreciate your blanket condemnation. My “obviously deep southern roots” and I want to let you know what a class act we think you are.
In response to another comment. See in context »jonmeachem – you do get it that the “cunt” t-shirts were making fun of MCCain for calling his wife a cunt in front of reporters, right?
In response to another comment. See in context »So…..to summarize…There’s no difference between Sarah Palin and President Barack Obama. If my lips were stained with Kool-Aid I would agree.
In response to another comment. See in context »“As ye sow, so shall ye reap.”
Jon, sorry, but after a while all of this innocent, wounded indignation on the part of Conservatives gets a little boring. Some hothead waved a nasty sign at Sarah where her kids could see it. So what? Your point is? Rush Limbaugh calls Obama a “little black man-child” where anybody can hear it, & you chuckle. It’s somehow better when one uses a code word that means n—-r, instead of actually saying n—-r? (Actually the n-word was used by Palin rally attendees. Don’t deny it, it was.) American politics has always been bloodsport, from the Revolution onwards.
I remind you of some of the abuse Conservatives have been flinging at liberals, & anybody they perceive as liberal, for going on 40 years now. Traitor. Slanderer. Facist. Nazi. Communist. If I were to give a substantial account of the demonization/de-humanization of Liberals, my post would be way longer than yours, & I don’t have the time.
You don’t have any right right to your indignation. When you’re doing the eye-gouge, don’t cry foul when the eye-gouge happens to you. You’re just learning how those nut-twists that you happily been delivering FEEL upon delivery. Only bullies believe that it’s unfair when their opponents fight back.
In response to another comment. See in context »Well put, jonmeachem. But don’t expect any of the Palin haters here to answer your legitimate points on Obama, Couric, Biden, etc.
In response to another comment. See in context »Wow, White Resentment just oozes through this comment.
And thanks for proving Matt Taibbi right on pretty much everything he wrote in his post.
In response to another comment. See in context »jonmeachem,
I’ll agree with you that Barack Obama and Sarah Palin do have many things in their background in common, and I think we can both agree with Matt that both are masters of the political machine. However, their forms of mastery differ.
Let me just tackle one thing (oh how I’m tempted to go point by point, but have many things to do): campaign etiquette. You go on and on about the cunt t-shirts, which are offensive whether they were a comment on Palin or her running mate, since someone mentioned they had to do with McCain and his wife. However, these were just T-shirts, and they didn’t incite violence.
Many many MANY Palin rallies and some McCain rallies and town meetings show people screaming “He’s a Muslim!” “He’s a terrorist!” “Kill him!” without any reaction from Palin. McCain finally had to stop a questioner and explain that Obama was a decent man, not a Muslim, and members of the crowd grumbled with displeasure. Palin never did squat. If you have evidence of her stopping such visceral and violence-promoting actions, please provide so I and others might muster some sympathy for her.
On the contrary, Obama would quell boos. *Boos* – you know, expressions of displeasure that have nothing to do with violence or hatred or associating a candidate with someone who perpetrated mass violence on Sept. 11, 2001. Even as the election drew near, people in Des Moines booed a reference to a McCain campaign tenent. Obama stopped it, this time with a small joke: “You don’t have to boo; you just have to vote.” That’s as far as the anti-McCain sentiment got that day.
So, you may disagree with Obama’s policies or be frustrated that he’s not delivering on a campaign promise tout-suite, but at least the man continues to deliver a sense of civility to the political arena. While I’d like more progressive action to take place during his tenure in office – the sooner the better – I’m not ready to count him out before year 1 ends.
As for buttressing your own points – you have some good criticisms and things that should be debated among both liberals and conservatives. I apologize for not listing them here, but I have been unable to determine how to block quote at this blog (despite a query to the creators of true/slant), so it would be messy to do so. however, I’d like to excerpt some things that pull down your argument, as they’ve been proven untrue, irrelevant, or based on hyped-up rhetoric that leads us down the road to BS:
>Obama smoked crack in HS.
no: he did cocaine, marijuana, and drank alcohol. Except for the coca, the other 2 were SOP for too many high schoolers of his generation. He doesn’t do them now.
>Both made their mark through a stemwinder of a speech at a convention on natl tv that had more to do with optics, pizzazz and style than substance.
Subject to interpretation. I give O way higher marks for policy in his speech. Maybe you didn’t agree with his side? Or that the delivery hasn’t been made yet?
>who flies out at the last minute so he can soak in the personal glory for bringing the Olympics to his hometown,
Irrelevant. At best, O was completing a political favor for some supporters. It didn’t succeed, either. So, again – irrelevant.
>his career being launched in Hyde Park hero Bill Ayers’s living room
Oh, please. Really – please read into Ayers’s life. He did eventually turn himself in; he paid his debt, and he’s done good things. To say that Ayers was Obama’s hero is such crap.
I checked on Bernahrd’s quotation. No matter how she tries/tried to justify it, it doesn’t waslh, so you’re on-target there. (When oh when wil people realize that public personas carry the weight of some amount of responsibility?? Locker room talk is one thing; public discourse and one person shows are another.)
I actually would like to hear and read more good arguments from the right. I left my family roots as a dyed-in-the-wool Republican many years ago in part due to the lack of substantive arguments in favor of support of yellow journalism (FOX news as the heir to that 1980s push) and win at all cost policies. The other parts involved issues regarding women, the environment, and war. So, if you would, keep showing up, but be wary of the BS arguments on the internets.
In response to another comment. See in context »Gypsy, you need to fact check yourself:
““He’s a terrorist!” “Kill him!” without any reaction from Palin. ”
The terrorist they were referring to is Bill Ayers. The “kill him” shout never happened. One reporter out of many reported hearing it, but none of the other reporters did. The secret service, who were present, were surprised to read the articlehe wrote, because they didn’t hear it at the rally. They investigated it, interviewing a number of people that were at the rally, and could find noone to confirm it.
Bill Ayers is no longer a terrorist, but he’s still a radical. He’s very much involved in radicalizing the education of teachers, so he can influence the brainwashing of our kids to achieve his influence on society through them.
Has he paid his debt? He and his wife Bernadine benefited from the influence of Ayers’ powerful father, which is ironic, because he is so against “white privilege”.
As for the rest of your stuff, it’s just your opinion vs another’s. What’s important is what the electorate as a whole thinks, and it seems people are turning away from Obama. They’re just not into him anymore
In response to another comment. See in context »>”Bill Ayers is no longer a terrorist, but he’s still a radical. He’s very much involved in radicalizing the education of teachers, so he can influence the brainwashing of our kids to achieve his influence on society through them.”
puhleez. Where are you getting this?
As for Ayers paying his debt – what are you going to do? Since the courts deemed the surveillance was illegal, the case was thrown out, but Ayers did turn himself in in 1980. (http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/30603589.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3) You can get pissed about him never serving time, but that’s the way the legal system works. You have decided that Ayers’s career has a nefarious sub-text due to his past, or you might consider the concept of redemption. He’s doing work for good these days. Well shitty shit shit shit.
And as it turns out, it was a McCain rally where those shouts were directed toward Obama.
You may not think that what is shouted before “terrorist!” in the this clip: (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jw3o3y77MaA) is “kill him!” but it does sound remarkably close to that phrase.
The Palin rally people just talked about things like “Hussein” Obama to associate our pres. with middle east terrorism. Palin merely asserted that Obama palled around with a terrorist. Gee – my bad.
Ya know, you spend time working for the same philanthropic organization – not working closely together, and you’re a “pal.” With Annenburg, they were on separate committees: “Obama chaired the Chicago Annenberg Challenge’s board of directors. Ayers served on the Chicago School Reform Collaborative, which made recommendations to the board on which organizations should get grants. The groups worked on school-reform efforts between 1995 and 2000.” (http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/902213,CST-NWS-ayers18.article)
Should we vet all of out associates? Have you checked out the backgrounds of all those you wok with and respect? Ayers is not in that lifestyle any more.
In response to another comment. See in context »Awesome! Thank you for an excellent piece. Well done, well done.
The liberals are like small children with a Linus blanket over their heads – if they don’t see it, than they are positive we don’t. Yep, if we don’t read it in the NY Times, we won’t know it exists. Couric giggles in her Manolo Blahniks over how she cut the tapes, erased the good responses and faked the transcript to humiliate a politician she didn’t like – but if she doesn’t tell us, than she knows we won’t know. Likewise Harvard Law School knows that we won’t find out that Obama was elected President of the Harvard Law Review only because, after a yelling, screaming all night session in which (for the first time in HLR’s history) the board eliminated grades and publishing requirements in order to elect ‘a black President of Harvard Law Review’. Yup, we’ll never know about that, just like we’ll never know that, as a result, Obama became the ONLY President of the HLR to be refused an offer of clerkship by every single judge in America, as well as being the ONLY President of HLR to fail to get a single offer from ANY of the major law firms (he had to slink back in disgrace to Chicago to take a job with a tiny law firm whose only client was a slumlord named Rezko). Yeah, because Harvard and Columbia refuse to release Obama’s grades, we’ll never know about this. Just like we’ll never know about the ‘God DAMN America’ pastor that Obama had for 20 years; just like we’ll never know about Michelle admitting (and Jack Cashill proving) that Ayers wrote ‘Dreams of My Father’ because Obama couldn’t even produce an outline of the book after 4 years of receiving an advance; and, of course, we won’t know about the ‘cunt’ tee shirt because the MSM doesn’t tell us. Ahuh.
Yeah, folks, tug that Linus blanket down hard and enjoy the cozy darkness while it lasts. Because that blinding light coming straight at your foreheads in Nov. 2010 is going to be damned painful.
In response to another comment. See in context »BTW – Jon Meachum – my ‘awesome’ compliment extends to YOU. Thanks again.
In response to another comment. See in context »Where you getting your information? Please provide sources. Do you know how to look critically at sources? I’ll grant that some internet sources are good and some bad (yes, huffpo has some really bad issues, especially surrounding the anti-vax BS). I’m guessing you’re on the internets a LOT, and your news source is either FOS or a knock-off. Got something substantial? Do tell.
And, just so you know, I could easily tell for whom your praise was levied. no problemo there.
In response to another comment. See in context »dood, you will please remove your head from your butt for just one moment and stop fretting about the situation as you’ve been spoon fed and actually think: it’s not about Team A against Beam B, although that’s how it has always been FRAMED for you — it is about all the corrupt politicians who have sold out America!
Please, think for yourself….it can be difficult at first, but then you’ll find it rewarding.
In response to another comment. See in context »Thanks for your reply i really enjoyed reading it I don,t know what you do for a living but you really shood write for some magazine or someone you have a way with words.
In response to another comment. See in context »You’ve clearly thought a lot about this and have shown yourself to be a dumbshit.
In response to another comment. See in context »Obama and Palin are not post baby boomers, they are baby boomers. Google it.
In response to another comment. See in context »I wasn’t aware of the cunt t-shirt controversy until reading the comments here. I do know there are stories that McCain called his wife a cunt in a public arena with reporters present. Could that have been what the t-shirts were about?
In response to another comment. See in context »Dude, try the de-caf next time!
In response to another comment. See in context »Interesting reply. You ever heard of fucking de-caf?
In response to another comment. See in context »[...] http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/2009/11/20/sarah-palin-wwe-star/ [...]
Matt is absolutely the best.
Time for a Palin palate-cleanser, don’tcha think? I do: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kx4kXgF88wQ
Cheers!
Quoting Matt Taibbi has enabled me to enjoy many “Oh Snap!” moments at the water cooler. Thanks Matt. You may very well be the only commentator out there who has grokked Sarah Palin and her followers in a prose style that most of us can connect with on a visceral level. She’s a real and genuine threat and I have a hard time understanding people who naively wonder why we don’t just ignore her. There was a full decade of Germans saying the same thing about Hitler. “Going Rogue” might as well be the new “Mein Kampf”. The only thing missing is a minority she can blame all America’s problems on…unless you count anyone who is against her the new scapegoats.
[...] Matt Taibbi has the best review so far of Going Rogue: “Sarah Palin–WWE Star.” [...]
[...] Matt Taibbi this morning: At the end of this decade what we call “politics” has devolved into a kind of ongoing, brainless soap opera about dueling cultural resentments and the really cool thing about it, if you’re a TV news producer or a talk radio host, is that you can build the next day’s news cycle meme around pretty much anything at all, no matter how irrelevant — like who’s wearing a flag lapel pin and who isn’t, who spent $150K worth of campaign funds on clothes and who didn’t, who wore a t-shirt calling someone a cunt and who didn’t, and who put a picture of a former Vice Presidential candidate in jogging shorts on his magazine cover (and who didn’t). [...]
Great piece. The comments are even better! How long do we think the country will tolerate this stuff?
Spiro Agnew quote (June 1969 commencement address at Ohio State University): “A sniveling, hand-wringing power structure deserves the violent rebellion it encourages. If my generation doesn’t stop cringing, you will inherit a lawless society where emotion and muscle displace reason.”
Ohio State had Spiro Agnew as commencement speaker–in 1969? That speaks volumes.
Second choice after the Dallas Cowboys’ Bob Hayes, no doubt.
In response to another comment. See in context »[...] More on the Palin-mania that has begun on the left… from those that haven’t even read the book. [...]
Whatever qualifications and skills some people believe Sarah Palin lacks are NOTHING NEW among presidential aspirants.
Surely there has been NO shortage of under-qualified, unskilled men who have aspired to high office.
The ONE big difference is that not one of those men took the beating from the media people (and a lot of other ridiculous people) that Sarah Palin has been subjected to.
Not one.
Men are allowed to be stupid, rude, nasty, unskilled, unqualified and a lot of other negative things; but as long as they are manly, “authentic,” like sports and can quote baseball statistics, they are good to go.
I do not share Mrs. Palin’s political views, but she is a smart woman and a hard-working woman. She has put herself on the line and accepted responsibility for her errors; she acknowledged that in the Couric interview she did not do well, but it is also true that CBS cropped that interview to show Palin as negatively as they could.
On the other hand, Obama, who is also under-qualified for the presidency and is failing spectacularly, was the darling of the media. No one in the media demanded to see his grades from school, college or law school. No one in the media demanded to see Obama’s papers from his college and law school days — papers which Obama has gone to extraordinary lengths to keep from public scrutiny.
The media people either chose not to notice or actually did not notice that Obama’s actions and record did NOT match his words. The media people covered up Obama’s gaffes and shortcomings and elevated him to the highest office in the land when there was a far more qualified candidate for the Democratic nomination and presidency, Hillary Clinton.
But, as is customary with media people (and many others), since Hillary is a woman and a (gasp) Clinton, there were special rules for critiquing her. Hillary, unfortunately for America, was subjected to both the Rules For Women and the Clinton Rules.
Now, we have the Palin Rules: she must be held to a higher standard than all the men in American history who ran for high office — many of whom were drunkards, thieves, charlatans and worse. But we must never talk about THAT because they were men and there are different rules for what makes a man a serious candidate.
I like Sarah Palin. She has had nothing handed to her in life. She has worked hard to have whatever she has achieved. She has not only espoused her conservative political beliefs, she has lived by those same beliefs — she did not abort a child she knew would be a Downs Syndrome baby.
My political views are not Palin’s views, but I like her because she is an intelligent, decent, honorable person.
And that is MORE than can be said of hundreds of men who have run for the presidency or vice presidency.
[...] had a hard time deciding which paragraph from this excellent Matt Taibbi column to use to illustrate his point, that Sarah Palin is the perfect candidate for the her times. There [...]
Nothing repulses Independents more than Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barney Frank and the US Congress in general. Guess you haven’t been reading the polls. As an Independent from the bluest of blue states, Massachusetts, who regrettably voted for Obama, I can tell you I will be voting down ticket Republican in 2010 and likely 2012 no matter who is on the ticket. Quite frankly brain or no brain, at this point anyone would be better.
I connect very emotionally with Harry Reid buying off Mary Landrieu with pork in the health care bill. That repulses me. President Obama’s DISMAL performance on the economy and focus on healthcare to the exclusion of all else also repulses me. Sarah Palin doesn’t upset me.
I hope Mitt Romney is the next President, but if he’s not on the Republican ticket I will vote for whoever is.
With all the talk about stupid, smart, intellectual, educated, lets not forget that Herbert Hoover went to Stanford.
Yes, people forget that Herbert Hoover, who was such a dismal failure in dealing with The Great Depression, was an extremely intelligent and decent man. He just did not have the vision to see what the solution might be for the bank failures, the rising unemployment and the loss of jobs.
In response to another comment. See in context »Exactly. Painfully familiar.
In response to another comment. See in context »Good to see that your logic allows you to make a leap from “qualified/educated person was a failure (Hoover)” so “unqualifed/undereducated person could be a success (Palin)”.
In response to another comment. See in context »No one except you made that leap.
In response to another comment. See in context »Elizabeth – as a conservative, I am getting the exact same message. The overwhelming reaction is that the swear word in 2010 will be ‘incumbent’.
I’m saying the same thing over and over again but it still bears repeating – the power brokers have this Linus blanket over their heads that blinds them to the immense anger over what they’re doing. It’s a universal anger, irrespective of whether you’re left or right. People have been lied to and now they’re being robbed blind, with their grandchildren and great grandchildren saddled with a crippling debt – and the incumbents just don’t see that we KNOW about this and that we are furious. Yep, next November is going to be very interesting.
In response to another comment. See in context »>next November is going to be very interesting.
Absolutely true. I wouldn’t be surprised if your prediction comes true. I’m not sure I like the alternative, only because I’m wishing/dreaming/imagining a different alternative.
In response to another comment. See in context »Agreeing with both of you here. I wish a viable alternative existed, but all I’m seeing for the most part are political animals and demagogues. People are going to throw the bums out and vote in a new crowd of bums whether they’re left or right, it appears.
In response to another comment. See in context »Welcome to 1840:
“Old Tip he wears a homespun coat
He has no ruffled shirt-wirt-wirt.
But Mat he has a golden plate
And he’s a little squirt-wirt-wirt.”
The two political parties have reached a consensus, which is:
1. The Neo-Liberal agenda will proceed no matter how much damage it does.
2. The working class will be further destroyed as much as possible.
3. The current aristocracy will be enriched and their positions as masters of the world entrenched.
That being the case, the only way to give the illusion of conflict are questions of style. Republicans are blunt, in your face, openly hateful, Democrats take a softer approach and appear cooler and more intellectual. The fact that they are pursuing essentially the same policies with a little window dressing changes (like this absurd goodie-basket-for-insurance-industry healthcare bill they’ve put together.).
The fact is, economic policy is exactly the same under Obama as it was under Bush. Foreign policy is marginally different, and the two (three… four, depending on how you count) wars continue a pace with no sense of slowing down or stopping.
Hope? Change? Short of violent internal revolution or the intervention of the foreign powers, not much chance in my lifetime. (The slow process of taking over one of the political parties is just that, slow. Third parties are locked out of the system.) However, it is still slightly better for Democrats to win than Republicans: Democrats are cautious and Republicans are bold. Republicans push the two parties’ joint agenda faster.
One of the smartest presidents America ever had was John Quincy Adams. Not only was his IQ probably higher than any other president’s, but JQA had served abroad as a diplomat and had been involved in many international negotiations prior to becoming president; he had an excellent knowledge and sense of foreign affairs. He was also well-grounded in American history and the meaning and importance of our Constitution.
Yet, John Quincy Adams is ranked by historians and political science professionals as a minor and somewhat failed president.
It takes more than IQ to be a good and effective president. It takes courage, character, wisdom and great common sense.
If you haven’t read “Outliers” you should. It makes this point very well.
In response to another comment. See in context »Is it possible to appreciate Matt Taibbi’s voice more now, than before the election? Absolutely.
Thanks, Matt.
@johnmeachem (cute!) Your comment was longer than the piece and I’ll cop to not reading it in its entirety, but to call Taibbi a member of the so-called “Liberal Media” would be to miss the point.