What Is Sarah Palin?

[bobbyw24]

YouTube - SA@TAC - What is Sarah Palin? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RgW5tgDIxY&feature=player_embedded)


Why do so many people love Sarah Palin? Why do so many hate her? I cannot recall a politician in recent memory that has been both so loved and so reviled for no discernible reason.

When Palin was announced as John McCain’s running mate on the 2008 Republican presidential ticket many conservatives were intrigued, including me. It was reported that the Alaskan governor had been a member of Pat Buchanan’s “Buchanan Brigades” during the commentator’s presidential bids in 1996 and 2000 and that Palin had ties to the secessionist Alaskan Independence Party. An “America First” states rights’ radical on a major political ticket? Palin did not sound like the average Republican.

And yet today, even removed from the constraints of the McCain campaign, Palin sounds fairly conventional. Asks Antiwar.com’s Justin Raimondo: “Where and when has Palin ever articulated a coherent alternative to the orthodox Republican doctrines of supply-side economics and endless war?” Raimondo is right. What, exactly, differentiates Palin from the average Republican bear?

Or should that be “moose?” It seems that Palin– the attractive, outdoors-loving “hockey mom”-is popular solely because of her personality, not any specific policy positions. Notes columnist Steve Chapman “Who needs policy? In her world - and the world of legions of conservatives who revere her - the persona is the policy. Palin is beloved because she’s (supposedly) just like ordinary people, which (supposedly) gives her a profound understanding of their needs.” When dissecting political cults of personality, it would seem that Palin has become the Republicans’ Obama–handsome, charming and a human comfort blanket for partisans.

It is also true that Palin is hated because of her personality. The venom spewed at Palin by the mainstream and liberal media sounds like a bunch of catty women slandering another on a drunken Saturday night. Once again, policy-wise, why should Palin be any more despised than, say, Republican House Minority Leader John Boehner? Where do they differ ideologically? Catty women have never needed a specific reason to trash talk the prettiest girl in the room. Similarly, Palin’s mere existence is all that is needed to earn the continued scorn of the Left.

This is not to say that Palin’s presence has been completely insignificant. A hero to the Tea Party set, Palin has quickly come to represent anti-government, grassroots outrage. But using sporadic, nominally-conservative rhetoric with no ideological platform or voting record to back it up is not exactly a firm foundation for any would-be “conservative champion.”

Raimondo notes the major difference between the personality-driven Palin and more serious, policy-driven leaders like Texas Congressman Ron Paul: “What is especially irksome, however, is that there is indeed a populist champion of the Tea Party grassroots, someone with the knowledge, the organization, the proven fundraising ability, and the principles to lead the GOP out of its ideological and political morass: Ron Paul… ‘Palinism’ is a hairstyle. Paulism is a bona fide movement. The first has no future — no, she won’t be a major contender, come the presidential sweepstakes, as George Will predicted on the Stephanopoulos program. The second IS the future, if the GOP is to have a future.”

When conservatives have been dubbed “Paulite” or “Buchananite” it has always been meant to describe someone with libertarian or traditional conservative leanings. Being a “Goldwaterite” had similar, specific conservative policy implications in the 1960’s, as did “Reaganite” in the 80’s. But what is a “Palinite?” I’m not sure anyone knows. I’m not even sure she knows.

And it’s a problem. As Raimondo notes, when it comes to addressing the grievances of Tea Party conservatives, that Paul’s platform is far more ideologically sound does not change the fact that the Congressman is not exactly Mr. Personality. Even Paul admits this. And yet his brand of libertarian conservatism has found a sizeable audience based purely on the power of his ideas.

Palin has found a sizeable audience based purely on the power of her personality. In fact, Palin’s most rabid fans don’t seem too concerned about her policy positions, if at all. Perhaps the best definition of a “Palinite” is one who emotionally invests himself in Republican identity politics. For Paul’s fans, the man is a philosopher. For Palin fans-she’s Oprah. Whereas Paul represents a political platform in need of more personality, Palin is a personality desperately in need of a political platform. The title of her new book is “Going Rogue,” but where, exactly, has Palin gone off the Republican plantation ideologically? Simply wrapping up the same old Bush Republicanism in a prettier package is not “going rogue”–it’s going wrong.

Only time will tell if Palin will turn out to be just another Bush Republican. But when judging political figures, it is only logical that we first look at their politics. What are Sarah Palin’s? What is Sarah Palin? We may never know.

http://www.amconmag.com/postright/2009/11/27/what-is-sarah-palin/

[RevolutionSD]

YouTube - SA@TAC - What is Sarah Palin? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RgW5tgDIxY&feature=player_embedded)


Why do so many people love Sarah Palin? Why do so many hate her? I cannot recall a politician in recent memory that has been both so loved and so reviled for no discernible reason.

When Palin was announced as John McCain’s running mate on the 2008 Republican presidential ticket many conservatives were intrigued, including me. It was reported that the Alaskan governor had been a member of Pat Buchanan’s “Buchanan Brigades” during the commentator’s presidential bids in 1996 and 2000 and that Palin had ties to the secessionist Alaskan Independence Party. An “America First” states rights’ radical on a major political ticket? Palin did not sound like the average Republican.

And yet today, even removed from the constraints of the McCain campaign, Palin sounds fairly conventional. Asks Antiwar.com’s Justin Raimondo: “Where and when has Palin ever articulated a coherent alternative to the orthodox Republican doctrines of supply-side economics and endless war?” Raimondo is right. What, exactly, differentiates Palin from the average Republican bear?

Or should that be “moose?” It seems that Palin– the attractive, outdoors-loving “hockey mom”-is popular solely because of her personality, not any specific policy positions. Notes columnist Steve Chapman “Who needs policy? In her world - and the world of legions of conservatives who revere her - the persona is the policy. Palin is beloved because she’s (supposedly) just like ordinary people, which (supposedly) gives her a profound understanding of their needs.” When dissecting political cults of personality, it would seem that Palin has become the Republicans’ Obama–handsome, charming and a human comfort blanket for partisans.

It is also true that Palin is hated because of her personality. The venom spewed at Palin by the mainstream and liberal media sounds like a bunch of catty women slandering another on a drunken Saturday night. Once again, policy-wise, why should Palin be any more despised than, say, Republican House Minority Leader John Boehner? Where do they differ ideologically? Catty women have never needed a specific reason to trash talk the prettiest girl in the room. Similarly, Palin’s mere existence is all that is needed to earn the continued scorn of the Left.

This is not to say that Palin’s presence has been completely insignificant. A hero to the Tea Party set, Palin has quickly come to represent anti-government, grassroots outrage. But using sporadic, nominally-conservative rhetoric with no ideological platform or voting record to back it up is not exactly a firm foundation for any would-be “conservative champion.”

Raimondo notes the major difference between the personality-driven Palin and more serious, policy-driven leaders like Texas Congressman Ron Paul: “What is especially irksome, however, is that there is indeed a populist champion of the Tea Party grassroots, someone with the knowledge, the organization, the proven fundraising ability, and the principles to lead the GOP out of its ideological and political morass: Ron Paul… ‘Palinism’ is a hairstyle. Paulism is a bona fide movement. The first has no future — no, she won’t be a major contender, come the presidential sweepstakes, as George Will predicted on the Stephanopoulos program. The second IS the future, if the GOP is to have a future.”

When conservatives have been dubbed “Paulite” or “Buchananite” it has always been meant to describe someone with libertarian or traditional conservative leanings. Being a “Goldwaterite” had similar, specific conservative policy implications in the 1960’s, as did “Reaganite” in the 80’s. But what is a “Palinite?” I’m not sure anyone knows. I’m not even sure she knows.

And it’s a problem. As Raimondo notes, when it comes to addressing the grievances of Tea Party conservatives, that Paul’s platform is far more ideologically sound does not change the fact that the Congressman is not exactly Mr. Personality. Even Paul admits this. And yet his brand of libertarian conservatism has found a sizeable audience based purely on the power of his ideas.

Palin has found a sizeable audience based purely on the power of her personality. In fact, Palin’s most rabid fans don’t seem too concerned about her policy positions, if at all. Perhaps the best definition of a “Palinite” is one who emotionally invests himself in Republican identity politics. For Paul’s fans, the man is a philosopher. For Palin fans-she’s Oprah. Whereas Paul represents a political platform in need of more personality, Palin is a personality desperately in need of a political platform. The title of her new book is “Going Rogue,” but where, exactly, has Palin gone off the Republican plantation ideologically? Simply wrapping up the same old Bush Republicanism in a prettier package is not “going rogue”–it’s going wrong.

Only time will tell if Palin will turn out to be just another Bush Republican. But when judging political figures, it is only logical that we first look at their politics. What are Sarah Palin’s? What is Sarah Palin? We may never know.

http://www.amconmag.com/postright/2009/11/27/what-is-sarah-palin/

She's simply Barack Obama on the right.

[Liberty Star]

Excellent observation, she's just as self-serving and opportunist even if her cult is smaller than the more polished dem. It doesn't help that she seems to be missing quite a few marbles in upper compartment.

[Zippyjuan]

Why do so many people love Sarah Palin? Why do so many hate her? I cannot recall a politician in recent memory that has been both so loved and so reviled for no discernible reason.



Hillary?

At least Hillary had smarts to go along with her ambition. Palin is all packaging- like your deoderant or breakfast cereal. She is probably liked more for who she ISN'T- a white, upper class eastern educated male polititian. I don't think her supporters really care what her positions are. And she in turn gives them what they want- she tailors her positions to her audience who do not notice that it is different from what she said last week. Somebody called her the "Paris Hilton of Politics"- people like her just because she is famous.

Those who do take the time to examine what she actually says are the ones who tend to not like her.

They are following script in promoting her. Get her at the party convention (in this case with the major leap as a VP candidate). They write a book and go on tour to promote that in favorable areas (notice she is not going to any big cities to promote it or any blue states)- she probably didn't even write the book herself. Then you start making more and more appearances in the early primary states.

But the plan does not always work. Just ask Dan Quayle- another unqualified candidate they tried to repackage and sell.

[tron paul]

Southern Avenger makes some good points. I really like the 'catty women' and 'comfort blanket' analysis.

But he skips from Buchanon endorsements, right over her record of the AK Gov, to the present day.

That is a major oversight. SA is at his best when he writes his own opinions, instead of parroting Justin Raimondo (who is also great, but misses the Palin boat).

Ignoring Palin's record as AK Gov is the dishonest maneuver that lets SA and JR pretend that all of her support comes strictly from her personality.

That's just wrong. SA and JR have both read here Wiki page and know what she accomplished as the Gov of AK.

My Dear Southern Avenger, this is the first time I've not wanted to applaud one of your missives.

Oh well, at least we know that you are not the amazing, anonymous Doctor Zero that writes for HotAir (he is the sharpest knife in the pro-Palin knife store). You had made it pretty high up on my suspect list, until you dropped the ball with this one.

Please stop parroting Justin R's catty talking points and do your own original research.

You will find that Palin support originates *BOTH* from her persona *AND* her record as AK Gov, creating a lot of synergy.

PS Did you bother to read her book before pretended to be all confused and perplexed by Palin's crazy, inscrutable enigma? It's obvious that you did not, because you would have found the correct answers to your uncharitable, unsourced conclusions if you (or Justin) had made the effort.

http://dummidumbwit.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/palin-gun-100309.jpg

[ramallamamama]

Sarah Palin > Sharia Plan, Anal Parish

[Grimnir Wotansvolk]

YouTube - Is Sarah Palin a Bimbo? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9ix7igcNNE)

[awake]

I am not against any minority at all so do not mistake what I say...

Placing designated minorities in the White house captures that creme de la creme of political capital - The bullet proof vest - The Oppressed Minority Card- which when played silences both the left and the right . It acts as a magic shield that makes the user impervious. You know how it works; if you're against oppressed minority X's policies you must hate all X's, and are an open and obvious oppressor that has no valid argument that needs to be considered seriously. The race card, the gender card...or what ever group/class card that can be thought up.

It is too tempting for the king makers not to select the next president as a minority. It is kind of like in Pac-Man where you are invincible for a short time, the ghosts can't hurt you and you can get away with anything - even acting just like Bush. That short time can be used quite masterfully to pillage the people in the worst ways, as we are currently witnessing.

I would not be shocked to see Clinton Vs Palin in 2012.

[Zippyjuan]

Ignoring Palin's record as AK Gov is the dishonest maneuver that lets SA and JR pretend that all of her support comes strictly from her personality.

Her record in Alaska would include leaving office before her first and only term was up- it does not expire until 2010. Walking away from her job is not a good sign of leadership in my book. She made the announcement Friday before the 4th of July weekend which would ensure minimal media coverage. She was only governor for 2 1/2 years- not a lot of experience. But then again, Obama did not have tons of experience either.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1908669,00.html

If her goal is to position herself for higher office, the stagecraft and timing of her announcement left Republicans scratching their heads. The Friday before Independence Day, when media attention is at its lowest, would be a more appropriate moment for a scandal-plagued politician to slink from the national stage. Palin made the announcement with no fanfare, no teleprompters, no prepared remarks. Waterfowl in the background at times challenged her for the microphone. "To step down on a Friday before a three-day holiday, people are going to scrutinize it: why is she doing it, question her judgment," said Ed Rollins, who ran former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee's presidential campaign last year. "It leaves her with less than three years as governor on her résumé — not a very strong argument to run for President. The way she did it — the fact she did it — damages her, damages her immensely. People aren't happy about a governor quitting, unless you're Governor [Mark] Sanford [currently under fire for his extramarital affair in Argentina]. Her doing this adds to the Sarah Palin mystique, but not in a good way."

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1908669,00.html#ixzz0YD2nMeSF


If she runs, her competition and the media will be able to tear her apart. Unless they are too afraid to challenge her. The job got tough and she could not handle it.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124664889369093021.html

Speculation swirled on what drove Ms. Palin's departure. Her return to Alaska after the 2008 presidential campaign had been marked by almost nonstop controversies. The Republican-led legislature in April rejected her appointment of a lawyer for attorney general who was controversial, in part, for his outspokenness. She tangled with lawmakers over other issues, including her decision to reject some federal stimulus money. And she brawled repeatedly with the media and others over what she called attacks on her and her family. A blow-up with late night host David Letterman -- which happened when she called out the CBS host for making sexual innuendos about one of her daughters -- was particularly well publicized.

Through it all, her once stratospheric popularity in Alaska began chipping away. As of early 2007, Ms. Palin's approval rating among Alaskans stood at an unprecedented 92%, according to pollster Mr. Moore, but it fell to as low as in the low 60s as of early this year. Had she chosen to seek re-election, most pundits believe she probably would have emerged victorious, despite her weakened standing. Now that she is out of the picture, the governor's race in Alaska is considered wide open.

'She Was Tired of Being Boxed In'
A source close to Ms. Palin said her decision appears to have been driven in part by a desire to escape the increasingly difficult state politics of Alaska. Returning to Juneau after her national run, she has been bogged down by opposition from Democrats seeking to undermine a possible national leader of the opposition, and by fellow Republicans irked by her attacks across the country against the state's political establishment -- a staple of her attempts to portray herself as a maverick.

"She was tired of being boxed in, of not being able to push her agenda forward," the person said. "It was clear her agenda could not move forward."

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Southern Avenger makes some good points. I really like the 'catty women' and 'comfort blanket' analysis.

But he skips from Buchanon endorsements, right over her record of the AK Gov, to the present day.

That is a major oversight. SA is at his best when he writes his own opinions, instead of parroting Justin Raimondo (who is also great, but misses the Palin boat).

Ignoring Palin's record as AK Gov is the dishonest maneuver that lets SA and JR pretend that all of her support comes strictly from her personality.

That's just wrong. SA and JR have both read here Wiki page and know what she accomplished as the Gov of AK.

My Dear Southern Avenger, this is the first time I've not wanted to applaud one of your missives.

Oh well, at least we know that you are not the amazing, anonymous Doctor Zero that writes for HotAir (he is the sharpest knife in the pro-Palin knife store). You had made it pretty high up on my suspect list, until you dropped the ball with this one.

Please stop parroting Justin R's catty talking points and do your own original research.

You will find that Palin support originates *BOTH* from her persona *AND* her record as AK Gov, creating a lot of synergy.

PS Did you bother to read her book before pretended to be all confused and perplexed by Palin's crazy, inscrutable enigma? It's obvious that you did not, because you would have found the correct answers to your uncharitable, unsourced conclusions if you (or Justin) had made the effort.

http://dummidumbwit.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/palin-gun-100309.jpg

Are you kidding me? Palin is a tool of Brzenski and Scheunneman. Why would anyone here support a Neo-Con? Let's see, she actually increased the budget of AK, not reduced it. She appointed an ex-member of Planned Parenthood, among other things and has an appreciable knowledge of foreign and domestic libertarian policy of that of a door knob. Needless to say she would be a DISASTER of epic proportions if she even runs in 2012, and if she won (Goodluck), she would be worse than Bush Jr!

Anyone who supports a candidate on personality in any part deserves what they get.

[tonesforjonesbones]

I am very concerned that the Sarah Palin we once knew has left the building. She is sounding more Neo connish than ever and her zionism is nauseating...I can't support her anymore unless she does a huge turn around. I am hoping for Michelle Bachman. Palin can't win..i really don't want to see her run. Tones

[Flash]

I don't get it-- Sarah Palin quit her job as a Governor to help out with Conservatives around the nation. Yet all she did is sell her book and endorse Hoffman after the Republican establishment got behind him.I don't see her going out and campaigning for anti-establishment Conservatives like Rand Paul, Schiff, DeVore, Rubio, etc.. yet somehow she is still seen as a 'rogue' and 'independent' figure. Its bizarre.