Framing Sarah Palin
[Note: I'm not going to get into the Palin baby story, as I personally am waiting to see how it plays out. So if you're looking for that sort of thing, don't bother reading any further.]
Before I get to Sarah Palin, I just have to point something out here first. John McCain is trying to score points off his party's restraint in postponing and toning down their convention out of deference to Hurricane Gustav, but there's a big fat steaming dose of hypocrisy here that the mainstream media is refusing to point out. Here's John McCain last Sunday on Fox News -- "it wouldn't be appropriate to have a festive occasion while a near tragedy or a terrible challenge is presented in the form of a natural disaster." Chris Wallace asked him about the convention again, and mentioned Katrina. McCain again responded: "I think, again, we don't want to appear in any way festive when you have that kind of tragedy possibly revisiting itself on the city of New Orleans and areas around it."
Now, from the White House website itself, the picture worth 10,000 words which puts this entire "we feel your pain" lie to the ultimate test. Here are George W. Bush and John McCain -- on the exact same day Katrina hit New Orleans -- celebrating what looks to me like the "festive occasion" of John McCain's birthday. Again, this was the day that Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans.
Please, someone in the mainstream media, please point this out. It's called "journalism."
With that out of the way, we turn to Sarah Palin.
Alaskan Governor (and designated Republican vice presidential nominee) Sarah Palin is going to have to answer some questions soon. She is obviously being held (to quote our current Vice President) in "an undisclosed location" every time the press gets near her. Think about it -- John McCain makes the big announcement Friday, and Palin doesn't appear on a single news show Sunday morning? We haven't had a press conference with her yet, or anything other than a few softball interviews. Oh, and it's rumored she's going to be on People magazine soon.
That's all fine and good as far as it goes, but it certainly doesn't go very far. Sooner or later Palin is going to have to stop cramming from briefing books and being given pop quizzes ("Quick: what's the capital of Pakistan?") and is going to have to strut her stuff in front of the national news media.
In a way, she's almost lucky that the baby story broke when it did, because whenever she does step out in front of the microphones, this will be the main thrust of the questions, at least for the first day or so. Sure, it's an embarassing family story, but it is going to detract from the real story the media should be following: Is this women ready to be president?
More to the point, was John McCain's choice of her putting "country first" (as his campaign slogan reads), or was it a hasty selection made because McCain was blocked by his own party from choosing who he really wanted, Joe Lieberman? And how hasty was that selection, anyway? Exactly what sort of vetting process did the McCain team put Sarah Palin through?
Because there are plenty of unanswered questions about her -- and her woefully thin political career -- that really need to be asked.
Democrats have a wonderful chance, because Palin (and McCain's campaign) is stonewalling the press on making her accessible. The Republican plan (no doubt) is to have her introduced to America at the convention, and to frame her and her story in such a positive light that any negatives discovered later won't matter.
Democrats need to get ahead of this curve for once, and start defining her in their own terms. They need to frame her before Republicans get a chance to.
Now, this is admittedly a minefield. She's a woman, and people are already wringing their hands that Joe Biden "is going to have to go easy on her" during the debates, lest he be seen as "beating up on" a woman. This is obviously nonsense (doesn't "equality" mean "actually being treated as an equal"?), but it is a valid media presentation point as far as sympathetic viewer reactions are concerned.
So mostly, Democrats should frame these things as "Why isn't the media asking about..." without getting into the answers themselves. Don't answer the question, in other words, just point out that the question exists and has not been asked.
So here is my advice for framing Sarah Palin.
(1) "I have no comment on the Palin family's personal problems."
(2) "If she's so ready to be Commander-in-Chief, why is she ducking the media? She's supposed to stand up to world leaders and she can't even handle the press?"
(3) "Sarah Palin got her start in politics by supporting a tax increase. Amazing how the Republicans haven't noticed this." (As mayor, Sarah Palin raised sales taxes and lowered property taxes.)
(4) "What exactly is Sarah Palin's relationship to the Alaska Independence Party -- a political party that wants Alaska to secede from the union, and who claims Sarah Palin as one of their own? Is Sarah Palin's motto 'Alaska First' (as the A.I.P. has on their website), or is it John McCain's 'country first'?"
(5a) "Sarah Palin was for the Bridge To Nowhere before she was against it. She campaigned on her support for the bridge to help her get elected governor, in fact."
(5b) "Sarah Palin may have stopped the Bridge To Nowhere, but she took the money anyway. So much for 'being against earmarks' as John McCain likes to claim. If she was against earmarks, she would have refused the money. She didn't."
(5c) "Sarah Palin built a road on the island to the Bridge To Nowhere that had been cancelled -- just so she wouldn't have to give the money back to the federal government. She spent $25 million federal tax dollars on a road to a bridge that isn't going to be built, rather than return it to the taxpayers in the other 49 states. Once again, so much for being 'against earmarks,' as John McCain claimed. Sounds more like 'Alaska first' than 'country first.'" (See the Anchorage Daily News for the whole Bridge To Nowhere saga.)
(6a) "Sarah Palin seems to have learned her personnel ethics from Alberto Gonzales. She has a history of firing people for political reasons -- exactly what got Attorney General Gonzales in so much trouble. While she was mayor, she fired the town's police chief for political reasons. He sued, and the judge had to tell him that by Alaskan law it was legal to be fired for political reasons."
(6b) "Then there was the state Creamery Board that wanted to shut down the unprofitable Matanuska Maid dairy. Palin wanted it kept open. So Palin sacked the entire Board of Agriculture and Conservation and installed her buddies. The new Ag Board then promptly fired the entire Creamery Board, declared itself the Creamery Board, and quickly approved keeping Matanuska Maid open. Later in the year, the dairy failed anyway. Sure shows Palin knows how to handle the entire American economy, doesn't it? It also shows how Palin deals with any political problem -- by firing everyone in sight who doesn't agree with her. And if you can't fire them, fire their boss. Haven't we had enough of that already under Bush and Cheney?"
(6c) "And then, in the scandal that Alaskans have come to know as 'Troopergate,' Sarah Palin is currently under investigation for firing a man who refused to fire the man she really wanted gone, who was her brother-in-law. Kind of reminds you of Nixon's "Saturday Night Massacre," doesn't it? Or, like I said, the Bush Justice Department."
(7) "If Sarah Palin is such a 'maverick' and takes on her own party, then why was she on the board of a 527 group called 'Ted Stevens Excellence In Public Service, Inc.'? What exactly did she do for Stevens while leading this group? How much money was raised, and from whom exactly? Sounds like until Stevens' scandals broke into the news, they seem to have been pals."
(8) "The more we find out about Sarah Palin, the more you have to wonder how much she was vetted by John McCain. Is this a woman who is the best possible choice to be a heartbeat away from the Oval Office, or was this some hastily-made and not-very-well-thought-out gimmick to score a few political points? One has to wonder if McCain is really, as he says, putting 'country first' with this pick, or whether it was an impulsive reaction to his own party telling him he couldn't pick the man he wanted. Which, unfortunately, says something about McCain's judgment."
OK, with those out of the way, here are a few cautionary notes. Because there are a few things Democrats should not say when attacking Sarah Palin's credibility.
For instance -- stay away from the baby stories. Resist the urge to comment at all on it. Let the media do the muckraking. Take the high road, instead.
Also, don't mention the whole "beauty queen" thing. Leave this to the late-night comics -- they're better at it, and they don't have to take the heat for doing so. After all, she was awarded Miss Congeniality, and there's a convenient movie of the same name -- so the comics will be all over this one without any help whatsoever.
Likewise, stay away from the whole "small town" angle. Again, leave that to the media and to ordinary people to make up their minds on. It's so patently obvious that not every small-town mayor in America is qualified to be president that you don't even have to point this out. Because even the appearance of attacking "small towns" themselves is going to backfire. Remember Obama's "bitter" comments, if you need any proof. Most voters actually live in small towns -- never forget that.
Don't attack her charisma. In fact, play it up. "Sure Sarah Palin is a wonderful person and has a lot of charisma, but what does she feel about the situation in Georgia? Or Darfur? Or North Korea?"
And DO NOT under any circumstances mention how she looks. This is guaranteed to backfire. Leave all the "hottie" jokes alone. Don't even whisper them. Again, leave it to Leno and Letterman, as they will more than make up for your silence on the subject.
As I said, there is a small window open for Democrats to get ahead of the curve on framing Sarah Palin to the American public. Most of that window is going to be crammed with the baby stories, but eventually the media will tire of that and start looking for a new angle. Be ready with the new angle, and take the high road on the baby situation, and Sarah Palin may go down in history as the worst running mate ever selected.
But be careful as you do. The thing about "throwing a Hail Mary pass" (as John McCain has so obviously done with his running mate selection) is that even though it's a move born out of desperation, even though it is extremely risky, even though it will likely fail... every so often the spectacular catch is made in the endzone, and it turns into a game-winning move. Democrats need to help avoid this, and the earlier they start the better.
Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
See Chris Weigant's Profile
To everyone -
Thanks to all for commenting. I've been too busy today to answer comments personally, so I apologize for that.
I just wanted to see if anyone else noticed a framing error the Republicans made yesterday. Over the weekend, with Gustav looming and McCain sending out confused signals about what exactly the GOP convention was going to look like, I thought "this is going to be interesting... an 'ad-libbed' national convention."
Because they obviously didn't have weeks to prepare remarks, Cindy McCain goofed. She said something along the lines of "We all have to take off our Republican hats and put on instead our American hats."
Sounds like a nice line, when you first hear it. But consider the subliminal message: When our "Republican" hats are on, we are not Americans. Or, to become Americans, we have to put our party aside. Whoops! Either way, something that would have been caught if given enough time.
Anyway, thanks to all for commenting.
-CW
My wife and I burst out laughing when we heard that - out of the mouths of babes, so to speak...truer words were never spoke. But it hasn't been widely caught! It should be looped and gone.
Thanks for the diligence, CW.
Based on what we already know, McCain made a terrible misjudgement, one that he will now impose on the American Electorate and attempt to excuse away.
Either he vetted her completely, in which case his judgement is a foregone abyssmal disaster, or he did not, which means he is wholely incompetent to hold the highest office in the land.
The selection of Sarah Palin as McCain's "soul-mate" and running mate tell us for more about McCain than it tells us about Palin, far more than we ever probably wanted to know about this once upstanding politician.
8a. The pick of Palin just undercuts McCain's own talking point of being a "maverick" as it shows that he's far from being a maverick. McCain likes to talk about how he will go against his party when he thinks it's the best thing to do. That he isn't beholden to the far right of the GOP. Yet this pick demonstrates that he's no such thing. John McCain wanted either Joe Lieberman or Tom Ridge. Both men are highly qualified for the VP position and would be strong candidates to stand up to Joe Biden based on record and experience. But the far radical right proved they hold the reigns over McCain. People like Rush, Hannity, and Dobson vetoed the pick of Lieberman or Ridge and demanded a far right conservative. McCain buckled under and gave in to the extreme far right with his choice of an unqualified pick.
The #5 and #6 issues are the ones to hammer home. There seems to be more and more coming out about how she was a huge supporter and lobbyist for earmarks, which completely contradicts her opening speech and the McCain camps talking points. More hypocrisy in the GOP world... rail against government spending, but keep spending away behind the scenes.
She also seems to have a very nasty habit of firing anyone who isn't a sycophant. Keep pounding home how she's just like Rove/Cheney/Bush... firing anyone that doesn't adhere to their radical views.
How about this for an issue:
If McCain is such a mavericky reformer, so resolutely opposed to government waste and earmarks, I think a legitimate question would be: How come he hasn't gone after any of the waste and corruption in the Iraq War? BILLIONS of dollars have been wasted and misused and yet I haven't heard a peep out of Maverick McCain about stopping it. Hell, I haven't even heard him mention it. Have you?
Maybe, by putting an elephant into the room, the Republicans are trying to maneuver Democrats into a position where they have no good choices.
It worked very well for Bush and Cheney, whose crimes were in plain sight and yet kept the Dems at bay.
.
Excellent advise on framing Palin. There's so much official stuff to hang her on, there's really no need to get into any of the personal.
Still, she's very selfish to throw her daughter's private life at the nation by making that announcement. There was really no need for her to make such an announcement.
You're so right about the Gustav/RNC part. These nuts are trying to make into their "redemption", as though Katrina could be forgotten, and as always the media's falling for the line. Shameful.
Now, with that out the way, I'll go back and read the Palin part of your blog.
HuffPost's Pick
I find this is the statement from the Palin's regarding their daughter's pregnancy to be CLEARLY a PRO-CHOICE statement.
"Our beautiful daughter Bristol came to us with news that as parents we knew would make her grow up faster than we had ever planned. We're proud of Bristol's decision to have her baby and even prouder to become grandparents," Sarah and Todd Palin said in the brief statement.
"Bristol's DECISION to HAVE her baby" is certainly Pro-Choice. It is not an ethics issue anymore, it is the apparent FLIP-FLOP on one of the pillar issues of the conservative right.
In a Pro Life World, the only decision a woman would have is whether she would KEEP the baby, or put the baby up for ADOPTION. Most importantly, HAVING the baby would NOT a DECISION/Choice in a Pro-Life world that Sarah Palin advocates.
While I agree the Obama campaign shouldn't go after this one...but the press most certainly should! "Gov. Palin, when you say you are PROUD of your daughter's DECISION to HAVE her baby, are you advocating that your daughter has the right to make her own choice whether to HAVE or NOT HAVE her baby?"
I wonder if she really meant to say they are "proud of Bristol's decision to KEEP her baby." Watch the wordsmithing in the coming days...I'm certain it will be different from her and her husband's initial 'PRO-CHOICE' statement.
I cannot even follow your logic.
The logic is...the wording of Palin's statement does not make sense from a Pro-Life mindset. Their statement implies they are approving of their daughter's decision, as if there is a decision (i.e. Choice) to be made.
When my finance and I got pregnant and we went to his parents and said "we are going to HAVE the baby" they looked at us a little confused. "Of course your going to HAVE a baby, that is what happens when you are pregnant. What other option is there?" A Pro-Life mindset does not see any other options....thus, there is no decision to make regarding HAVING a baby.
The quote was from a statement by the Palin's - see CNN's reference here http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/01/palin.daughter/index.html
VERY nice... I didn't pick up on that, but it certainly can be construed that way.
Where would we be without Samantha Bee!
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=184097&title=bristol-palins-choice
Apparently, you're behind. The pregnancy story was pursued with a vengence, in spite of warnings. Some folks just can't resist gossip.
it's NOT gossip when it's FACTUAL...!!
Good grief, I'm speaking about the absurd big Orange story that AP and HuffPo are now repeating, as rumor of course, that she didn't even bear her own child.
It's going to take time for just how bad this is to sink in.
But it will sink in.
And it won't be Palin who ends up being despised.
It's not gossip - it's fact. Palin put out a statement about the pregnancy. Does anyone really believe that if it were a Democrat, the Republicans would be showing any restraint?
The founder of the AIP, Joe Vogler, so HATED AMERICA, that he said, "Damn America and damn her institutions"
He so HATED AMERICA that he insisted upon his death to be buried outside the US. He died only 15 years ago. He's buried in the Yukon in Canada. So is his wife, Doris.
Look it up on wikipedia. Watch the YouTube video of Palin's gushing speech to the AIP convention THIS YEAR.
And she should serve to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States?
It isn't about a "baby" ... it's about Palin's own decision to refuse to support sex education in school and Palin's own decision to support abstenence only. Looks like THAT isn't working.
I was doing sex education stuff 25 years ago. Never worked. Doesn't work today. Everyone knows how to protect themselves.
They simply choose not to do so.
It's the same old tired story from my own youth. He doesn't want to. She wants to please him.
Same ole' stuff.
Forget sex education. Try not practicising sexism. Try not putting women into a corner.
The very forces that make young women not take care of themselves?
You're seeing it right now, in real life. She can't be a VP because she's a mom. She must have lied about having that baby.
It's the same sexist crud I've seen all my life and the very reason young women are intimidated out of self-care.
Want to support the opposite?
Knock off the sexism.
I love the way Obama/Biden handled Ms. Palin at their campaign appearance on Saturday -- they didn't acknowledge her at all. One brief comment about not campaigning in Alaska, and on to attack McCain. I absolutely think that's the way to go at least until the vetting process (by the press, since McCain obviously didn't do it) is complete. Then, if she's still around, your list in this post will be a terrific guideline. But somehow I think Sarah Palin's 15 minutes are coming to an end.
agreed completely. deserved or not, folks like her better than mccain, which is probably one reason why he picked her. as vp she's basically irrelevant anyway, so the less attention directed at her, the better.
1. The media has not done its job in 8 years, it is doubtful it will now.
2. This is my business. The repugs can't have it both ways, telling me
how to run my sex life, but theirs is "private."
Great article from someone who truly knows who SP really is! So her nickname is Sarah Barracuda, because her ambition has bitten anyone who disagrees with what she herself wants. She abused her position of authority as a Mayor of that small town and fired their Police Chief, just as she abused her authority as Governor for firing the Alaskan state Police Chief for failing to fire her ex brother in law involved a very bitter custody dispute with Palin's sister. Everyone should read this article for Palin's behavior as Governor and Mayor of that small town reveal she is in the mold of George Bush, for installing unqualified individuals in posts they aren't qualified for. Heck, she even placed her high school friend as the state Police Chief, only having to ask him to resign 2 weeks later because of a sexual harassment charge against him. Oh', and the state of Alaska paid him $10k as severance pay for those 2 weeks of work. Geez, $10k for 2 weeks? Nice work if you can get it!
Read "A note to all by Anne Kilkenny": eyewitness account by someone who's known Palin since 1992, resident of Wasilla, detailing Palin's administrative misdeeds, reflecting on her character, etc.
http://www.andrys.com/palin-kilkenny.html
Great article from someone who truly knows who SP really is! So her nickname is Sarah Barracuda, because her ambition has bitten anyone who disagrees with what she herself wants. She abused her position of authority as a Mayor of that small town and fired their Police Chief, just as she abused her authority as Governor for firing the Alaskan state Police Chief for failing to fire her ex brother in law involved a very bitter custody dispute with Palin's sister. Everyone should read this article for Palin's behavior as Governor and Mayor of that small town reveal she is in the mold of George Bush, for installing unqualified individuals in posts they aren't qualified for. Heck, she even placed her high school friend as the state Police Chief, only having to ask him to resign 2 weeks later because of a sexual harassment charge against him. Oh', and the state of Alaska paid him $10k as severance pay for those 2 weeks of work. Geez, $10k for 2 weeks? Nice work if you can get it!
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
