T'Aint "Elitist" to Be Anti-Palin
I HATE TO pull rank here. But it seems I am almost the only Republican still standing who can criticize Sarah Palin without being accused by my fellow conservatives of suffering from an "elite education. "
Peggy Noonan, David Brooks, Christopher Buckley, Kathleen Parker and [my husband] David Frum have all had their heads put on pikes by the self-appointed rulers of Conservatism. As Rush Limbaugh said:
These are the people who are embarrassed by Sarah Palin 'cause she's not an intellectual and she didn't go to Harvard or have a college degree from approved universities and she drops her g's from words like morning and says mornin'. She's embarrassing, and I think something else really bothering these people is that they believe that she may become one of the key leaders of the conservative movement beyond 2008 if she and McCain lose this.
Those with degrees from approved universities are capable of mounting their own defense. But what about those of us who did not go to Harvard -- and yet whose eyes still bug out at the prospect of a Palin vice presidency, let alone the prospect of her as a "key leader"in the future?
In fact, not only did I NOT go to Harvard, I have no education to speak of. Not beyond high school anyway (and it was one of those large, urban high schools from which many of the most successful graduates went on to become garage mechanics). To paraphrase Melville, a tabloid newspaper was my Yale and my Harvard (and yes, it is possible to have read Melville without attending Yale and Harvard. It's Sarah Palin's kind of story, too: lots of huntin' and guttin' ).
My lack of post-secondary education isn't something I'm proud of. Certainly I've never been moved to boast about it in public. Honestly, if I'd had more sense at eighteen, I would have gone to college -- preferably, an elite one. But I grew up in a newspaper family and was eager to join the business. So instead of spending my early twenties engaged in discussions of Keynes and Friedman, I found myself knocking on the metal doors of public housing developments, asking residents for recent photos of their murdered children. I never said "Get me rewrite" because, more often than not, I WAS rewrite. And like Palin, I was raised to disdain anyone who thought himself too clever or above everyone else (usually a reporter from the competing broadsheet). In my world, an elite degree marked you as someone with permanently retarded judgment, a reader of The New Yorker -- the sort of person of whom Orwell would write, "Only an intellectual could say something so stupid."
Maybe it's because of my background that I've been wary of Palin from the get-go -- and more than taken aback by those who insist the only reason a conservative could oppose her would be because of intellectual snobbery.
Don't get me wrong: I love the idea of Sarah Palin. She conforms to an early American (and pre-feminist) ideal of womanhood: rifle on one hip, baby on the other. I love her modern incarnation of this ideal, complete with Sex-in-the-Tundra wardrobe and kick-ass Jimmy Choos (even if they are paid for by the RNC). I love the idea she represents "common sense" over fancy-pants theorizing. I love -- and certainly identify with -- her real world, "out there" experience over her opponents' closed-off years in Washington. Truly, there are few women I'd rather share a beer with.
The problem is that the reality of Sarah Palin does not match the idea of Sarah Palin. It's as plain as day -- glaringly obvious! -- that she's unfit for the job she's running for. We wouldn't expect the best darn regional car saleswoman to be appointed the next vice president of General Motors. We wouldn't fly in a commercial plane piloted by someone with a Cessna license because we trusted her gut. We wouldn't follow a woman into battle because she's a crack shot at moose hunting. Why is it unreasonable -- or snobbish! -- to have expected a better choice from our party for the next potential leader of the free world?
And please don't reply with, "The other side doesn't have experience either!" That's an argument you can make without having graduated from elementary school.
Those of us who came of age as Reagan Republicans expected more from ourselves. Leave the left to its demagoguery and name-calling. We'll make the case using facts, reason - -and yes, common sense.
Now it seems my side are the ones circling the wagons, shouting abuse at dissenters -- determined to lose rather than ask ourselves why we aren't winning.
As Orwell once might have said...
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
The wonderful thing about this country is that you rise and fall based on your abilities and luck. Gov. Palin has the looks and communication skills and also been very lucky to be in Wasilla and Alaska (not New York or Chicago). However, she can only make it as far as her talent would take her.
Our current president (Mr. Bush) has some of the same gifts as Gov. Palin and many of the same liabilities (although not so crippling). The only reason where he is today was because of tremendous luck in being born the son of a former president and competing against Mr. Gore at a time when democrats had tarnished their image through the indiscretions of President Clinton. Jeb Bush and Kathleen Harris also helped.
However, luck and even great ability together sometimes are not enough. Senator Hillary Clinton, having both the ability, at a scale that Ms. Palin cannot even dream of, and President Clinton's machine backing her, when faced with a truly exceptional opponent like Senator Obama, could not win.
So, do not worry about 2012. President Obama will make Gov. Palin an even bigger laughing-stock should she be chosen to run against him as the Republican candidate. What I imagine is a truly memorable contest between Obama, the first black president against Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana (a Rhodes scholar) and an Asian-American candidate. That would be a contest where the nation would win no matter who is elected.
Bobby Jindal? Seriously, you think that guy would be a "win" for the country, with his extremist fundamentalist christian views? Only if your definition of "win" includes an American Theocracy.
Palin real? Come on. You do realize that she hired a PR firm while in Alaska to shape her image. She wears glasses because she felt she was "too pretty" without them wanted to appeal to women and men. OMG. This is a woman who believes her own hype. The reality of Palin was carefully crafted to give the illusion of "I'm just like you".
You can't blame the McCain campaign entirely. She may have been dolled up in expensive clothes, but, Palin started creating this media image a long time ago.
That was the whole POINT of this article. The author stated she loved the IDEA of Sarah Palin, but the REALITY did not match up with what was being presented. I don't particularly find a woman holding a rifle in one hand and a baby in the other as particularly appealing, but more power to the author if she does.
And common sense is great, but it is imperative it be accompanied by intellectual curiosity and the capacity to communicate clearly . . .
From watching and listening to people talk in this country for quite a while, I get the distinct impression that there is a real tension between "eggheads" - considered elitist and impractical by a greater number - and the "jocks" - a much larger population whose mentality seems to have been shaped around team sports and locker rooms.
The disdain of the "jocks" for the "eggheads" seems to be largely an aggressive compensating factor for a marked inferiority complex, but also a strong distrust of "abstract thinking" because the political class has so often provided palpable proof that ignoring realities might get you elected, but it won't ever yield results towards practical solutions. The reality that the "jocks", in turn, ignore at their peril, is that "eggheads" still have a better chance of coming up with any sort of solution at all.
But this is all really a fundamental problem of Democracy, a system that - in order to function best - assumes that all citizens are well educated (or at least equally capable of grasping the essence of the issues and their corollary complexities) and goal-oriented (as opposed to "my team vs. your team" mentality).
From: "The Revolt of the Elites" by the late Professor Christopher Lasch
"Once it was the 'revolt of the masses' that was held to threaten social order and the civilizing traditions of Western culture. In our time, however, the chief threat seems to come from those at the top of the social hierarchy, not the masses. This remarkable turn of events confounds our expectations about the course of history and calls long-established assumptions into question."
And
"Today it is the elites, however--those who control the international flow of money and information, preside over philanthropic foundations and institutions of higher learning, manage the instruments of cultural production and thus set the terms of public debate--that havve lost faith in the values, or what remains of them, of the West."
Bingo.
page 25 and 26 (W.W. Norton and Company, 1995)
What we may be seeing is more than a “revolt of the elites.” It may well be the crystallization of a social class and the default formation of an underclass as a consequence. A new class analysis may well be useful today. However the answer wouldn’t be a Marxist-type class solution, namely a revolution of the underclass as a class. The solution may be a return to the truth of “all politics being local politics.” An underclass revolt in the form of class war is no more viable than the formation of a third party. Thus the failure of Nader and the Libertarians. The solution may lie in the return to the building of community, locality, regional integrity. Possibly only this kind of rebuilding and transformation of sociality will generate a real democratic subject and political subjectivity which, self-reflectively informed of its real self-interest, is responsible and autonomous enough to save the democracy. Possibly only this kind of neo-populist return to the reconstitution of substantive community could enable the restructuring of our “Federalism” and proffer authentic representation.
"Don't get me wrong: I love the idea of Sarah Palin. She conforms to an early American (and pre-feminist) ideal of womanhood: rifle on one hip, baby on the other. " Are you kidding? Sorry not to be particularly sympathetic to your view.
Have to agree. I grew up semi-rural, huge garden with a few farm animals near a small town. However, I never imagined Ma Kettle (though slimmer) would make a good potential POTUS.
author says she liked the IDEA of palin. not the REALITY of palin. that was her entire point in writing this article. that the fantasy of what palin might be is not the reality of who she actually is. so she is saying she thinks palin does not meet the mark.
the idea is worse!!! sheesh
There are plenty of reasons to distrust Gov. Palin and judge her unfit for higher office without having to deride her educational experience.
Her unethical, illegal conduct as governor; what she did with the very small job of mayor of Wasilla; her lack of travel experience, even in the US; her inability to answer basic questions on substantive national issues, her constant revisions of her own record to improve her image, her slanderous personal attacks on Obama and Democrats; and her hate-filled, divisive tone when campaigning.
She clearly wasn't vetted by McCain and his Keystone Cop campaign managers, and he missed the biggest point of all: does this person deserve my trust?
Sarah's gift is not leadership but more like that of an entertainer, charismatic and funny, but not someone you trust with the most important decisions.
Families used to take pride in getting their children into college. Now, because of a bunch of no-nothings on the right (many of whom went to Yale, Harvard etc), college is a mark of elitism. Call me elite; I love it. If nothing else, I know that the Earth is more than 6,000 years old.
"I love the idea of Sarah Palin, she conforms to an early American (and pre-feminist) ideal of womanhood: rifle on one hip, baby on the other."
Were you born in the dark ages. I don't think feminism began in 1835, and that the American males dominating fantasy of the phisical woman was that of Annie Oakley.
Apparently you grew up in a urban loft with piped in fresh air.
On farms not that long ago, and someplaces now, women and men shared responsibilities. What you liberals called feminism, like you invented it, was just the way men and women were as a married couple. It may come as a surprise to the new democratic elite, but men don't need women to be self actualized and women don't need men either.
Sarah has redefined the new republican. She is beautiful, tough and has not backed down from anything. You gave her your best and she just smiles at it. Democrats will see her again.
Is being guilty of violating ethics part of this "new repubilcan" idea...hmm
Thanks for this piece and I hope you don't get ripped - like some other writers have, for coming from the "other side." I couldn't agree with you more and I feel liked I've typed myself to death saying it. I don't like Sarah Palin mostly because I'm NOT an elitist - I come from a hard core working class beackground (farmer father, 11 kids). I live in a small rural town. This woman is an insult to all of the intelligent, informed, caring, working class people who could be qualified to be VP or President because they have worked for it - not only through their professional lives and education, but through giving.
I just glanced up - and there are some hateful pieces here. Do any of you have the courage to try to go against your litttle world? In public? On a "progressive website?" Or in this case, on a conservative website? No one believes in a straight party or philisophical line. It takes guts to go against your own party and your own little world - you lose people. Your children lose friends. I admire this woman for doing it and for stating the truth.
sclucie...
Ok, why then would we want a President with less executive experience than Sarah Palin. Obama has zero executive experience. All he has ever done is taught and voted. Of the four candidates she has the most leadership experience. The state of Alaska has over 15,000 state employees which she is responsible for. What do the others have? McCain has none, Biden has none, and Obama has none.
Excuse me, George Bush had experience as a governor and he made a monkey's breakfast of everything he touched.
Bush had a lot more executive experience (over a much much greater populace) than Palin has. How's that working out for you?
I believe I'll vote for intellectually superior, better informed, wider world view instead. As a matter of fact, I already did that. I voted for Obama/Biden (and a straight Democratic ticket) on October 20th.
There are school superintendents who have more executive experience than Sarah Palin. There are deans of large universities who do more on a day-to-day basis than she did.
Plus, from what I've hear, Sarah phoned in a lot of her executive responsibility (when she wasn't over-stepping her bounds, that is).
I have faith that Obama can handle the "executive" part of the office.
John McCain has zero "executive experience" too!
McCain and Obama have executive experience. That's right. They both do. And I'm not smoking anything.
In addition to the 11.5 years of legislative experience that Obama has as well as the 12 + years as an attorney and the 30 or so years that McCain has, they both have executive experience running multi million dollar companies.
McCain and Obama both have just short of 2 years running a multi million dollar company with thousands of paid and unpaid workers. Just about the same amount of time that Gov. Palin has running the state of Alaska. In fact, I'd suggest that their experience is more extensive since their companies have employees operating in all 50 states and her experience only operated in the state of Alaska.
Right now, both Mr. McCain and Mr. Obama are running multi million dollar companies with thousands of employees.
Mr. Obama's steering his company a bit better through the chopping seas, but Mr. McCain is holding his own.
So, the only one left out of the executive experience equation is Mr. Biden. But based on the fact that he's run for President twice, he too has some experience running what is a company.
Education and a knowledge of civics are fundamentally necessary for anyone aspiring to high positions in public service such as VP. The problem with Palin is that she lacks the intellectual curiosity to overcome her shortcomings. Three times she has been asked what is the role of the VP, and three times she has answered incorrectly- brushing over the Constitution which is available in the internet would have helped....
Another problem with Palin is the lack of measuring what comes out of her mouth. this could be helped by engaging the brain before opening the mouth...bu
Believe me, if the conservatives want to have Sarah Palin as the leader of their party, more power to them, although they are going to lose folks like Frum, Buckley, Powell as well as independents.
Belive me, conservatives would like neoconservative and liberal republicans to leave the party. Would you like them?
Palin is void of ideas so loving "the idea" of Sarah Palin" is an emty argument, unless you're against a woman's right to an abortion even when raped, Gay rights and a continuous war in Iraq etc. Whenever I hear some pundit say how much they respect Palin because she's brought the base to together for McCain etc and she's a new face and she's a woman and all that nonsense as Mika on "Good Morning Joe' does and who should know better than try and suck up to Joe's right-wing crowd, it makes you sick. Take Palin for who she is, an extremeist right-wing Christian fundamentalist who would, if given the chance, take this country into a deeper dive than we're already in because of her lack of knowledge, as well as her extremist positions. Her homespun 'you betchas' are nauseating and her road is one of dumbing down the perceptions of the electorate. I believe those in the McCain campaign who have called her a whack job and a diva. She's a Dragon Lady out of control and all this White House business has gone to her empty head. For me, give me someone who is smart, in fact, very smart. Look what happened when Gore ran against Bush and the media constantly criticized Gore for being too smart and consistently asked that great question of the day, 'Who would you rather have a beer with?". Look what we got.
Ok--does anyone else find it hilarious that the title of this post begins with T'aint???
Irony--hello!!!!!
We don't elect a Mayor of a town of 5,000 residents winning with six hundreds votes then, based on that experience, won the governorship with 114,000 votes, to be a 72 year-old-h
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
