by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret KimberleySmug Democrats love to imagine they are a species apart from Sarah Palin, the “pit bull with lipstick.” However, U.S. political history teaches us never to overestimate the intelligence of the American electorate, or trust a Democrat – many of whom were Republicans not very long ago. At root, Palin's supporters are “white nationalists,” the same people that adored Ronald Reagan and, yes, George Bush. So why is it so hard to imagine a Palin presidency?
Freedom Rider: President Sarah Palin
by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley
“Palin’s fans are white nationalists, who won’t be taken seriously if they speak their true thoughts.”
Sarah Palin has been the butt of jokes ever since John McCain chose her as his running mate in the 2008 presidential election. She got off to a decidedly inauspicious start, with a pregnant teenage daughter and interview disasters that a sitting governor and vice presidential candidate should have easily handled.
Now she is settling scores with the publication of her autobiography, Going Rogue. The book is definitely pay back against all those she feels mistreated her during the presidential campaign, but it would be unwise to dismiss Palin and her political ambitions. Going Rogue should also be seen as Palin’s first foray into the 2012 presidential campaign.
It is easy to snicker at the woman who claimed that Alaska’s proximity to Russia made her a qualified potential president. Yet it should also be remembered that Ronald Reagan was once joke fodder for late night talk show hosts, as was George W. Bush. Palin can’t be disregarded because she was a beauty queen. Reagan starred in film classics such as Bedtime for Bonzo and ended up being elected to the presidency not once but twice.
“It would be unwise to dismiss Palin and her political ambitions.”
Democrats would do well to take Palin seriously. She would not have become John McCain’s running mate unless she was supported by the Republican Party base, the religious conservative and tea party crowd. Say what you will about the Republicans, unlike the Democrats, they know the importance of pleasing their most loyal party members.
Palin speaks their language. She understands people who “want their country back” while most people scratch their heads at the seeming gibberish. In short, they are white nationalists, who won’t be taken seriously if they speak their true thoughts. The “pit bull with lipstick” understands them and in return they treat her as their icon.
In analyzing Palin’s political future, it is important to examine faulty conventional wisdom about what makes an individual qualified to be president of the United States. Palin was an elected governor, a good enough qualification for Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton, to name but a few. Her grasp of important issues is no worse than that of some in this now august group.
“Reagan knew he wasn’t the sharpest knife in the drawer.”
The only difference between Palin and Reagan or Bush is that she previously refused to acknowledge her limitations. Reagan knew he wasn’t the sharpest knife in the drawer and he resolved to put together a communications team who revolutionized the art of media manipulation and currying favor with the right groups of powerful people. Their skills transformed Reagan’s image from buffoon to the “great communicator” who was all but worshipped by many of the people who at first dismissed him. If Palin shows signs of similar Reaganesque shrewdness, then prepare to call her Madame President.
The snobbish contempt heaped upon Palin is not warranted. All of the Ivy League degrees and ruling class credentials of Bush father and son, Clinton and Obama have not benefited working Americans. We still have endless war, and the government continues to send trillions of dollars in public money to the people and the corporations who brought down our financial system. There is no plan to address long term unemployment, and even a black president is uninterested in the plight of the black unemployed.
The only difference between Palin and her vice presidential opponent Joe Biden, is in the number of years each has served in elected office. Biden is known as being “gaffe prone,” a polite way of saying stupid and indiscreet. He is thought to have “gravitas” and is considered a foreign policy heavy weight because he usually advocates the right of the United States to kill people at will. In that regard, Palin differs little from her 2008 opponent who now sits in the change agent administration.
“A Palin administration wouldn’t be much worse than anything else we have experienced.”
So yes, Sarah Palin could be president and no, a Palin administration wouldn’t be much worse than anything else we have experienced. Barack Obama is now planning to escalate the war against the Afghan people. He and his administration are about to preside over what can only be described as a show trial of 9/11 suspect Khalid Sheik Mohammed and his codefendants. The president and his attorney general have both predicted a guilty verdict and an execution, all before one word of testimony has been heard. Palin is anti choice on abortion, but congressional Democrats threw women under the bus in striking abortion coverage from any health care legislation. Is a Republican presidential administration really any worse than a democratic one?
There are voters who supported Bush in 2004 and Obama in 2008. If there is sufficient disillusionment with Obama, he and the Democrats could lose support to a Republican in 2012. That Republican could be Palin or someone else. There should be little surprise or alarm if that is the case.
Margaret Kimberley's Freedom Rider column appears weekly in BAR. Ms. Kimberley lives in New York City, and can be reached via e-Mail at Margaret.Kimberley(at)BlackAgandaReport.com.
Comments
I know what you father meant; find the lyrics to Phil Ochs' song
PanaSemitaSioni: Find the song lyrics of "Love Me, I'm A Liberal". I am not a liberal. It explains what a liberal is, although written awhile ago, it still "works".
President Palin
I'd hate to be linked with a fringe nationalist group but I really like Sarah Palin and can't wait to vote for her as President. Is there some way I, a middle-aged white guy, can get credit for not being a misogynist in supporting her? I know the folks who normally check this site love to hate people like me but I really do love this country and I want the best for it.
We don't "hate" people like you
Tim, we just strongly disagree with you. Why do you think a President Palin would be a good thing, why would you prefer her over other GOP potential candidates, as a "populist" what makes her better than Hucklebee?
Most of us realize we are not going to change your opinion any more than you'll change ours, so the best we can hope for perhaps is some level of understanding. I'm just intellectually curious as to why you think a bona fide quitter would make a good President, whether of the US of A or the PTA?
To "give you credit" I'm going to link an article from Arthur Silber who talks about the sexism that is directed at Palin and her qualifications to be President. Granted Silber and Chris Floyd whom he links may have different reasons than yours as to why Palin is a viable candidate. Here's the take:
November 19, 2009
Palin Derangement Syndrome: When It's Time for a Long, Long Rest
http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/2009/11/palin-derangement-syndrome-...
"To rephrase Floyd's argument in terms of any alleged "threat" that one might consider Palin to be: given the operation of the current system -- and in light of the fact that these mechanics are entrenched and embedded throughout that system in a multitude of ways -- even a President Palin would not make any difference in any significant way. This is precisely the point that I recently made about Obama and his full embrace and even expansion of all those policies of the Bush administration that he had repeatedly pledged to change or reverse. That post also analyzes the progressives' complete failure to oppose Obama's supposed "capitulation" in any meaningful manner."
And the truth is that Obama isn't "capitulating," for he never opposed our corporatist-authoritarian system. He's the perfect embodiment of that system, a point I have been making for well over a year. The ultimate explanation will again be found in the nature of our current system of government itself:
Any individual who rises to the national political level is, of necessity and by definition, committed to the authoritarian-corporatist state. The current system will not allow anyone to be elected from either of the two major parties who is determined to dismantle even one part of that system.
All of this applies to Obama, and it also applies to Sarah Palin."
So TexasTim, here you have your "Leftist" "endorsement" of a Palin Presidency, an endorsement (presumably) of course based upon different reasons than your own. Last, I don't know how a good, Republican like yourself cottons to a Palin "endorsement" from a gay, Leftist, white guy like Silber, but there you have it?
Who's that girl?
My God, Sarah Plain looks and sounds like Peggy Hill, dontchaknow!
Deepak Chopra's take
Sarah Palin: Fooling None Of The People All Of The Time
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/deepak-chopra/sarah-palin-fooling-none_b_3...
Excerpt:
But nobody is being fooled. A recent Gallup poll showed that 67% of responders don't want Palin to run for president. Fear of Palin is ill-advised on two counts. First, fear is what the shadow wants. Without it, the shadow has no power. Second, the left needs to learn how to win graciously. The current upheaval in American society, which has been an enormous threat on many fronts, called forth a president and a constituency that knows how to handle crisis. The voices of sanity are prevailing. The solutions that have emerged on all fronts -- economic, social, and international -- represent the best in the American character."
I don't know about "the best in the American Character" or the "left needs to learn to win graciously" biz, but the statistic he cites and some of the arguments he makes are otherwise valid points. Though he is naive to not consider how the media will use her as a torch for regressive causes, as a bludgeon to liberal causes.
45th President of the United States
I am on the same wavelength with you Ms. Kimberly. I said the same thing in my blog a few days ago. The only difference is you think she can or might become president. I think she WILL become president beyond a doubt. Poor, angry rednecks are very predictable. It's almost too easy for the elite.
http://racerules.wordpress.com/2009/11/23/sarah-palin-45th-president-of-...
America is a Center-Right Country aka Conservative
Although I acknowledge and agree, in part, with all of the arguments for a Palin Presidency, my cynicism comes into play when current national polling shows only 25% of Americans identify themselves as Republicans. The Republican Brand is fast fading, though Obama's incompetence and timidity may lead it to a possible resurgence, and I am doubtful that Palin has significantly broad appeal amongst "Rockefeller" Republicans/Libertarians/and Moderates/Independents to hold national sway. Remember that Obama got the bulk of college-degreed types to swing his way. Remember how Clinton cast herself as more "blue collar." It's tempting to digress on how Obama and the Dems could have vanquished the GOP Brand once and for all, but I won't.
Conversely, remember, as Ms. Kimberly reminds us, that Democrats voted wholesale for Reagan, and, in all fairness, is Palin any more dimmer than Ronnie? Some argue that Reagan, though no Ivy-League calibre intellect, was at least able to articule a coherent policy or philosophy. It's getting increasingly difficult for the Republicans to do the same. If I were a betting man I'd say Mitt Romney looms larger than Palin. "Going Rogue" is not the epithet for being President of the United States. (Interestingly, polls show a slight increase in the number of Americans against abortions).
The field will be wide open no doubt, due to the incompetence and shallowness of the Demcratic Party and the extent to which they have disillusioned their "base." But people are scared as hell of Sarah Palin, and a "bitch going rogue," is scarier still. Last but not least, the GOP "base," what Robt. Altemeyer refers to as "Authoritarians," is both a boon and a curse. The "Creative Class" may practice empty progressivism, but their effete educations, sensibilities, tolerance, and worldviews won't permit them to be attached to White Christian Nationalism. Many won't vote Palin out of sheer embarassment. The "base" or Altemeyer's "Authoritarians," while providing rabid energy ultimately hamstrings the Party. Most college grads don't see Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter as Leaders.
http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/
I'm not convinced that state-wide GOP resurgences will translate into national ones. National politics has different dynamics. Democrats in Iowa vote for both Harkin and Grassley. What appeals on a state or regional level does not necessarily translate into national appeal. For sure, anything is possible, especially in a country as dimwitted, increasingly regressive, and inherently center-right as America.
I still believe that McCain would have beaten Obama, especially if he had serial Dem traitor Joe Lieberman on the ticket. When he selected Palin, it showed he was not ready for prime time, his age issues then morphed into validating questions about his judgment. Obama went to the Center where he will stay, it's the sine qua non of his "bipartisan" pussy-ship. He knows where the electoral strengths and weaknesses lie on a national level. F***k the Blacks and the Libs, they have no where else to go. The Hispanics are predominantly Catholic, so abortion makes them ripe for the Center or Rightist tendencies as well. He's outdone Clinton with triangulation, he's a "brother with charm and charisma." If he were in the hood, he'd be a great pimp.
So who will be the next President? The Pimp from Chi-town, or the hot, little cougar from Wasilla? Right now I go with the pimp. However, whoever it may be will win because they capture the Center-Right vote. Oh, btw, what we now call Center-Right use to be Right Wing, America's regressive genes are kicking into high gear. After all, the "media" and pundits consider Obama "Liberal." Get my drift?
THIS IS ALL STILL, JUST POLITICAL THEATRE
Here's the deal: If Booker T. Obama gives the elites what they want (cuts in Social Security, cuts in Medicare, partial privatization of education a.k.a. charter schools, a military engagement in Somalia/Sudan, expanded "free" trade zones, weak financial regulation, and immigration "reform"), Sarah Palin will be offered up as a sacrifice. The only way Palin becomes president is if black people quit drinking the kool-aid- eliminating the let's scare black people then take them for granted strategy. Her job for now is to stirr the white nationalists into such a frenzy that they would be willing to vote for the regressive enough candidate. If Obama fails to give democratic cover to the elitist agenda, expect an all Minnesota republican ticket.
Great
Really great. What a masterpiece.Thanks for sharing it.
Acai Berry
Colon Cleanse
Arbitrage Conspiracy Reviews
LL you gave me an "aha" moment....
It also occurs to me LL that Palin is f***king with the big guns, the money players and ballers w/n the GOP. Bad mouthing McCain will only reap her enemies, McCain is too entrenched in the stench and filth of American Bipartisanship, his connections on both sides of the "asile" of the American Imperium run deep. Palin does not have the support of the GOP Elites, the Right Wing Intelligentsia. Geo. Will, Peggy Noonan, and David Brooks, the "sages and oracles" of the GOP Elite, dismiss her as a "unserious celebrity." In the hood these "journalists" would be called "shot-callers."
The GOP Elite doesn't need nor want a "radical" to run the Empire. Reagan at least had "charm," was "likable," and one would have to assume living in Cali did make him more tolerant (personally if not politically). Palin is casting herself as abrasive, and she'll get a healthy helping hand from the GOP elites. Pawlenty, Mitt, even Huckleberry are more viable than Palin. The base will make her a "celebrity," a so-called "force," but ultimately the Big Ballers calling the shots, will rally the troops and apparchtik around a "moderate" republican just like they rallied around Booker T. The GOP intellgentsia (like the Dem one) understands the future lies in the center, what use to be "conservative" but what the Propagandists have already succeeded in calling "moderate."
As we see from Booker T's most esteemed advisors and cabinet, THERE WAS NEVER A HAIR'S DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BOOKER T. and HILLARY!!. The Elites simply decided the Clinton brand was played and that the rock-star, anti-Jimi Hendrix Black guy would swoon the natives with silver tongue eloquence. Hope and Change seemed like heaven after 8 years of Bush/Cheney distopia.
So LL your right. Shits just a game... But the Media, even the "Liberal" one, will indeed use Palin to influence more regressive policies and legislation. Despite 25% of Americans calling themselves Repugs, the f****king media portrays them as a juggernaut. Palin will take this mindf***k and propaganda meme to a whole new level.
It's like 3 card molly, .. you played anyway it goes.
One more thing, Booker T. is committed as hell to give the Elites just those things you laid out. More Ronnie Reaganism via Chocolate Thunder, coming at a theatre near you soon.
i See These Politicians Like Obama and Palin As The Same
They are imperialists. They are goofy in a way only an American can be goofy. Both are devoid of compassion or empathy. They are both war fanatics.
South America is about to explode and will when Gates/obama´s number of BOOTS ON THE GROUND is reached.
The mere mention of the name Barack Obama nauseates people, never mind his insults and lies. He´s all involved in being black and the first black president, bit until somebody explains why that means anything or should mean anything to me, why should I care?
My father was a communist. He HATED libeals more than he hated fascists. Fascists he understood. He knew they were about control, violence, locked-in social strata, and a police state. But who knows what liberal even MEANS today. Seems to me that it mans identical things as fascism does but prettified in some way such that they wan PRAISE for their open-mindedness.
South America is so ethnic-aly diverse that I never had to ponder any of this masterful Obama campaign brought the American racisal poisons into my life.
The game is on, dear friends. I´ve written it before. Aside from Russia,China and India´s JVs in natural resource exploration and development, the only friends anybody has in the USA who can change minds are yours, Cindy Sheehan and the Southern livertarians.
That´s kind of a tough hand to play including Chavez Lula , Lugo and owevver the Pacific sorts itself out.
Keep up the good work.
--PSSJ
Raimondo nails the "Liberal" contradictions
"Who Will Protest Obama's Wars?"
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/11/24/who-will-protest-obamas-war/
Excerpt:
"What it boils down to is this: saying no to war entails saying no to Obama – and I have the distinct feeling that, forced to make a choice between their ostensibly antiwar sentiments and their devotion to the Dear Leader, Shara and her privileged, politically correct friends will reflexively choose the latter. Indeed, they already have, which is why Stanford Says No to War is lazing around, only stirring itself when a Republican rolls into view. But for how much longer can they rank on Condi Rice, who may indeed be a reprehensible warmonger but has, since the end of her tenure at State, been rendered relatively harmless?"
Yes, she could be president, but we can't predict if or how much
worse she'll be. Noam Chomsky has also pointed out that the people who are listed in this article, could go "right" and the whole country could go "right" not "left", which reminded him, with some discomfort, of Germany in the 1930s. I do not underrate the ability to "sell" a candidate, which Chomsky, and Paul Street (here and on Znet) have pointed out. I've been wondering..... She still scares me.
In a land where most of the
In a land where most of the inhabitants believe in pregnant virgins, cadavers that get up and walk out of their crypts, invisible, omnipotent, omniscient bogeymen that live in the sky, prophets that soar to heaven on flying donkeys, chosen peoples, and the United States as the moral beacon of the planet, the election of Sarah Palin, Dan Quayle, Pat Robertson, Rush Limbaugh, or any other demented candidate to any office should not surprise anyone.
we're talking "scary" not whether or not "surprise"
But I get your point about religion,etc. And well said,too.
Cretins in (and near) the White House
Let’s see. In addition to George W and Ronald Reagan, we’ve had the moronic Gerald Ford, the vile Richard Nixon, and the doddering, stuttering fool, Dwight D. Eisenhower, whose two greatest gifts to the citizens of the United States were Richard Nixon and "One nation under god" in the pledge-allegiance-- which is a farce and which I stopped saying when I was in fifth grade.
The aptly named Vice-Presidency has been a show case for mountebanks, fools, and charlatans: Richard Nixon; Spiro Agnew–whom Eugene McCarthy called "Nixon’s Nixon"; Dan Quayle–a truly astonishing imbecile even by the standards of the office; and the current travesty, Joe Biden.
Stupidity is always amazing–no matter how used to it one gets.
And to expand Barnum’s famous observation, no one ever went broke, or lost an election, by underestimating the intelligence of the American people