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.
Growing socialist and people's democratic projects, as in China and Bolivia, must be seen as examples of how revolutionary forces in the United States can build a system of governance.
A reported rift between Trump and Netanyahu continues to widen ahead of the US president's first visit to West Asia since regaining power.
A forward-looking critique of African and Caribbean collaborations embodied in the Africa-Caribbean Community (CARICOM) Summit.
The United States' role in Central Africa has resulted in regional war and mass casualties.
In this week’s segment, we discuss the 80th anniversary of victory in Europe in World War II, and the disinformation that centers on the U.S.'s role and dismisses the pivotal Soviet role in that…
