Sarah Palin and Three-Syllable Words

Sorry.  I’ve taken it long enough, and I just can’t stay quiet about Sarah any longer.  Here’s the thing I hate most about the Sarah Palin phenomenon:  you can’t criticize her.  If you’re male, you’re a sexist; if you’re female, you just hate her because she’s beautiful.  And there’s no argument to counter that.  It’s like the old joke about asking when you stopped beating your wife.  As soon as you start to say, “But I never…”, you realize you’ve been trapped.  If you’re a liberal critic, that goes double for you, and if you’re a liberal critic in the media, triple.  Said another way by Judith Warner of the NY Times:

“The idea that women with a “major education” think they’re better than everyone else, have a great sense of entitlement, feel they deserve special treatment, and are too out of touch with the lives of “normal” women to have a legitimate point of view, is a 21st-century version of the long-held belief that education makes women uppity and leads them to forget their rightful place. It’s precisely the kind of thinking that has fueled Sarah Palin’s unlikely — and continued — ability to pass herself off as the consummately “real” American woman. (And it is what has made it possible for her supporters to discredit other women’s criticism of her as elitist cat fighting.)”–July 9, 2009 

That’s why I have viewed the reactions of conservatives over the last week with great glee.  They aren’t so easy to dismiss.  First there is David Brooks, who technically isn’t a conservative, he’s a moderate, but he’s the most liberal of the people I’ll refer to here, not counting Warner.  His op-ed In Search of Dignity concludes that Sarah Palin and Mark Sanford have none; Obama does.    To quote him:  “Then there was Sarah Palin’s press conference. Here was a woman who aspires to a high public role but is unfamiliar with the traits of equipoise and constancy, which are the sources of authority and trust.”  He says worse, but you get the drift. 

Then there was Russ Douthat who wrote about Palin and Her Enemies.  He’s quite a bit more sympathetic to Palin than most, but he says she should have said no to John McCain.  Well of course.  But her ego would not have allowed that. 

Now today, there is Kathleen Parker, who I guess is pretty enough and conservative enough to get away with her criticisms.  Her column from yesterday begins:

“WHEN YOU’RE up to your waders in barracuda, blame the media.

And quit your job.

And say you did it for the people.

And hire an agent.

And try to keep a straight face.

On your way to the bank.”

Parker ends her column by saying that if this is altruism, “there’s a lakeside house in Wasilla with a fabulous view of Russia you’re just gonna love”.

By far, however, the comment that struck home with me was by, of all people, Jeb Bush.  (What is the world coming to?)  Here’s a summary from CNN Political Ticker, although the actual interview with Jeb is in Esquire magazine.  There’s a link to it in the CNN article if you’d prefer to go to the source.  The relevant quote: 

“Told that Joe the Plumber had briefed congressional Republicans on Gaza, Bush launched into a defense of intellectualism. “I think it’s okay to have a deeper understanding of things. I think it’s okay to talk in three-syllable words. The world we’re living in is incredibly complex,” he told the magazine. “And simplifying things to the point where you’re misunderstanding where we are as a nation isn’t going to help people overcome their fears or give them hope that they can achieve great things. I don’t get inspired by shameless populism.”  Shameless populism?  He may have been talking about Joe the Plumber, but who else does that remind you of?  Also when asked who he thought the leaders of the Republican Party are, Sarah wasn’t mentioned. 

So while listening to Sarah’s garbled speech and cutesy folkisms (Only dead fish go with the flow?  Huh?)  may make me grind my teeth together, I am comforted by this prediction:  she will never be either President or VP.  The Republican Party will not let that happen.  I’m not sure she’ll ever make it to Congress either.  Maybe she should try to run for mayor of Wasilla again, if there are enough people even there who still trust her.


10 responses to “Sarah Palin and Three-Syllable Words

  1. She is like a water moccasin in the swamp creek for liberals, just wanna tease her because she is dangerous. Prod her with the stick or stone handy to make her strike at air. Tease and demean her and the kids and find a way to justify it. Nothing is out of bounds or off limits.

    It’s sad that liberal”intellectualism” is so redneck.

    “Hey Bubba….watch this”

  2. You almost sound as if you feel sorry for her, and I think that’s a luxury you don’t get in politics–that is, to have people feel sorry for you. I of course, believe the ridicule heaped on Sarah is self-created. She doesn’t need prodding or goading to make a complete fool of herself.
    That said, I don’t actually think Sarah is all bad. Mostly I just think she’s unsuited to govern.

  3. I am sad that people as gifted as Maureen Dowd can not control the venom and hatred that they write. But even sadder that it is reduced to the level of checkout line “tabloidism” that gifted people embrace as funny and fair for one side but bigoted and unfair for the other.

    America pays the price and the Pols just keep on reveling in the public’s stupidity.

    Now the funny part is that all of the PT Barnum publicity will make Sarah wealthier than all her detractors.

  4. Interesting comment. I recently heard an interview on NPR with a writer named John Denby on his recent book “Snark: It’s Mean, It’s Personal, It’s Ruining Our Conversation”. The book has an entire chapter on Dowd, who is more or less the queen of snark. That isn’t to say that I don’t take a guilty pleasure in some of Dowd’s columns, but I recognize that our true public conversations should not really use her as a model.
    You’ll notice that in my post above, and as far as I can recall, in all my previous ones, you won’t find me commenting on Sarah’s appearance (okay, maybe the red shoes) or her family. I’m more concerned with her intellectual weightlessness, which may not be due to a lack of ability but to something like attention deficit disorder. Either way, she embodies and appeals to what I consider the lowest common denominator in our country. People who get their “knowledge” from pulpits and bumper stickers and slogans and buzzwords, who don’t think independently and have no grasp of nuance.
    The problem with the snarks is that it moves people who might otherwise have begun to question Sarah’s fitness for office to defend her more passionately.

  5. You have to keep in mind that people might not read Dowd if she wrote like Mary Anne Lindley. We read Dowd just because she is snarky and we love it.

  6. “That’s why I have viewed the reactions of conservatives over the last week with great glee.”

    “We read Dowd just because she is snarky and we love it.”

    It’s like stoning; the mentality of the outraged mob decides her fate. Throw more and laugh about it, is that political reality in the same nation that you charge should be held to a civilized higher standard than the terrorists who try to destroy us?

    You know I heard the other day that leprosy is on the rise in America. It particularly infects conservatives. There is growing talk of shipping us all off to a colony so that the “pure” can remain uninfected.

    Anyone can be snarky but it doesn’t make them correct, funny……..or particularly civil.

  7. PT, have you ever stopped to consider that Palin brought this on herself? I mean “determined and dedicated people inspired me to quit” is not a smart thing to say and expect not to get ridiculed.

    I thought Dowd and Collins were hilarious. Peggy Noonan and Kathleen Parker were kind of brutal.

  8. Oh please pt! “Civilized standards” and “terrorists” don’t belong in the same sentence. Ordinarily you would be praising the freedom of speech we enjoy in this country–or does that not apply when the subject is Sarah Palin? Osama Bin Laden would probably have Maureen Dowd beheaded. I think we can best set ourselves above terrorists by not torturing.

  9. pt, who is behind the mobs now? Sarah Palin is stoking the fire,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s