Oct 01 2009

Sarah Palin’s First Misstep? Doubtful

The news is spreading that Governor Palin’s ghostwriter for her up and coming book is a far right wing evangelical. Which means there is a good chance Lynn Vincent is just like 70% of Main Stream America – who are the antithesis of the elites who make up the Political Industrial Complex that has been bungling their way for many years now.

A new Politico piece is out today, dutifully reporting the spin which was flowing through the partisan blogosphere yesterday – an unfortunate reaction to net-hype by a ‘so called’ news outlet:

Vincent’s past projects include co-writing the memoir of General William Boykin, who blasted the media and President George W. Bush alike for ending his career over his casting the war on terror in overtly religious terms. Her most political book, “Donkey Cons,” describes the Democratic Party since its inception as “pro-gangster” and the “party of treason and subversion.” Her work for World Magazine, where she was an editor, includes a description of President Barack Obama as the “minority survivor” of the “black genocide” – that is, abortion.

First off, I think it is safe to assume this is a cherry picked selection of Vincent’s work. That’s how these hit pieces find some air, through distortion and exaggeration. But I do see a problem here: Vincent is probably too hot in her rhetoric to provide the calm and reason the nation wants right now. But then again, is this about Vincent or Palin?

We as a nation are sick and tired of the partisan zealots arguing over which side of the spectrum is the smartest and more capable to tell us other rubes how to live right. The Democrats as a whole are not “the party of treason”. There are some far left liberals (mostly visible now in DC and in the media) who would love to change this country into a socialist, central control, fantasy of dictatorial perfection (and perks for the select elite). But there are bizarre counter parts with the same delusions of Godliness on the right. These are the exceptions, not the rule in the nation as a whole.

What we don’t need is to change America or fracture Americans. We don’t need a hyper-partisan. We need someone like Sarah Palin has been demonstrated to be so far. Honest and blunt in a kidding way – not a threatening or demeaning way. Someone who can honor our differences and represent our diversity – not someone trying to shape us into their image of a perfect society.

Lynn Vincent may be getting a bum wrap here, odds are she is given the Political Industrial Complex and their fear of normal America taking over. From day one the left and media elite (and some conservatives violating Reagan’s 11th commandment) have tried to paint Palin as a religious zealot. I have never once seen anything to back up those claims.

So I read this article and noted some troubling evidence of my own:

Sarah Palin’s most consequential choice since leaving the Alaska governor’s mansion may be her co-author – a staunch conservative, devoted evangelical Christian, and intensely partisan Republican from far, far outside the Beltway.

Some things don’t work here. “Staunch Conservative” and “Intensely Partisan Republican” are either redundant or an oxymoron. Trying to use both points to an effort to exaggerate – a lot.  That’s like saying Vincent is really, really, really, really on the right side of politics.

“Devoted evangelical Christian” means nothing more than the woman goes to church regularly. Again, why bring this up unless your trying to create an impression. Another sign this is not reporting but a political PR piece.

And the worst is always left for last: “from far, far outside the Beltway

Yeah, Palin and Vincent are from that land far, far outside the Beltway (why do I feel a Shrek analogy is called for?). The Ogres from Main Street are coming to town and the Political Industrial Complex has their Paul Revere’s crying the alarm.

This so called reporting is actually another sign of the power of Palin to disrupt and shake up the Political Industrial Complex. Vincent may be too far right to be elected to office, but she is not running for office. So far I have seen nothing to prove Vincent is outside the boundaries of main stream America (which is really a very broad and diverse group of people). Some people are intense, few of us can get elected.

What is really pathetic in this blatant political piece trying to masquerade as news (sort of reminds me of Shrek again, all gussied up in formal wear) is the attempt to transmute Vincent into Palin:

Palin’s choice of Vincent suggests that hers will be, emphatically, a partisan tract. And it is of a piece with a post-election posture in which the nation’s most intensely popular, and most intensely unpopular, Republican has chosen to deepen her bond with her base at the cost of antipathy from the independent voters who decide presidential elections.

Well, this is all supposition with an overdose of wishful thinking thrown in. Palin has never pushed cultural conservative issues into political policies. Not once that I could find. Lord knows the left tried to find an example of this (remember the whole book banning in the libraries lies).

“The success of this book will rise and fall on who much it appeals to the Christian right,” Nelson said.

I found this quote particularly damning of the hit job has a whole. This Nelson person has no relationship to the book, Vincent or Palin. She is offering an outside opinion that isn’t worth a dime. But it does give a chance to reinforce that evil phrase again: “Christian right”.

People of faith scare the daylights out of elites. The churches of elites  are different than the ones sprinkled in the neighborhoods of this great nation. They focus on different things. The elites fear people who actually live and breathe their religious beliefs. They come from the Church of “its OK to cut corners”.

For the record, I don’t attend church anymore. I believe I learned what I needed about living a positive spiritual life when I attended as a kid. I also have a serious problem with the way the Roman Catholic Church sees women as second class. So religion and I parted ways (not God and I). I always wondered about those who go for show more than reason. One of those puzzles I will never solve I guess.

Anyway, Palin does have to manage the image (if not the reality) of her religious side and connections with those who are more strident. Vincent is probably a great writer and could work positively with Sarah Palin to get herself on paper, focus on the important stuff. After the fiasco of the DC handlers mucking things up during the 2008 election I am not surprised Palin went for far, far outside the beltway.

Palin will control the tenor and priorities –  not Vincent. It is too early for anyone to make judgement on the book and its message. Which, in the end, is why this hit piece from Politico is not a warning sign for Sarah yet, but a sign of more panic from the Political Industrial Complex.

Which segues me nicely into an incredibly insightful piece by Jay Cost on the hubris of President Obama. While the article’s focus is on Obama’s problematic relationship with America as a whole, the same observations apply to the Political Industrial Complex (left and right) as a whole. This fracture between those who led this nation into this partisan snake pit (the pols, the hype-addicted news media, the talking heads, handlers, lobbyists, and partisan consultant) and the nation itself is summarized nicely in the piece:

We all know that President Obama has a Republican problem, namely the 200 or so Republican members of Congress who refuse to go along with his health care reform plans. However, I think he might also be developing a republican problem. Namely, I think he is having trouble keeping his ego within the boundaries of an office that fundamentally reflects the republican quality of this country.

It is difficult to nail down precisely what “republicanism” means. It has had different meanings in different places at different times. In the United States, it conjures up the notion of self-government: the people are capable of ruling themselves, and the authority of the leaders derives from the consent of the governed, rather than some aristocratic pedigree or superior position in life.

Ironically, the sense that the President is no better than any of us is a major reason why the office is so powerful, or at least why it can be. A President who appears to be of the people, rather than above them, can more easily rally them to his cause, thereby forcing the Congress to do as he likes. It is not coincidental that the first stirrings of the modern, powerful presidency can be seen in the administration of Andrew Jackson, who was thought by his opponents to be the leader of a mob.

Since he emerged on the national stage, Barack Obama has not been the model of American republicanism. This was the case during the campaign, and it continues today. Juxtapose the simple respectability of the White House with these images taken from the Obama-Biden campaign website.

Creepy Obama Imagery.jpg

Read the whole thing, it really distills down the problem the people in DC are having with those of us outside the Beltway.  And Palin is the figure head for all of us outside the beltway – that is why she stirs up so much fear. The problem for Obama and all these DC clowns is their egos. They see themselves as the white knights come to save America:

There are two problems with the attitude that Gerson has correctly identified. First, it’s fair to criticize the actions of the previous administration to a point, but speeches like his U.N. address often move beyond that to suggest a broader failure, one that implicates the mass public. For instance, the best rejoinder he has to those who question the “character” of his country is: “look at the concrete actions we have taken in just nine months,” which he suggests are “just a beginning.” This rhetoric does not befit the leader of a democratic republic, especially one as great as the United States of America. The President should be willing and able to defend the “character” of his country beyond his own, inconsequential-to-date actions.

Second, the implication here is that his administration has sanctified our character. No administration can do that in a republic because no administration possesses the moral standing to offer such a blessing. He is the equal of the people in every measure. He temporarily holds an office whose magnificence is dependent upon the goodness of the people he represents. Yet this President implies a claim to such moral superiority – in the above quoted sentence, then later on when he says: “The test of our leadership will not be the degree to which we feed the fears and old hatreds of our people.” No President should suggest that his people would fall prey to fear and hatred were it not for his leadership – even if he thought this were true. And he surely should not air such “dirty laundry” to an international audience that does not understand how this country actually functions. Instead, he should claim that he leads a great people who have the wisdom and equanimity not to fall prey to such fears, and it is his hope that he can emulate them.

We are getting an ear full of “I have never been proud of my country until now” and “Its all because I am here doing what I am doing that we are now whole”. Obama and the DC elites are piling it on too thick to stomach. Makes one almost want to throw up.

Add into the political mix the Nanny state attacks on babysitting, garage sales, riding bikes to school and the take over of our health care and you see a tipping point going by.

We do not worship  our leaders, we hold them accountable. 90% of us would prefer to do things ourselves, our way, and have the fools in DC be quiet and just keep the trains running on time. But this generation of leaders really think they are special. Sadly, when you look people like Kerry, Gore and others all you see are people kidding themselves. ‘Special’ just doesn’t work with these people trying to keep up with a rapidly changing, modern, complex world.

As the facade was ripped from the news media, and this nation grew to realize there was a bottomless pit of information which we could digest and synthesize better than the talking heads on TV could ever hope (we miss you Dan!- not) I think  the facade of the all powerful, all knowing, all wise political leader is falling away as well.

The internet has brought us close to each other, even though we may never physically meet. That kind of familiarity tends to rip away romantic facades. But the core of reality, while less grand, is no less inspiring or intriguing.

We don’t think in terms of simple platitudes, and we don’t need to be told what to do. When our leaders listen to what we want or need, and work to prioritize our needs and desires into a community plan acceptable to most in the community, they will have arrived into the modern world.

If they keep trying to walk on water in their own minds – fuggataboudit.

7 responses so far

7 Responses to “Sarah Palin’s First Misstep? Doubtful”

  1. WWS says:

    Good post – and good handle on the loaded words used to try and slant any reportage against Palin.

    I noticed a writeup about a very interesting exchange on Behar’s new talkshow this morning. Now they were talking about Beck, which is just more of the same old, same old (although a little more vile than usual) but it’s the comments by Coulter at the end of this piece that I find so insightful.


    Coulter explained the obsession by the Left with Beck (on display by Maher in that discussion) by pointing out that the Left is *Desperate* to identify a “Leader” they can attack. This applies to Palin even more than it applies to Beck. All the left knows how to do is attack – these are Alinsky Rules, after all. Personalize and then viciously destroy the object of their hate as a substitute for any rational argument.

    What is driving the left crazy these days is that they can’t identify a leader. Beck is widely viewed, so they attack him – but he’s no leader. (in fact the more they attack him the more they cause people to watch him to see what happens next, which is what the TV game is all about) Likewise, Palin – they are desperately scared that she *might* be a leader so they jump on every utterance she makes, but as of today she is no “leader” yet – so their attacks are petty and wasted.

    The GOP has no true “leader” these days, which means there is no one that the left can reliably make the recipient of their apparently limitless hatred. On the one hand, the lack of clear leadership is frustrating, but given that it destroys the Left’s entire game plan, it’s endlessly amusing. We really are now in the era of Glenn Reynold’s “Army of David’s.”

    A quote to close with –

    “As Coulter explained – the conservative movement doesn’t have a leader and the entire discussion of who the leader of it is manufactured so the left won’t have to debate issues, but instead attack the character.”

    I would add that it’s also because the Left has absolutely no idea of what to do besides attack.

  2. Alert1201 says:

    Good post AJ. You made a lot of excellent points and the article on Obama was one of the best I’ve read.

    I would like to comment on the media’s view of Palin and their associating her with the Christian right.

    You are right that the Beltway’s understanding of the evangelical community is wrong and it seems they force their false impression on Palin. As an conservative evangelical who was trained for the ministry at one of most conservative seminaries in the country and who still lives and breathes in that world, I can honestly say their view of us is not correct. They have made a caricature based on the more radical, vocal and visible members of our community. Just like I do not project the views and personality of Oberman on every democrat I meet, so it is wrong for others to project the Jerry Fawells or Pat Robertsons of the world on us. This is what the Political Industrial Complex wants to do when they make references to us and Palin as the “Christian right”

    What we really want is just to be left alone; to quietly practice our faith and raise our families the way we believe honors and pleases God. We are not interested in politically cramming our views down other peoples throats. We are indeed an evangelical community, meaning we do desire and seek to convert others to our faith, but it is not done through the domain of politics but by gentle informed persuasion and the power of the Spirit. We all believe in prayer but not all of us want to force public schools to make our kids, or any others, pray to some generic deity that every religion of the world can accept. Most of us to not believe women should be ordained ministers (or priests or pastors or whatever) and prefer they be quiet diligent home-makers. Yet we do not treat our women as secondary or inferior members of the human race, but we hold them in high esteem and bestow great honor and dignity upon them. We educate our daughters in not only the art of homemaking but also as doctors, lawyers, nurses and engineers. We do not want to force our view of women on our country and even less do we want to keep them intellectually or politically suppressed. We believe there is room for women like Palin, Thatcher and Schaffly whose gifts and abilities should not be limited to the home. (Read Proverbs 31 for a good balanced Judeo-Christian image of a good wife) Many of us do not believe in evolution but we are not clamoring to have creationism or even intelligent design pushed on our public schools. We respectfully, quietly and patiently teach or children our views and pray that they will grow up to believe them. Also, most of us abhor abortion and consider it nothing less than infanticide, yet we do not seek to ban any and every abortion. We understand there are some cases where it is necessary. We live in a world of sin and evil and there will be rare instances of conflicting absolutes where choosing one evil can suppress greater evil and even ultimately promote the good.

    When I look at my own beliefs and compare them to those of Palin I see many of the same ideas. She like us, wants to destroy the Political Industrial Complex but, she like us, does not want to install another more “conservative” one in its place. We want one that will just leave us alone. What is ironic and sad is that the Left has become the caricature they make of the Christian right. They are the ones who force their views and beliefs down everybody’s throats. We are not telling people that they can or cannot smoke, what they should eat, how much they should drive, how many babies to have, what they should teach their children, how they should discipline and raise them, what type of house to buy, car to drive and cloths to wear, what to read or what library books should be in our public libraries. For the most part it is the left forcing their views on us and all freedom loving Americans, not the Christian right. Yet the left makes it sound like we and Palin are doing just that when we are not.

  3. raven397 says:

    Rush had a good comment the other day, that the Lefties attack most hysterically the conservatives they fear the most. Note that Palin is catching all the flak, not Huckabee or Pawlenty.

    Conservatives cannot let the opposition pick our leaders.

  4. Frogg1 says:

    Coulter’s observations on the “leader” issue is right on. And, I don’t know about you guys…..but, I like not having a leader right now. You know who the true leader is? The Tea Party/Town Hall/We The People. And, as we found out…..they don’t know how to attack that. Let it be. We don’t need a leader just yet……it will happen in due time. The WH is definately trying to fight with Beck (how trivial does that make them look)? And, I think Palin holds her own against Obama on the debate over the issues.

  5. Frogg1 says:

    AJ, I wanted to respond to your note to me on the earlier related thread (How Dumb is this Administration).

    I’m truly sorry if the right treated Johnson badly. To tell you the truth…..I think we all drive each other crazy. It’s the nature of the beast of ‘politics’ and ‘passion’. I think it takes a special person to be a politician that has good intentions and trully represents the people (like Palin) amidst the constant personal attacks by those who wish to destroy you. We don’t have enough of those types of politicians anymore. That’s why DC is acting so stupidly. And, I think it takes a lot to be a person who analyzes the political poison out there (like you and CJ). Most of us can’t handle it. That’s why we seek credible bloggers out.

    But, honestly, there is something so much bigger happening out there. I hope CJ can connect to that eventually and blow the rest off (I miss his old posts greatly).

    You think 2010 and 2012 will be the year of the centrist. I think it will be the year of the Libertarian/Conservative connection. Libertarians are on the rise in public view right now. Even Palin alludes she is Libertarian. Glenn Beck (I know you don’t like him) serves a purpose because he is educating Americans about complex things in ways they can understand–and the big picture of what has been going on in DC is a big shock to those who were asleep to it in recent years). Now John Stossel is moving to Fox. What will this new freedom allow him to do?

    I’m not a fan of Ron Paul. But, I have to admit it started with him. His supporters were the first to see how wrong things were out there– and to say ‘enough’.

    There is more Libertarian influence right now than I have ever seen. It may take Libertarians to pull the Republican party from the brink …and back to common sense. I say this as a centrist conservative (not a Libertarian). I also see this as a good thing.

    A Libertarian/conservative shift may actually look and act more centrist than the conservative/liberal shift (necessary to move away from the far right) that you long for.

    It’s just a thought. But, I might just be on to something.

  6. Neo says:

    Vincent’s past projects include co-writing the memoir of General William Boykin, who blasted the media and President George W. Bush alike for ending his career over his casting the war on terror in overtly religious terms.

    Is this Vincent talking or Boykin ? The book about Boykin, even if ghostwritten, is about Boykin

  7. Frogg1 says:

    Oh, I see Rio did get! Nice.

    Drudge Headline is priceless: