The Second Coming of Sarah Palin

Rhoda Klapp

Do you not think the current incumbent is a populist? A pragmatist? An ideologist then?

Sir Graphus

Palin scares the life out of me. She seems to wear her ignorance as a badge of pride; that because of it, she must be the only politician who can identify with the mythical man-in-a-midwest-bar. George W Bush proved that you need brains to be President, otherwise you can make a serious mess of the entire world.

And this is the other reason Palin scares me; because she is so like Bush, at this distance from a Presidential campaign. Every time Bush opened his mouth he said something either crass or plain dumb. I thought, blimey, what a fool, surely no presidential ambition could survive and outburst of that stupidity. And yet he carried on. And now we have Palin.

Conservative Cabbie

Alex

What to say.

"Like many populists she is clear about what she's against, but not what she's for beyond slogans, the lighting of torches and the wielding of pitchforks."

I don't remember Palin invoking pitchforks. I do however remember Obama doing so, whilst President. So tell me again who the demagogue is?

"that there are severe limits to what populism can achieve in American politics."

Yes. Or should that be "yes, we can". Nope, populism has got no chance for success.

"At the moment, the most successful Republican politicians in America, such as Indiana's Mitch Daniels, are pragmatists. (You could put Bob McDonnell's campaign in Virginia in this category too.)"

I seem to remember making those points myself a week or so ago on these very pages. So Palin, who took on her own party and worked with Democrats in Alaska didn't govern as a pragmatist then? Is that your contention? Or are you just brushing away inconvenient history?

It's fine that you think Palin is the wrong person but you can at least be honest in your dislike.

Kittler

And Palin believes the World is six thousand years old. This is more than ignorance, it must indicate some sort of cognitive flaw.

Snowman

would it not be wise, Sir Graphus if one were to postpone the judgement on who has the greater capacity to mess the world up until the brainy one has finished with the job at hand?

Alex Massie

ConCabbie: The problem with your analysis is that Obama did not run as a populist. A chant of "Yes, We Can" does not populism make. Yes, he was the liberal darling during the primary but in the general election he ran as a problem-solving pragmatist. You may think that a false flag but it's the campaign he ran. Just as George W Bush ran as a centrist in 2000.

Populist candidacies are notorious for three things: sound, fury and losing. Palin shows no sign of being any exception to this general rule.

Snowman

Kittler @ 5.24:

donno about Palin's beliefs in this department, you may however like to peruse any book by either Michael Behe or Michael Denton. Don't tell Dawkins though.

Sir Graphus

I’m no flag waver for Obama, Snowman, old fellow, believe me. But Bush was a copper bottomed, died in the wool idiot. He made Al Gore look like an intellectual on the campaign stump.

He let Wall St run riot because he didn’t understand finance, and he let the Neocons run riot because he didn’t understand foreign policy. If he didn’t have an influential Dad, can any of us really imagine him being anything other than a rather pompous but mediocre project manager?

DavidDP

I don't think Dawkins and the scientific community at large have anything to worry about.

Of course, Palin's views on creationism alone make her unfit for office in this day and age.

ndm

I'm not sure Sarah Palin has any genuine interest in running for President. There is a pretty well-worn path for wannabee and failed politicians hinting they might run as a way to keep in the public eye and keep the moolah flowing. The sheer and utter vacuousness of Sarah Palin fits in that mould.

The broader Republican Party and John McCain, in particular, must share the blame for her ascendancy as a politician. Sarah Palin was such a bad VP nominee she would sink a Paris Hilton run.

Rhoda Klapp

Obama ran as a pragmatist? Now you really are pulling my leg. If you don't concede populist, how does all the hope and change and yes we can rhetoric fit into that? He ran as a Messiah. The black man who can untie the races. The one who would deliver change you can believe in. Pragmatist? Pah.
Populist? Would a populist modify his position to suit the audience not just once or twice but every time? Would a populist run on meaningless slogans and never treat any issue in depth. Damn right he would, and he did.

Snowman

Sir Graphus: a fair response, my astute knight, I‘ve lost trust, too in any of the anointed who are supposed to lead us into the uncertain future. Where to escape though. A thought that won’t go away. Bush may have been all those things you say, and more, I agree. The fact remains, however, he got the Presidency, the many of the worthier ones didn’t. How come? Could money, connections and fame be that blinding for the millions that backed him in free elections? See also below.

ndm: never underestimate the capacity of the masses to get seduced, to worship, and to go and fight for the one perceived to be of their own.

Cato

Please, when reading, keep in mind that the above article and all the comments that follow are about fictional characters named "Sarah Palin" and "George W. Bush" created by the American left-wing press and swallowed whole by the British public.

Any resemblance to the actual George W. Bush and Sarah Palin is purely coincidental.

CT Barbarian

Actually, I'm glad she's doing the media rounds now. It (almost) guarantees that she will peak too soon and the inevitable backlash will start right around the thick of the 2010 mid-terms.

Fearless Frank

The chorus of sneers from Sarah Palin's self-proclaimed superiors when she emerged as a candidate was, at least, proof of one thing - the gulf between the political class (of either flavour) and a lot of real people.

Snowman

DavidDP at 7.27: ever come across something called cytochrome C? Just curious.

Beefeater

"Of course, Palin's views on creationism alone make her unfit for office in this day and age."

And is not a good percentage of the electorate unfit to vote for the same views? Or for believing a virgin birth? Bodily ascent to heaven? Or that the planets affect destiny? Chanting brings peace?

By all means bring back voter qualifications based on knowing the correct age of the planet, and the capital of Uruguay. That should suffice.

Conservative Cabbie

Don't you find it interesting that a "populist" revolution in America is conservative based? In recent European terms, the revolting masses were usually driven by a socialist led agenda of economic class warfare. However, even in the UK now, a grass-roots political movement is more conservative based. It's just a shame that the only home they have to go to is the BNP.

The progressive elites have turned themselves into the class that we, the unwashed millions, have come to dislike. What a dramatic failure on their part.

And I do enjoy lectures on creationism from proponents of AGW. The dogmatic blind attacking the dogmatic blind. Most amusing.

Frank S

Palin struck me as an absolutely delightful and excellent person, a woman of substantial political achievement as well as a rounded human being. Good-looking to boot. The fact that the American left and their mass media hounded her so disgracefully is evidence enough for me that she has the right stuff.

Patricia Shaw

By now Mr M I was hoping for some informed comment about Dispatches, perhaps something a little less hilarious than the rantings of Our Mel on the subject

Harold

Its not what you believe but to have the freedom to do so. Since the opinions of the American media represent a small portion of that population its viewed as perverted tabloid or warped entertainment by the majority. The Levi Johnston saga for example is viewed as child abuse perpetuated by the shady and corrupt sex industry that prey on children. Sarah Palin said it best in that you do not need a title to promote freedom and to defend America. Obama on the other hand with his lack luster title spends most of his time tearing down America.

Bill Rees

Cato and Frank S are absolutely right.
The American media crucified Palin, and the McCain campaign proved itself to be inept in the way they used her. I actually thought that McCain was probably one of the most useless Presidential candidates the Republican Party has ever put forward for office.
The trouble with most writers, including those who write for The Spectator, is that they don't analyse what Palin actually did in Alaska.
She is what I would describe as a principled pragmatist, who got rid of corruption and took on the major oil companies.
It's disappointing that so many political commentators seem unable to get beyond the Katie Couric interview of Palin.
When Obama, or even more so Joe Biden, comes out with a non-sequitur, the MSM refuses to jump down his throat, but Palin is given no room at all.
Not just that, but the MSM deliberately sets out to destroy her.
It's time for The Spectator to let us have some more serious analysis of Republican politics in the USA, together with some analysis of why the MSM in the States is so anti-Republican and anti-Palin.