It’s hard to top Andrew Sullivan for pure obsession and outlandishness, but David Frum keeps trying. The vengeful vagina party gets another member, as Frum boils down his Sarah Palin problem to this.
This is a woman who has got into a position of leadership by sending very powerful sexual signals. And we see that in the way that men like her much more than women do.
The Palin critics are doing something never before thought possible – making me look prophetic.
In regard to Sarah Palin, the whole media establishment has becoming a baying chorus of vengeful vaginas. This is an attractive woman, living the lifestyle they dread, an ideology they detest, and doing so to more and more success. No wonder Pierce and The Atlantic’s resident homosexual gynecology expert can’t help but be fascinated at her innermost workings.
And they know fascination is as far as it would ever get. There’s no question Palin’s taste in men – it’s not hard to figure which side of the alpha/beta male divide her snowmobile-racing, professional-fishing beau rests. There’s something about that which eats the vengeful vagina party up, that after 40 years of emasculating men from the culture and the leadership (and to much success) here comes this vamp from Alaska who finds success while breathing the scent of testosterone in her midst.
It reminds me of a joke I hear some comedian rattling off on my local hard rock station – “look at the girl trying to get my attention by making out with that guy.” Maybe if Palin would just say hi to Frum and David Brooks in the hallway every once in a while, she’ll get their vote for prom queen. Sending sexual signals? Notice he notes no evidence of Palin doing this on her own, but instead is rather judgmental of her audience (something which is very anecdotal, especially given Mark Steyn’s comments in the link.).
I’m quickly falling into the camp of David Harsanyi and others, who aren’t totally sold on Palin but are defending her due to the egregious behavior of the media and the opposition. To be honest, when it comes to Palin I haven’t made my mind up one way or the other, especially with all the media distortion. I’m still not clear as to her policies and from what I’ve gathered she ran Alaska much like a Huckabee or Bush would have, and that doesn’t exactly sit well with me. The Palin who rocked the house at the convention? Yes. The Palin who rambled through two national resignation speeches? Uh, ask me later.
What’s clear to anyone watching Palin, or even listening to Jesse Jackson’s recent stupidity regarding health care, is how different the rules are. Sure, we’ve cleared racial and gender hurdles in this country, but not if your Republican. Vote the wrong way, suddenly you’re a traitor to your race or a pre-suffrage harpie. If Jackson, Obama, Emanuel and the rest of the stronghold want to laugh off all the rightist commie assertions from Glenn Beck and his ilk, they’d be wise to drop the “loyalty to the cause” litmus test. Denying Palin her womanhood isn’t far off from giving party members the key to the better restroom.
The big question – is she still politically viable? She doesn’t poll well – who cares. For all those saying she’s damaged good, they have little knowledge of political history. George Washington was damaged goods at several points – from the French and Indian War through the Revolution, where some of his own generals try to usurp him. Reagan was long gone after ‘76, and lord knows how many times Nixon came back politically from the dead (the “Checkers” speech, the Kennedy debate, losing the California race) before he finally killed it on his own.
In other words – don’t count her out.
Have you seen her latest interviews? You might want to reserve the huh until you see her on O’Reilly. She held her own. She also held her own with Barbara Walters and Oprah. Palin is the real deal. As far as her similiarity to her governorship of Alaska and Huckabee I wouldn’t know. Give her a chance there and David Frumm is a tool.
My friend got into a debate with him at a thing and it was ugly. His opinion means nada.
I think her office-holding years are in the early 2020s. She needs to leavened a bit more I think and when she’s in her early 50s or so she’ll come off differently. Frum’s horny librarian fantasies are nearly as pathetic as Sullivan’s fag-hag routine. I’d almost say Sullivan is sexually obsessed so focused one her nether regions is he.
Someone at NRO surmised that while she has no chance to get elected in 2012 (with which I agree and why I think 2020 is a better fit for her if that is in her cards) she is so popular that she can play kingmaker. You will see a lot of 2012 candidates try to get on her good side — she’ll be a great motivator. She needs to bolster her political chops — Senate or an executive btanch Secretary or she needs to go Reagan and write a series of op-eds and other pieces where she fleshes out a philosophy.
I like her, but populism is not really a coherent philsophy and our problems are too deep to elect someone who is well-liked, but not up to the very deep problem we have in this country. We need action AND intellect AND wisdom.
You make a lot of good points, Floyd. Palin will benefit from a few years working for conservatives and developing, as you said, political chops. I know 2012 is not that far away…yet so much can happen before the next presidential race kicks off. These aren’t normal times in any sense! A year from now Sarah Palin may have formed into a more seasoned candidate.
I’m not ready to put out a yard sign and campaign but honestly I can’t imagine voting for any of the other guys who ran in the last primary. Well, except for Fred Thompson but I don’t think he’ll run again.
I heard Palin’s interviews with Rush and Mark Levin and was impressed. I think she has great potential. I admit that I really don’t know much about her governorship of Alaska but I do give her credit for having an executive position in government. She actually held an office with responsibility for which she was accountable – more than others I can name.
If Palin becomes a candidate for president there is no doubt in my mind that she would have my vote. I know not every moment recorded for posterity has been a Reaganesque moment. I can forget that if that flair for conservative policy turns into a real platform. Remember what cameras and bright lights did to James Stockdale? One bad moment in the spotlight and the world laughs at a hero.
The media wouldn’t spend so much time running her down if they didn’t think she is for real. Remember how some thought the media picked the Republican candidate last time with McCain? The media just might be doing it again by stalking her like my dogs stalk doughnuts.
Mmmmm, doughnuts.
TCW… I grant she’s got more experience than Obama and I would generally trust her instincts, but she’s no Reagan so far as I can tell on the intellectual side. I want to her her spell out why she’s a conservative — her views of human nature, economics and markets, private property and liberty and the close tie between the two. Etc. etc. I’m sure she leans the right way on all those things, but in times like this we need a leader who can articulate these ideas AND make them happen. I’m not saying she can’t (yet), but in a 400 page book (which I admittedly have yet to read) there’s about 12 pages on policy — according to Michael Medved. I want more from her and I hope she can and does provide it. I like her a lot. I grew up around girls and women like Sarah Palin — salt of the earth and damn fine people.
I know it sounds contradictory, Floyd but I do agree with you and JohnFN: Palin needs to be even more articulate than she has been. You don’t have to explain that you like her. I think we all feel the need to circle the wagons when it comes to Palin. It’s nice that you and JohnFN do that while being honest and saying there’s more work she’ll have to do before she can be ready for prime time.
We know that the world is going to expect a great deal from her and she’s going to have to be spot on every moment. I’m very optimistic that she can do it.
I’m a big fan, but there is no way she is ready to run for President.
Floyd has summed up my position brilliantly. I kind of wonder why she even wants to continue in politics, but if she does things will turn out poorly if she does not take his advice. Her abdication of the Alaska governorship is an immense hurdle to overcome. She has a lot of work to do to get voters beyond that. The heat in the kitchen in DC is a whole lot hotter than Anchorage, and she walked away from that kitchen. I like her reasons, and she probably did the right thing for her state. Her intentions were downright noble, but it gives gobs of ammunition for anyone running against her.
We cross-commented TCW! I have NO idea who our person in 2012 will be. I’m afraid it’ll be Romney et al. again and I don’t think — as much as I like those guys — that any of them are right or able to sweep into office.
I would settle for a Republican Congress though to offset Zero.
Ok…we did it again! Agree with you about “Romney et al.”
Now this really has to stop because I need to get some sleep! It’s 1:30 my time zone. Stop making me think!
If she wants to she could run for Senate in Alaska and get some more experience. And Floyd I have been saying for a long time she may make the Kingmaker. But she sounded like she was running on Hannity last night. I find it interesting how many so called conservative men are freaked out by her. I had a run in with a guy at another forum. The guy is a misogynist and treats girls with opinions like crap and he said some things about Palin that really stuck in my craw. Its bad enough to have all these so called men on the left obsessing about her but when a guy professes to be conservative and then turns around does the unmanly thing its like does a woman have a chance at all to be President? WTF?
Palin the Kingmaker. Sounds good and I think she is humble enough to do that. I’m no feminist but it is disgusting to see Palin marginalized because of her gender. Rush took a call from a young guy a couple of days ago who claimed to be conservative who said he preferred male leaders. Rush responded by saying that this reaction to women is the result of 1970s feminism. Real women have so much to work to do thanks to people like Hillary and NOW.
I heard the same idiot TCW. He pissed me off. Rush was correct, as always.
I’m not afraid of her. I want her to show some intellectual gravitas. I’m not saying she doesn’t have it, but she has to articulate a world and political view. I think Huckabee is just as light though he’s been around a lot longer.
I want her to talk a lot about liberty the next year. I want her to talk a lot about free markets and private property. I want to know that she understands the concepts embodied in the Federalist, the Declaration, Lincoln’s Second Inaugural, Reagan’s speech at Moscow University, etc., etc. Bush never did that and we embraced him anyway instead of seeking out a better more conservative candidate. I love GWB and voted for him 4 times, but I don’t want to vote for compassionate conservatism redux just because — he helped start this economic ball rolling. She might be an American Maggie Thatcher, but I want to hear it and see it and so far she hasn’t shown it — strength yes — but not the philosophical heft these times call for. I hope she can. I know a lot of folks who went to non-Ivy League
Floyd, I can’t disagree with these points either – especially not wanting more compassionate conservatism. No more compromise. We need someone to reassert ‘founding’ values and I’m hoping Palin is that person.
I didn’t think you were afraid of her – just people like Frum, David Brooks and (ugh) Andrew Sullivan.
Yes, yes, yes and yes.
Palin has been a problem for me. I am old enough to think with the top head and distrustful of charismatic candidates (this is helped by the fact that such candidates tend to be Democrats – I voted against John Edwards for Senate here in NC, I voted for Jesse Helms, surely the least charismatic Republican this side of Phil Crane.) Yet I confess to being charmed by Palin. I remember Reagan’s run in 1976 and am struck by how much the media reaction to Palin resembles the reaction to Reagan: reflexive, rabid, excessive. Palin has not demonstrated the kind of policy chops I would like to see, but then again neither has Romney, Huckabee, or any of the other likelies for 2012. Which is the key metric: she doesn’t have to be the perfect candidate, she merely needs to be the best available (a sadly low hurdle to clear.)
But I am certainly amongst those whose opinion of Sarah Palin boils down to: not enough data but I like what I’ve heard. I understand and approve her resignation from Alaska’s governorship where the incoming fire was imposing too much collateral damage; I appreciate that her reflexes appear right but not far right. I am not confident of her ability to select staff, probably the single most important task undertaken by a President, as the aphorism “personnel is policy” reminds; OTOH I have no basis for doubting her ability in that regard is inferior to any other potential candidates and cannot be worse than Barack Obama’s judgment.
Her book is not and should not have been a policy collection. It was packaged as autobiography, a reintroduction to the person of Sarah Palin. It is too early to delineate policies and a book is the wrong venue for such delineation. The public doesn’t want to read such (next time you’re in the checkout line at WalMart or your grocery eyeball the magazine covers; the Beloved Spouse and I tallied seven (7!) cover stories focusing on Jen, Brad and Angelina, zero (0!) on health care reform, the intricacies of the tax code or the Islamofascist threat. A policy book would not reach the audience she needs to catch and would enable her foes to cherry-pick proposals and defeat her in detail. Policy-wonks are rarely leaders for good reason. As Reagan demonstrated, a political leader’s job is to sketch a vision, define objectives, pick the people to achieve those goals and dump those who are not pulling their weight. A long way of getting to the point: perhaps the best option for Palin is to spend the next couple of years at Heritage or The American Enterprise Institute or even Cato, giving speeches (which can be put on DVD and disbursed to potential supporters) and learning to size up the wonks she would need to staff a Palin administration. That (and making appearances in support of 2010 candidates) would occupy her productively and put her in position to run for President in her own time.
Very good points made by all.
Palin has miles to go before she is ready. You all are right about that. As RES commented, she doesn’t have to be perfect. That’s no reason to keep the bar low just because weak candidates have conditioned us to lower expectations. As I commented last night Palin will have to work harder than any of the other candidates if she runs.