Let me begin this column with a disclaimer: I am not a big fan of Sarah Palin.
The reason I know this is because any time I write anything either mildly or constructively critical of the woman, I get scores of emails excoriating me as a “Palin-hater from the get-go,” from people who are completely aware that I not only predicted her invite to the McCain ticket, but applauded it, too.
But the reason I must make the disclaimer is to head-off those who truly do hate Palin and try to disguise their hate in concerns over how she dresses. These are the people who dismiss any defense of her as mindless wingnuttery.
Actually, disclaimer or no, anyone who defends Palin on any front—even against ludicrous charges that she is responsible for an assassination attempt by a seriously ill man—is instantly dismissed as a rightwing hack, such is the state of 21st Century anything-but-open-minded “liberalism,” which is a far cry from the liberalism to which I was raised.
American’s sad ideological balkanization is most obviously exposed for the sickness it is whenever this woman’s name is mentioned. Thanks to cable news and the social media echo-chambers that invite us to pledge allegiance to a stark perspective and then hiss “enemy” at anyone who thinks differently, Americans are being conditioned to absorb The Daily Outrage on cue; we are one nation, quite divided, with reactionary hyperventilation for all.
And if the nation is becoming addicted to hysteria porn, its centerfold is Sarah Palin.
I know this because of a Facebook thread begun by a friend. She had linked without comment to Newsweek’s latest Palin cover—a rather unflattering, harshly-lit image of the former governor, arms akimbo and wearing the sort of shapeless and unmemorable henley hoodie that women wear when they’re running to the grocer’s and don’t much care how they look.
The very first comment on the picture—from a “liberal” who might be supposed to know better than to objectify women and whom, one presumes, considers himself a free-thinker—went like this: HAHAHAHHAAAAA Keep flashing those [breasts], Sarah!
The poster was correctly diagnosed by others as projecting his own obsession upon Palin, and he was good-naturedly given the chance to hit “reset,” but he could not let it go. Next he suggested that if only she were a smarter woman, like Jeane Kirkpatrick, he would treat her better. Apparently the class distinction that existed back when James Carville talked about Paula Jones’ trailer park background still exists, and it still permits the so-brights to treat anyone they consider their lesser in sexist and reprehensible fashion. Palin’s “tight little running shorts from 2008—perfectly unsexy, standard-issue running shorts worn for the cover of a fitness magazine—indicated to this paragon of prole-tolerance that the mother-of-five was thrusting her body into our faces because “sex sells” and she needs to distract us from her myriad misspeaks and incompetencies.
It was at this point in the stupidity that I became annoyed. Sarah Palin has surely made her share of misfires and flubs while speaking. That is the unavoidable and common hazard of everyone in the public eye. They all get things wrong now and then—just ask the candidate (that would be Obama) who declared that he had not yet finished visiting “all 57 states” during the campaign, or the president (Obama, too) who not once but twice referred to Naval corpsmen as “corpse-men”—and those lapses should earn a shrugged shoulder, regardless of party. But to suggest that Palin was serving cheesecake is not only idiotic, it is insulting to women, in general. Should attractive or non-Yalie women bind their breasts so as to not threaten so-bright men, who might be crushed by the corporeality of their cups? Do liberal men need to put attractive political women in burqas in order to proscribe the potency of their Playtex, and hide their taut mid-thighs?
But perhaps this astonishing mind-cramp of a man was unconsciously demonstrating a learned concept to the Facebook faithful—subconsciously recalling the Chesty McCheesecake images of a shirtless candidate Barack Obama exiting a gym, or romping in the surf; maybe this fellow remembered the mainstream press features breathlessly chronicling how the sweat glistened on Barack Obama’s skin and the splendor of his pectorals, and he is simply sending up a red flag we should be attending to: “danger, danger,” his subconscious self is warning, “sexy pictures are a misdirection! That candidate has nothing else to recommend him or her than a glorious body, the beauteous shell disguising a staggering incompetency!”
So, I’ll keep my eyes out for pictures of Palin romping at the beach, and press articles plotzing about her taut thighs or Michelle-Obamaesque arms. And if I see those popping up, I will know that America must never, never allow that woman into the Oval Office.
After all, experience is the best teacher.
Elizabeth Scalia is the Managing Editor of the Catholic Portal at Patheos and blogs as The Anchoress. Her previous articles for "On the Square" can be found here.
RESOURCES
Predicting Palin, earlier than most
Mildly Criticizing Palin
Hate Mail
How She Dresses
The Madness of the Mainstream Media
Palinoia
Palin Newsweek covers
James Carville and "Trailer Trash"
57 States
"Corpse-men"
"Chesty McCheesecake" and "chisled pectorals"
Wit, Clarity, Coherence
Become a fan of First Things on Facebook, subscribe to First Things via RSS, and follow First Things on Twitter.
Comments:
You know who else I like? I like Kirsten Powers, who is an out-and-proud
liberal. And for the same reasons I like Palin. She's upbeat, positive, and concerned about the country. She's also, like Palin, very attractive. I don't agree with the vast majority of what she says. But I like her anyway.
I guess I just don't understand why people can't disagree with someone without needing to tear the person to shreds- and on the most superficial things, too. Don't like Palin's politics? Fine. Feel free to criticize that all day. But there really is no need to bag on her appearance. And people wonder why Palin's supporters think the opposition is mostly sexism. I don't see the men on the political stage being picked apart for their appearance.
On the other hand, this cover is no media plot. Sarah Palin is smart, and has learned the ins-and-outs of what she calls the "lamestream media" very well. These pictures -- there is a whole portfolio -- are not candid shots of a busy, slightly disheveled woman in casual dress as she loads the minivan at Costco.
She has chosen, in picture after picture, to pose. And this is the image she has chosen to communicate.
Brava, Ms. Scalia! Brava!
Hell hath no fury like a liberal scorned.
There is no snobbery worse than liberal snobbery, no misogyny worse than liberal misogyny, and no racism worse than liberal racism.
PS: Moz, your comment about being middle-class but desperate to appear upper-class identifies the inmost motive of the current left-liberal mind.
Getting closer-but not there quite yet: Discuss her accomplishments/credentials and her stance on issues (see The Undefeated perhaps) instead of something like, she's just not presidential material. Sounds like the media convincing you she's unelectable because they say so (see Concern Trolls- not that you are one but seem to be repeating their refrain). To me she has been the ONLY one really opposing Obama/democrats for 3 years in many ways and in words I agree with with past actions that back up her words. I am not a fanatic either as I am a conservative and therefor will never trust ANY govt/politician fully. She may not be your pick: Be 'Most Reasonable'- back it up with more than feelings and media talking points and convince us to switch.
Needing to lose a couple of pounds myself, I decided right then and there to do it with love and the idea of sacrifice and obedience. I've lost 25 pounds since mid-May. I never did hear how the Palin-hater did.
Female friends have told me that much of the negative reaction from women to Palin stems from the fact that she is a beautiful woman who doesn't hide her confidence or her looks by "dressing down" or "dressing male." I never fully appreciated this explanation, figuring there had to be something else. The reactions to this latest photo series is making me rethink that.
My point above was to disagree with Elizabeth Scalia's description of the Newsweek cover. She seemed to imply that this picture -- arranged by appointment with a professional photographer as part of a cover package focusing on Sarah Palin's presidential aspirations -- was a casual, candid photo. It is neither.
And, while we're on the topic, can I digress for a moment to say that nothing prompts derisive laughter from me so much as the proclivity of certain Secularist-types to claim for themselves the label of 'Bright'. Of course! They're just smarter than the rest of us (and probably more virtuous)! Why didn't I think of that?
No President "directs" military operations. That which took Osama bin Laden's life was pursued for 10 years and got its last major break about four years ago when bin Laden's messenger was identified. You might remember that Bush 43 was President then. There is a continuity here. A good one. Obama did decide that a Seal Team and not a Predator strike should take bin Laden out, but then his residence was in the middle of a sizable and peaceful Pakistani city, so the Seal Team was risky enough to the relationship with Pakistan. And that relationship continues even as the two countries squabble.
OTOH, I too wish political rhetoric was more civil, but I'm afraid I find no exemplars on that score. Palin sounds like another politician to me.
I find it endlessly amusing when people talk about how she wasn't fit to be vice president in 2008 but Joe Biden was fit. To me, the scariest 3 word phrase in the English language is "President Joe Biden." Biden is be best impeachment/assassination insurance Obama could possibly have. Hell, even I'd jump to catch a bullet to protect Obama just keep Biden from becoming president.
* The 50 states of course, plus D.C.,
* Guam,
* The U.S. Virgin Islands,
* Puerto Rico,
* Rhodesia,
* Patagonia, and, er,
* Shangri La
The evisceration of Ms. Palin - and her family - was nothing short of one of the most shameful acts on the part of the MSM that I've ever seen. She is perceived as a threat when, in fact, she has done everything that the feminist movement will have you believe a woman should do: beautiful, smart, articulate, happily married with beatiful children.
Sarah Palin's big mistake there was doing all that and being - gasp - conservative at the same time. She didn't abort Trig which was an even bigger sin.
One of my closest and dearest friends is a die-hard liberal - and she consistently says that Sarah Palin is stupid. One of these days I will risk our friendship by asking her how someone who went to college, was elected Mayor of her hometown and then was elected Governor of her state - could be considered stupid.
Sarah Palin has accomplished more than many of the liberals who hate her. And therein lies the ugly truth ... jealousy.
For some reason, the mere mention of their names makes some "progressives" reflexively abandon any pretense of civility, tolerance, open-mindedness and gender equality.
It's sort of a public service, really.
On an Alaska board that supervised oil companies she was forbidden by law from making the subject of meetings public. In order to reveal the corruption she resigned, freeing herself from the law's effect. The corrupt officials were shocked that anyone would walk away from such a paycheck for mere honesty.
As governor, faced with frivolous suits and forbidden to either use state money to defend herself, or to raise money via a legal defense fund, she resigned, leaving the governorship in capable hands. Her leftwing opponents were offended that they could no longer bring false witness to bankrupt her.
I would rather have a president that was honest as Bush, than slick like Clinton. I would rather have someone who cares more about the country than about their left wing and terrorist buddies.
I would rather have a President who will shut down rent seeking corporate CEOs, (Warren Buffet) rather than suck up to them.
Those words are absolutely true. I think the picture is unflattering, but the very fact that it becomes an issue is and of itself an example of what is screwy about public life in America today.
Don't forget, by the way, that our illustrious super-smart president also thinks they speak Austrian in Austria.
Sarah Palin then brought the fight directly to Obama when everyone else ran. She attacked Obama at every turn while the Republican men ran for their pollsters...pitiful. Mitch Romney was polling to find out where he should stand.
If Sarah Palin was trying to escape the heat of battle she sure did find a peculiar way of doing it....by drawing more fire.
Sarah Palin did not quit serving the public...she just chose a more effective forum than being hampered by being a Governor.
The guy Elizabeth had the misfortune of running into on Facebook sound like just the standard case of arrested development.
Yet you no doubt voted happily and thoughtfully for a Senator who did the exact same thing. It amazes me that people can hold a thought like this without seeing the obvious hypocrisy.
Nixon and Goldwater were...."intellectuals." They never described themselves as such, and the self-described intellectuals hated them, as did they.
I think the days you're pining for--Nixon, Goldwater, etc. were the days when conservatives routinely lost after putting up token resistance and frequently hurried themselves to ride the liberal zeitgeist? And I think that's the point.
Wasn't it great before Reagan, when conservatives would happily play the hapless Washington Generals as liberals just marched forward with PROGRESS, you know, more government control of our economy, higher taxes, the sexual revolution, family disintegration, retreat before Communist aggression, and the ultimate prize--abortion?!?!?!
When I was at a UC in the early eighties, I journalistically covered a speech given by Kirkpatrick, then Reagan's UN Ambassador. Her speech was repeatedly interupted by chanting "activists" (*spit*) unfurling Nazi banners and the like at her. At that moment, I basically looked at them and said to myself "Whatever those people are for, I am against, and whatever those people are against, I am for", and I have never really looked back.
My point? When this Facebook pos(t)er says he would respect Palin if she were "itelligent like Kirkpatrick", she is LYING. LYING to himself, to us, to everyone. And he is running true to his tribal groupthink. Jeanne Kirkpatrick is dead. Therefore, she is a Republican who can be, at least briefly, be spoken of respectfully. She is categorically out of the picture, so the Ideology Lords of the left have declared that it is OK to speak with at least a modicum of decency and respect. If she was still alive, politically and/or literally? HAH! "Respect her intellect", my sweet posterior. We see it with Reagan himself, and even with Nixon. And I said this four to six years ago, mark the words. If Palin or Ryan et al were elected in 2012/16, you WILL hear..... you WILL hear from more than one commenter on the left.... "Oh, at least George W. Bush had the interests of the whole country at heart, even if misguided etc etc..... but THIS current GOP President....??? Worst ever EVER EVER.... blah blah blah blah blather blather blather blather."
Mark the words, because under that scanerio, you WILL hear them. Gauranteed. Gayr-an-teeed!
Yes, facebooker, you would respect Palin if she were more like Kirkpatrick. Yeppers, we all buy that, absolutely. And please do continue thinking conservatives are all utterly stupid enough to believe you when you say that. That assumption about your adversary is gonna continue to work reeeeeallll well for you in the arena.
Why not? We elected as president a U.S. senator who hadn't even completed his first term when he did they exact same thing -- the only excuse he offered was he wanted to run for president. Where was HIS commitment?
2. You need to shorten your posts and get to the point. And tell Reno, too. I used to subscribe to the print edition when Neuhaus was in charge, and miss his mark on things terribly. I was depressed for two weeks when he died. I think too many of your writers just like to see their stuff in print. The point is to get a message across, not to massage the message.
Funny that. People who hate Christ usually blame their hatred on Christians. I would have expected Scalia to be especially sensitive to the error of such logic especially when applied to lesser mortals like Sarah Palin and her defenders.
and another reason she's hated: Too honest to play the game.
I wonder if anyone noticed that one reason she quit being governor was that she was being harassed by scores of trivial legal "ethics" suits and owed a hundred thousand dollars of her legal bills...she couldn't function as governor with the political harassment, and didn't like the debt so she quit to get a job and pay it back.....
Yet a certain Democratic candidate had a "donor" give him more than that amount to cover up his bimbo, and some people dared to defend him saying it was "legal" to accept such a gift.
Also not noted: That unlike Senator Murkowski and others in Alaska's Republican party, she wasn't the patsy for oil companies. This may be why some Republicans hate her.
No, she's not qualified to be president, but neither was Harry Truman, who was also hated by the press for being "A failed haberdasher"...
Respectfully,
Mary
The source of the "palling around with terrorists" line doesn't excuse Palin for using it. McCain never used it. During one of the town hall meetings, a woman asked McCain if Obama wasn't a closet muslim (or something to that effect, which spelled "un-American"). To his lasting credit, McCain responded, "No, Ma'am, he's a good, decent family man." He showed himself to be head and shoulders above Palin at that moment. So, maybe the McCain campaign fingered Palin to be their "ax woman"? In any case, she took to the job with gusto.
In fact, regarding the subject of political civility, Bush showed himself to be head and shoulders above Cheney when he was asked about possible criticisms he might have of Obama's presidency. "What he deserves is my silence," Bush responded. He wouldn't distract a sitting president with sniping from a former president. My estimation of Bush definitely rose at that moment.
@RobH: "This is all nothing more than class snobbery writ large. "
No, sorry Rob, you can't get me on that one. Ever read "The Grapes of Wrath"? That's my family...dirt okies who migrated to California during the Dust Bowl. One of my uncles was a common sailor caught in the attack at Pearl Harbor. I finally got my university degree at the age of 50, and I was the first one in my family ever to do it.
@DonM: "She [Palin] is the person who cares more about the duties entrusted to her than she does about personal position and power."
Now it's time for me to swoon! Palin...a self-effacing servant who shuns the limelight and is devoid of personal ambition! That's it! I'm speechless!!!
than Obama or Hilliary.
Let's not forget that Obama was and is hardly qualified for the position he holds.
Another comparison: Chris Cox vs. Obama. For every qualification Obama held, Cox held a similar one for longer, generally at a higher level, and usually with greater responsibility. Cox was also Harvard Law Review editor -- while taking the joint JD/MBA program. He was also a corporate law partner, senior counsel to the president, multiple-term congressman, Harvard Law instructor, and SEC chairman. Yet somehow nobody clamored for Cox to run for president.
I don't see how Palin, as POTUS, could have harmed the interests of the USA more than the present incumbent, both by increasing the stress of regulation and for unilaterally declaring war on Libya. BTW, I thought that the Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war. So it seems that BHO had his fingers crossed when he took the oath of office.
TeaPot562
I can't help but suspect that her attractiveness, _in itself_ bothers some on the Left (and let's admit it, a few on the Right, too) on some deep level.
Sarah's doing fine with her own navel gazing. Do we all need to chip in and help? Is it still navel gazing then? It's a sad, sad thing when a perfectly good Instapundit link (and subsequent mouse click) goes to waste like this...
"I like Sarah Palin and think she'd make a fine President. I'll concede that she might not be ready yet. Still, she has done more for the acceptance of women as politicians than any other person I know — (tongue moves to cheek) more even than Hillary Clinton."
The great divide between statesmen and politicians is simply this: The statesman understands and operates upon our founding priciples found in The Declaration of Independence and the U. S. Constitution with the mind of our founding Fathers. The politician watches where the power is headed and gets in front. In a word: INTEGRITY. I am stunned that Hilary Clinton sold out this nation's sovereignty to the United Nations. It seems everybody wants to be the unelected head of the global government.
"Mary says:
I believe Nancy is correct: Sarah Palin has chosen to pose in this garment in this fashion. For what it is worth, we were photographed for Newsweek, and they gave us guidelines but permitted us the choice of clothing and pose.
Respectfully,
Mary"
Mary. with one third the nation on food stamps and jobless, Sarah Palin's choice of garment is appropriate. Needless to say Czar Nicolas II was building his 7th palace while his peole were starving in the streets. No St. Elizabeth of Hungary was he. Remember too, If Palin is elected president of the US, the taxpayers will be providing the glamour for state dinners. Palin has the common sense and constitution of a Jaqueline Kennedy. God bless her. God bless them both.
Speak for yourself. Your condescension obviously entitles you to your opinion of yourself. I am a human being created in body and immortal soul, with an eternal destiny. Your unauthorized use of another person’s prerogative to name himself, and used in a demeaning way offers insight into your character. Tell me if I am wrong, Neanderthals –R-Us, “WE hold these truths” does not include you???
A person’s name is the most wonderful thing and the worst thing anyone can say, but for you to incriminate everyone is, well, perjury.
"you go Sarah!!! Keep socking to the lame stream media!! You were soooo great on Sean Hannity last night!!! Keep driving the libs nuts with your straight talk!! yo go girl!!
I never intended to present a comprehensive argument as to why Palin shouldn't be president. I simply made an observation about her regrettable lack of political civility. You think it is entirely realistic to view Obama as a friend to terrorists and a secret muslim. All I can say is that our ways of evaluating evidence are worlds apart.
I continue to be bewildered by the extraordinary attention being given to Palin's physical attributes. Whatever difference does that make? One reason the "lefties" like me supposedly dislike her is because she is beautiful. What is far more important is that she is extremely clever and has an ability to manipulate the media that rivals that of Joe Kennedy's. In fact, I wonder if she isn't using him as a model for modern myth building through media exploitation.
I also supposedly resent her because she hunts. Really? I was once president of a military rifle club in Texas. Upon entering the Air Force, I outshot all 100 or so airmen in my group on the target range with an M1 carbine. I would challenge Palin to a shooting competition anytime. I am supposedly contemptuous of her because of my class snobbery, and that despite the fact that my family was going bowling on Navy bases while the Bushes were playing polo at the country club.
Does it seem to you, like it does to me, that there is also some blind prejudice and stereotyping at work here among the Palin defenders, just as there may be among her detractors?
Now tell me, Josefa.... How do you know she's not qualified? What are the qualifications to become President?
According to the Constitution, Article II, Section 1, these are the qualifications for someone to become President:
"No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."
OK, here they are. Now, let's compare them to Sarah Palin.
1. Natural-born Citizen. She was born in Idaho. Check.
2. At least thirty five years of age. She's in her mid-forties. Check.
3. At least fourteen years as a resident of the United States. Alaska is the 49th State of the Union. Check.
Nowhere in that Article I says that such person has to be a graduate of Harvard, Yale, Columbia, or any Ivy League college; have a law or business degree; have world travel experience; or have the approval of the Editorial Staff of the NY Times, Washington Post, Hollywood, Academia or the New Yorker, or any other such snobbish silliness the Ruling Class loves to come up with. Heck, Harry Truman had zero college degree!!! Abe Lincoln self-taught and apprenticed to be an attorney. No Harvard for Lincoln. And what about Ronald Reagan: Eureka College. Not a whole lot of people have been there, let alone attend.
George Washington. Oh, boy! He had no college degree or program behind him. Nope! He was a land surveyor who happened to be lucky enough to have married into a nice little fortune in Mount Vernon. Military experience was a big plus for him. He was the General of the winning side of the American Revolution... But I digress...
Following the straightforward guidelines set up by the Constitution of this country, Sarah Palin is perfectly qualified for the position. (Heck, my next-door neighbor who works in the oil fields... Heck, my merchant-marine husband is perfectly qualified as well!) Any other qualifications anyone comes up with come only from the figment of their imaginations.
Good for you. You are thinking it through the way it has always needed to be considered.
The misogyny against female politicians has to stop no matter what party they belong to. It is so ingrained in our culture that we need your carefully constructed thinking to guide us as you are a culture commentator superb.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSdFIDygFwM&feature=youtube_gdata_player


