Two new biographies of Palin—along with the self-proclaimed hockey mom’s own memoir, Going Rogue, which set a record for advance orders—are helping to make sure that she won’t fade away any time soon. Together, this trio of books offers more information and context about Palin than all but her most ardent detractors and fans could possibly stand. Yet the volumes, alone or together, still don’t give a clear picture of either the woman herself or what it is about her that drives her fans and critics alike to the edge of insanity.
More important, the books strongly, if unintentionally, suggest that Palin does not have what it takes to redefine a Republican Party whose future looks about as bright as that of General Motors. Despite her impressive fan base and her ability to turn out huge crowds, Palin’s own program for “The Way Forward” (as she names a chapter in Going Rogue) makes plain that she is last year’s political model, a vehicle for a backward-looking GOP bent on blending generic social conservatism, small-government encomiums, big government spending, unconvincing outsider outrage, and status quo foreign adventurism. With a Saint Reagan statue firmly glued to the dashboard, of course.
Whatever mojo such rhetorical posturing once had, Americans have heard it all before, most recently during the administration of George W. Bush, who with the able assistance of a Republican majority managed to double overall federal spending in real dollars over the course of eight years. If the Republicans are to regroup and advance in another direction, they will need something other than warmed-over Karl Rove speeches.
HT Arnold Kling
Share
Podcast RSS Feed
Full EconTalk Text
{ 139 comments }
← Previous Comments
And would those people call Obama “intelligent?”
No one will ever accuse Obamalini of being intelligent, or “pro-business”.
Beautifully posted Heater. It is beyond ironic that both socialists and libertarians assume a Judeo-Hellenic tradition in order for society to function, but both actively work to destroy it.
In this regard it is interesting to go behind the Fallen Iron Curtain where the church and the culture it produces was most actively destroyed. The current train wreck that is the Soviet Union is not just the product of corruption.
In this Palin's freedom to speak of her religious conviction is only a detraction to the intellectuals who have decided they were atheists long ago. They miss much by viewing it as only blind faith pablum.
That's correct, but he's got a strong southern drawl, and is therefore racist, and a non-viable candidate.
“Ron Paul is a loon and so is anyone who supports him.” your words buddy…
Like Ross “20% of the vote” Perot?
Last I recall, he lost!
20% of the vote is significant,whether you accept it or not, of course people with your attitude sat idle by while the DNC and RNC seized the opportunity to tighten their death grip on the levers of power by further restricting access of 3rd party candidates.
Sorry, Arrowsmith. I don't think “neocon” is equivalent to “teabagger” and I don't think that Justin was using “neocon” as a slur. Perhaps you would have felt better if he called them “rinos”.
I have a cousin who, while noticably lacking in anything like common sense, holds several PHDs— the regretable result of coddling parents and an intellectual community which encourages such excesses. During the last campaign I'd challenged her to relate Mr. Obama's credentials whereupon she regaled me with his academic resume, a response which elicited considerable laughter on my part and thus, her ire, and so exasperated, she took the logical leap that many on the left are quick to; conflating intelligence with ability. I warrant the man is smart, but does that trait necessarily imply problem solving skills requisite for the job or, more importantly, the capacity to devine what, in fact, the problems are.
I can't speak to the intellect of Ms. Palin. I have an opinion but, for purposes of this discussion, it's irrelevant. I was pleased with McCain's decision to include her on the ticket as it necessarily revealed the hypocracy of the feminist movement— if nothing else, it was fun to watch the logical contortions of the pundits and, for that matter, remains so— but, given the apparent impossibility of a McCain victory, I saw no real harm in it.
Now we have an organic political movement which portends some good. The Tea Partiers, I think, are reacting against the republicans with equal disdain to that directed at the democrats and so a void is present which, as is always the case with naturally arising reactionary movements, looks for a leader to arise. There are innumerable examples in history, among them the post Weimar experience and the anti-statist movement in the US, circa '33 and '34 and while I don't see the attraction to Palin as anything comparable to Hitler's rise, I do see something of the populism ot the Kingfish (Huey P Long, for the un-informed) in it.
Palin is welcome —or not— to be the dullest leader in the history of politics and I would support her happily if she would advocate, or at least invoke the need for a return to free market operation as opposed to the merchantilist/ welfare system in which we're mired, the reduction of the size of government by 1/2 and a renounciation of interventionist foreign policy. Without these things we are, by any measurement, screwed.
Palin won't say or do any of these things. Here's how I know; because she's retarded, as evinced by her recent vilification of Mr. Immanuel for having gored her particular, politically correct ox. I hold no love for Rahm but neither do I for anyone who falls prey to the fashion of thought manipulation as that points to a willingness for a socially conscious, and thus frivolous, interpretation of the world.
I wholeheartedly agree with your response, and thank you for taking the time. There is one thing I disagree with, though, so allow me to address it. You say:
“Now we have an organic political movement which portends some good. The Tea Partiers, I think, are reacting against the republicans with equal disdain to that directed at the democrats and so a void is present which, as is always the case with naturally arising reactionary movements, looks for a leader to arise. There are innumerable examples in history, among them the post Weimar experience and the anti-statist movement in the US, circa '33 and '34 and while I don't see the attraction to Palin as anything comparable to Hitler's rise, I do see something of the populism ot the Kingfish (Huey P Long, for the un-informed) in it.”
I think this is not the right outlook on the Tea Partiers. It is my greatest wish that this movement was one of enlightened libertarian ideas, but it just isn't. All you have to do is look at who's speaking to them – who they're cheering for. There, you see such people as “literacy test” Tom Tancredo, Michele Backmann (f***ing crazy), Dick Armey, and Sarah Palin (all Republicans) along with non-politicians like the editor of WorldNetDaily and Jerome Corsi, kooks of epic proportions.
These people are not libertarians. They're merely angry Republicans who want their control back. I'm just not seeing this as something that will elect fiscally responsible leaders who value freedom. Big, dumb mobs – which is what this is – tend to elect bad leaders. I can't say I'm optimistic about the future.
It's not a slur. It's an apt description of people like David Horowitz; former Leftists who saw what socialism was doing to people around the world, and came to a more (classical) liberal point-of-view.
All you have to do is look at who's speaking to them – who they're cheering for.
I don't expect any Democrats to speak at these events.
I agree with much of what you say, but I'm just wondering why Ron Paul doesn't show up? I know he'd be welcome. Why isn't the Libertarian Party making hay here? They'd be welcome, but every time they get in front of crowds this big, they'd rather talk about legalizing drugs – a sentiment I share, but it ain't gonna win elections.
These events are a wonderful arena to present libertarian fiscal ideas. Cato, and any other libertarian organization should be involved in this movement, it's a golden opportunity to push the Republican Party toward a more libertarian fiscal outlook.
You mean the way unions funded the current administration?
BTW: Calling somebody a dimwit after you voted for Biden, and for a guy that needs a teleprompter to speak to First Graders speaks volumes about your own lack of wit.
So we let the neo-com's take over?
That's idiotic.
Oxymoron: Political science.
No such thing, dude.
Politicians are uninformed idiots, and their constituents are clueless rubes, especially DK & muirgeo.
So, shall we flip the coin? That’s a far better option….
It's true that most people are clueless rubes, but is that really fair? Not everyone has the benefit of the right upbringing. I was brought up with a love for reading history and analyzing politics. You can't expect the average person brought up on an intellectual diet of ESPN to understand the nuances of things. It's frankly amazing when the “swing voters” make the right choice.
As vidyohs once said, in a battle of wits, he (Biden) is defenseless.
[Shakespeare said: "I would challenge to a battle of wits, but I see you are unarmed!"]
What an astoundingly useless observation, idiot.
Uh, fair?
Wha?
Don’t care.
See ya.
did I say that?
I cannot believe, nor even pretend
That the thunder I hear, will just disappear
And the nightmare will end
So hold back the fire 'cause this much is true
When all's said and done, the ending will come
From out of the blue
Skipper C
To the extent that I believe it is the province of government to institute and operate the legal system and insure, to the extent which it is able, the security of the populace, I am a libertarian. That said, I would rather that such institutions were unnecessary which makes me a anarchist.
Practically speaking neither position has even the slightest chance of becoming reality so I must operate in the real world, and it is in that light that I see the peril we face. Individual world governments have created a burden of debt—both monetary and promissary— which is beyond our capacity to honor. I believe it was done knowingly and that the actions on the part of governments in the current crisis are intentionally exacerbating the problems. Whether by design (conspiracy) or as an inheirent tendency, the desire is clearly to affect global state control. As example, I give you cap and trade. This is the future we face. I suspect Orwell in his darkest moment couldn't envision a more despicable state of affairs. With this in mind, I would accept a toothless, blble thumping hick from Alabama as a president, so long as he/she were willing to attend to the economic armegeddon which confronts us (see above, for my three requisites).
The Tea Partiers may have a republican bent but they don't appear to be statists. Many, I'm sure, would have an opinion as to the reproductive rights I might wish to exercise were I not too old and male, and I venture that some would be opposed to my marrying, say, my barber, but as these things are weighed against the future I envision and the alternative being the democrats —they who would defend my right to abortion with the the full force of the state and rejoice in my son's and his boyfriends nuptuals but see no constitutional issues in tracking my whereabouts by way of cell phone ownership, and take exception to my thinking in a way not correct politically— I expect the partiers at least understand inately, the stupidity of doubling down at the national debt casino. Whether they can be educated as to the real burden of unfunded liabilities, remains to be seen.
So I guess the question is, do I want to be subjected to a government operating under the elective auspices of the redneck, moralizing masses, or that of the socially concious, economically irresponsible statists. It brings to mind the words of my friend Billy Wacker with whom, as a indestructible pre -teen, I decided to break into some vending machines which resulted in the owner, gun drawn, coming through the back door while the police came through the front. He said, and I quote “Dude, we are so screwed.”
Cheers,
S
Again, thank you for gracing me with such thoughtful responses. I must say, I've been many places around the internet and have never seen or participated in such great discussions with such thoughtful people.
You've made your point well, and I think I can agree. “Least bad” will have to do, I suppose. It still doesn't mean I have to like it, though. Maybe I should be thankful for that.
Haven't our last two two-term presidents had a southern drawl?
Wow – Justin P gets a taste of my world! Don't worry Justin – I know you're not a communist.
It is probably only thanks to the intervention of the Gores that we managed as a country to wrestle free both of Beelzebub's and Ronnie James Dio's bony grasp. Which, it's worth adding, might have been preferable to that of Ben Bernanke and Timothy Geithner.
It is probably only thanks to the intervention of the Gores that we managed as a country to wrestle free both of Beelzebub's and Ronnie James Dio's bony grasp. Which, it's worth adding, might have been preferable to that of Ben Bernanke and Timothy Geithner.
Isn’t that exactly what happened?
I’m just giving you crap. The neo-cons are ridiculous, but the neo-communists (Obamalini, et al.) are far worse. These people are out of fiscal control.
Let’s take a quick inventory of recent achievements in neocom/liberal/progressive governance -
Europe: bankrupt. FAIL
New York: bankrupt. FAIL
California: bankrupt. FAIL
US Gov’t: basically bankrupt, except they can print money. FAIL
Far be it from me to predict or suggest outcomes, but there’s a pattern here, and I’m trying to figure out exactly what it is…..
[against better instincts]
Ever heard this guy talk? Evidently not.
Bush sounded like a Rhodes Scholar compared to Barbour.
Wait, Clinton was a Rhodes scholar, disregard. Shows what that’s worth.
You’re nearly a lark…
Can you please not refer to me as a clueless rube? I don't ever remember extending that sort of discourtesy to you.
No.
In that one quote she appears more intelligent than our President and his entire cabinet.
Ha ha, right!
One thing that neo-cons and neo-communists have in common, Keynesian economics. Pattern? hmmmmmm
I see two major factions in Palin criticism. One holds that she never says anything of substance, “her book didn’t articulate policy!” The other holds the she’s mentally deficient (take this thread in evidence). The factions overlap in a tautological knot.
It’s the Negative Proof Fallacy at work. One can’t prove she’s stupid until she says something that is demonstrably false or logically unsound. If she never says anything more than bromides, it is not evidence of stupidity. It is merely an absence of evidence for her knowledge.
I do not know how elitist smart she is. She seems to be media smart and politically smart, which are the only things that matter to be elected.
If she hasn’t articulated any policy, on what evidence can y’all claim she’s Rovian/Neocon/whatever? If she has articulated policy that is “stupid”, then why not cite her words instead of the generic ad hominems?
Palin may not be fully revealed (or even fully-developed) in a national policy sense. If/when she does establish a comprehensive set of policies, remember that a leader need not be complex to be effective.
Damnit, I'm tired of this basic behavior from fellow libertarians.
Look Palin isn't perfect, but she is the closest thing to a libertarian that has a chance of winning. As it stands now, I am probably going to vote for Gary Johnson, but attacking those who stand closer to us than most is a very bad idea. Instead of calling her names, we should be encouraging her to become more libertarian.
In this war against state coercion, let us stop pointing metaphorical guns at those closest to us and aim them much further down the field.
The Republican Party also needs Pizzaz. It needs to sex it up a bit. Celebrity-tize itself. If not Sarah, than who?
Tim Pawlenty? Golly gee, he's real exciting. He'll attract 70,000 to rallies at The Villages in Florida for sure.
You all eggheads don't know jack about politics. It's not just about who is right on the issues, or who is the most intellectual, or who has the right degree from the right Ivy League school back East.
It's about who can rev up a crowd, looks good on TV, and has a likeable personality. On that score, nobody in the GOP even comes close to Sarah Palin.
With all due respect to Mr. Gillepsie, when I read these types of commentaries I burst out laughing.
What other political figure in the Republican party attracts the same level of excitement and enthusiasm? None.
- Go back and look at Governor Palin's record as city councilor, Mayor, Chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission and as Governor of the State of Alaska.
- Read the speech she gave in Hong Kong, along with her various Facebook postings on economic issues. Listen again to the speech she gave to the Nashville Tea Party Convention.
What comes through loud and clear is that Sarah Palin is a fiscal conservative, who believes in smaller, more efficient government.
She has spoken favorably of Paul Ryan's Roadmap for America's Future.
But most important, has Governor Palin announced that she is running to be the Presidential nominee for the Republican Party? No.
So, how about everyone just back up and let events unfold. Right now the political focus needs to be on the 2010 mid-term elections.
There will be time enough after that for policy and position papers, should she decide to run for the Presidential nomination of the Republican party.
In the meantime, I suggest that folks focus on putting together a coalition of conservative / libertarian candidates running under the Republican banner with the objective of winning a majority of seats in the House and Senate on a platform of smaller more efficient government that is committed to bringing spending under control, reducing the deficit and ultimately balancing the budget, while implementing no cost policies that will allow the private sector to create jobs and wealth.
With all due respect to Mr. Gillepsie, when I read these types of commentaries I burst out laughing.
What other political figure in the Republican party attracts the same level of excitement and enthusiasm? None.
- Go back and look at Governor Palin's record as city councilor, Mayor, Chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission and as Governor of the State of Alaska.
- Read the speech she gave in Hong Kong, along with her various Facebook postings on economic issues. Listen again to the speech she gave to the Nashville Tea Party Convention.
What comes through loud and clear is that Sarah Palin is a fiscal conservative, who believes in smaller, more efficient government.
She has spoken favorably of Paul Ryan's Roadmap for America's Future.
But most important, has Governor Palin announced that she is running to be the Presidential nominee for the Republican Party? No.
So, how about everyone just back up and let events unfold. Right now the political focus needs to be on the 2010 mid-term elections.
There will be time enough after that for policy and position papers, should she decide to run for the Presidential nomination of the Republican party.
In the meantime, I suggest that folks focus on putting together a coalition of conservative / libertarian candidates running under the Republican banner with the objective of winning a majority of seats in the House and Senate on a platform of smaller more efficient government that is committed to bringing spending under control, reducing the deficit and ultimately balancing the budget, while implementing no cost policies that will allow the private sector to create jobs and wealth.
← Previous Comments
Comments on this entry are closed.