Sarah Palin, Mark Sanford and Occam's Razor

I tend to agree with Fish, that's she's had enough. But that doesn't really get her off the hook. She should have had the sense to see all this back in 2008 when the world's worst candidate asked her to save his pathetic a**. She should have known after the election, when she continued to string along supporters by refusing to deny any interest in running 2012. If she wants to depart the stage, fine, but she's no hero in doing so. She's someone's who's left a lot of earnest followers in the lurch.

"To the pure all things are pure, and to the swine all things are swinish." - Nietzsche

I'm sticking with the "She's-a-grade-A-flake" explanation.

Palin told the people of AK that she would be their governor. She has now broken that promise.

Can you imagine any male politician acting like this and having Our Working Boy writing a simpathetic article about him?

Balko's comment in the previous thread makes a lot of sense. Some of the criticism of Palin was over the top and unfair, but most of it was spot on and perfectly fair. Here's one from the previous thread that I thought was unfair, or at least overly broad:

And I do reserve the right to point out that someone who attends four or five colleges before receiving a B.A is not exactly serious about education.

Or she's very serious. Some people at the economic margins go in and out of community colleges and universities before finally getting a degree. Those people are a lot more serious than most at my four-year liberal arts school.

That said, Palin does bring out the conservative victim mentality. This quote came from Dreher:

Someone -- maybe Booker T. Washington, I can't recall -- once said that because of prejudice, black Americans who wanted to get ahead in America would have to be better than good enough to withstand the things thrown at them in their ascent to the top. The Palin experience suggests the same thing for a woman politician of Palin's background and beliefs.

Hillary Clinton was hit pretty hard, too. Many Republicans used "Obama's a Muslim" or "Obama's not a citizen." People accused both Clintons of murdering Vince Foster. Even though I think Palin was not even close to being qualified for the job she was seeking, many of the attacks on Palin were unfair. But they were just a variety on the unfair attacks all top level candidates face.

As much as I think Palin was unqualified, Democrats shouldn't take her apparent incompetence for granted. She's certainly not as stupid as her stereotype. She appeared to use the failing McCain candidacy to build her own base instead of to help McCain. That's self-serving and ruthless, but those are often two qualities in successful presidents. She's also probably laughing her way to the bank, now. She can work her way up to being a serious national contender if she can hit a self-reliance message while avoiding the rhetoric that attacks anyone who is not a conservative Christian from a small town.

Republicans should stop worshiping her. Democrats should turn down the mockery a notch or two.

Here's another example of the conservative victim mentality from the last thread:

I wrote a column last fall for my paper complaining about Saturday Night Live making fun of her accent, which has been compared to the North Dakota/Minnesota accent *I* speak with. Sarah Palin sounds completely normal to me and certainly not unintelligent.

Her accent is what it is. Any comedian impersonating her has to use it. What accent should they impose on her? A Boston accent? A lower midwestern accent? A southern accent? Tina Fey didn't seem to be exagerating it much, if at all. When Palin and her were on the same show, they were dead ringers for each other. Palin got some unfair treatment, but Fey's portrayal of her accent was perfectly fair. The words spoken, not the accent they were spoken in, made Palin sound unintelligent in the portrayals.

Ross Douthat, as example, is Catholic and a Harvard graduate who, although bemoaning the known elitism at Harvard in his book, "Privilege..", gave no solutions to modify the Harvard male's better than thou smugness. Thus, I truly wonder how seriously the opinions of such men matter when they have so little in common with the subject of their writings

Automatically distrusting someone with a top quality education is its own form of snobbery. Palin's problem isn't that she lacks an Ivy League degree, it's that she seems to believe that a top-flight education disqualifies people from higher office. Just like Obama couldn't have won if he relentlessly campaigned on the idea that people without college degrees were worthless idiots, Republicans can't win with a relentless campaign that people with college educations are inherently unqualified to lead.

Admittedly, I am in some ways, I am an elitist. I want my president to be smarter than I am. I want my president to have better judgment and leadership ability than I have. Someone without top-notch degrees can do the job and do it well (Truman showed that). I also know a lot of lawyers from Fourth Tier schools who can litigate circles around a lot of Ivy League lawyers. But in a president, a good education is a help, not a handicap. I'm looking for someone to lead the country, not have a beer with.

Does memory serve or fail me, but was Sarah Palin's church firebombed after the election? If memory serves me, then that's a form of assault I don't recall being hurled at other politicians.

Palin blasted through the VP campaign door - spewing irresponsible, ignorant vitriol. This is a case of her reaping the exact same nastiness she sowed, herself. Attacks against her have been nasty, but no more so than hers have been against Obama, un-"real" Americans, the media and everyone else in her path, including her own grandchild's teenage father. The self-described pitbull/barracuda/grizzly bear could dish it out, but she couldn't take it.

Y'know, I'd be a lot more inclined to believe that Sarah's exit from the political stage was sincere if these big honking "SUPPORT SARAHPAC: DONATE" ads didn't keep popping up in the corner of every one of Rod's blog entries I've opened today.

I'm just sayin'...

You know what? I don't want to hear Mark Sanford and Sarah Palin mentioned in the same breath.

I can't stand either one of them politically. But to compare, even by putting their names together in the same paragraph, a lying adulterer with a woman who did not terminate her pregnancy but had her Downs baby (with all that entails)....well, talk about opposites. Sanford couldn't manage to be faithful even to his wife and family, Palin goes the distance for a disabled baby. You don't hear about her in Argentina with some hunk of a "soulmate" and then coming back and whining about it.

Please.

"If that's what it takes to be involved in national politics these days, what normal family person would bother?"

That's just it; a normal family person would not bother with national politics, and Sarah Palin is not a normal family person. Sarah Palin knew, or certainly should have known, exactly what she was getting into when she ran for governor and when she accepted the number 2 spot with McCain. You have to have an abnormal ego to sign for this kind of stuff in the first place.

"Palin blasted through the VP campaign door - spewing irresponsible, ignorant vitriol. This is a case of her reaping the exact same nastiness she sowed, herself. Attacks against her have been nasty, but no more so than hers have been against Obama, un-"real" Americans, the media and everyone else in her path, including her own grandchild's teenage father. The self-described pitbull/barracuda/grizzly bear could dish it out, but she couldn't take it."

You might as well save it, man; they just don't care. Christ told his followers to love their neighbors, but the self-professed Christian right just can't be bothered.

ALL politicians (or nearly all) trot out their families. And while I agree that Dan Quayle put up with a lot of guff, and the Bush twins came in for their share of abuse, the mainstream media DID NOT do anything comparable to claiming that the parentage of any of those children was questionable, or make sex jokes about underage kids.

I thought I was pretty clear that previous politicians put up with a lot, but this was a whole new level. If you think that suggesting that a family's child is not their own or that making jokes about teenagers getting "knocked up" by sports stars on network TV isn't a level far, far below making fun of partying college students or spelling gaffes or calling a dislike politician unpleasant names, I guess you won't get my point. I don't like any of that stuff and I was annoyed by a lot of it, but this is something different entirely.

"the mainstream media DID NOT do anything comparable to claiming that the parentage of any of those children was questionable, or make sex jokes about underage kids."

Can you point to an article in which a mainstream media outlet called into question the parentage of any of Palin's kids? Just one. I'm not talking about internet bloggers or comedians or radio talk loonies. Show me an article in the Washington Post or the Houston Chronicle or the NY Times where they openly called into question the parentage of Palin's kid(s).

Likewise, where did the mainstream media (by that I mean a serious news outlet) make jokes about her daughter? Letterman is a comedian -- he says things that occasionally offend. So does Jeff Foxworthy. So does Lewis Black. So does Chris Rock. Get over it, already.

Of course, from your perspective, you probably have no problem when the rightwing media (FOX News, in particular) referred to Michelle Obama as "Obama's Baby Mama" (which is a reference to inner city -- aka "black" -- pregnant teens) or when they identified the Obama's as giving one another a "terrorist fist jab". Sure, there was no slime throwing by right wing media.

Wow, Palin WAS treated unfairly. You could almost say she was "swift-boated." It's just so awful! Only a liberal elitist would be so mean as to have a bumper sticker saying, "Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my gun." Oh wait...

You might as well save it, man; they just don't care. Christ told his followers to love their neighbors, but the self-professed Christian right just can't be bothered.

http://www.thepaincomics.com/weekly050504.htm

Sarah Palin was dealt an excellent hand. I don't buy the 'media-hates-Christians' theme. Had she presented herself as serious, thoughtful, and open about her limitations and stated a willingness to learn, and not speaking in cliches, not winking on national TV, and _giving press conferences_, none of this mockery would have happened.

"the mainstream media DID NOT do anything comparable to claiming that the parentage of any of those children was questionable, or make sex jokes about underage kids."

In 1998, John McCain joked about the then 17 or 18 year old Chelsea Clinton: "Do you know why Chelsea Clinton is so ugly? — Because Janet Reno is her father." McCain apologized profusely, but it's worth noting that he directly insulted the child of a sitting president, implied infidelity of the First Lady, and weirdly attacked the gender of the Attorney General.

Or there was the episode of NBC's Saturday Night Live in which Madonna did the "Happy Birthday Mr. President" song for Bill Clinton, and then implied that she was really lusting after the (then 12 year old) Chelsea. Around the same time Rush Limbaugh referred to her as "the White House Dog".

Politics is ugly, Palin didn't get it any worse than anyone else.

I think if you look at her history - this is really not an unusual thing for her to do. She transferred to a couple of colleges, even quit college to do the beauty pageant thing. She quit her job on the Oil Board (or whatever it was called) after campaigning to get it. So this is consistent for her. Since she has not dissolved her PAC - she obviously aint staying home with the kids and continues to have political ambitions - as in running for the presidency type ambitions. Normal people do not have PAC's. To accept her explanation on face value seems foolish - if she meant what she seemed to have said - the PAC would be gone and she wouldn't be twittering away as she is. She is - on twitter - speaking of her desire to help this country - remake the country etc - sure sounds like a politician to me.

I personally do not see how Palin's small government big military climate change denying drill baby drill worldview is in any way where we need to go - consider Rod's post previously on meth labs and small towns - and I bet by 2012 that will be even less likely to be a successful strategy. She is yesterdays news.

"That's just it; a normal family person would not bother with national politics, and Sarah Palin is not a normal family person." A

TR: I mostly agree to this. I'm willing to defend her at times, but she's not an ordinary person. Purely ordinary people don't get where she got. They'd also decline a VP position if they know their teenage daughter is pregnant.

She has many good qualities, but everything indicates she is strongly ambitious and highly competitive. I think this could be exactly what she said, but if so that means she's probably taking a "time out" than quitting entirely. She'll probably either remain in the spotlight or return to it after a bit of breathing time.

Mark Sanford got lost in his heart, Sarah Palin got lost in her ego.

If the Republicans can ask for Obama's birth certificate, why can't Andrew Sullivan ask for Trig's.

the completely ridiculous "My water broke in Texas so I jumped on a plane for an 8 hour flight to Alaska" story

I don't know what happened (or, care very much). But this tall tale is like someone telling you that their living room was trashed by a dinosaur.

I don't know what happened, but not that. If her water broke, she was leaking all over the airplane seat, and no small amount of fluid, either. I'm sure the airline appreciated that. Furthermore, a woman pregnant with a Downs baby (who is very likely to be medically fragile, and quite likely, actually, not to survive the birth process) who gets on an airplane when her water breaks is the most irresponsible person on the planet. Sarah Palin is an airhead, but I don't believe she's that much of an airhead.

Sullivan's instincts are good. We are being lied to.

... that made her seem UNintelligent...

I are a ignoramus.

I sympathize with the Palins but isn't Sarah Palin giving a clear signal to those who think they can hound people out of office with non-stop harrassment? If this becomes the norm, who is going to run in elections except people whose only "quality" is such excessive self-serving ambition that they are willing to put themselves and their families through a never-ending ordeal of public ridicule and expensive legal proceedings.

Maybe she's leaving because Politics is public-service... a job
essentially. I think it's OK to quit a job when it sucks. If
I take a job and learn later that there are things that come with
it that make my family life miserable, I have to do right by
them first and resign and take the heat.

Calling her resignation essentially a "lie" is drama-queen speech.

My Governor (Deval Patrick) promised me property tax relief. Instead
I now get to pay a higher sales tax, along with other fees/taxes.
Did he LIE TO ME to get elected? Or did the economy tank and now
is reacting to it?

Look, I'd rather he cut spending first, but I don't go all
"drama queen" and say he LIED to me. C'mon...

Keep that PDS coming.

Ahh, man, I"m sorry. This captcha thing did it to me again. I got interrupted before pushing the post thing, refreshed and it called up a previous post. ...

So, here's the right one....

Maybe by stepping down from the governor's office -- if that means she's leaving politics forever -- Palin proves she is exactly what her supporters say she is: a normal human being. It's worth thinking about. If any of my children said he or she wanted to become an entertainer or a politician, I would actively discourage them, saying that those worlds would likely chew them up and make mincemeat of family life. That's not to say that one cannot be a good family man or woman and be an effective entertainer (actor, pop musician, etc.) or politician, but it is to say that the odds against it in this culture are pretty high.
=================================

No, Palin proved to be exactly what she said she was... A public servant. She stated ever so clearly that when the intentional and orchestrated campaign to obstruct her, and that is continuing on, and showed absolutely no sign of abating became the primary occupier of her time and attention and a huge allotment of state money and resources, she did precisely what was in the interests of the people of the state. It's called self sacrifice. She left the agenda she started in capable and dedicated hands, someone just as worthy as her.

For all the tea in China, for all the gold in Fort Knox, for all the diamonds in Africa, I can't imagine why you'd then turn on someone who did that and call them a "quitter".

That's shallow, that's disgraceful. Further, it is the epitome of UNCHRISTIAN. I expect THAT from the disgraceful people, from the uncharitable, from the myopic media... But not from people who claim insight, or have the gall to publish nationally and in print, and lecture us on cultural, moral, and faith decay...

I agree, Sarah Palin's act was EXACTLY WHAT SHE SAID IT WAS. You were so busy attempting to read between the lines, people, you never actually READ THE LINES.

We can all speculate wildly on Palin's future. The door is closed on being Governor. She closed that door in an act that can be considered nothing other than an act of ultimate character.

What door she chooses to walk through next is up to her. Your thoughts on her political viability are pointless. She's not playing your game. And the people who admire her for what she is and did aren't playing your game, either.

Yes, lots of people want her to run for office, due to the fact that they want someone of character, who doesn't play the political game. Could she win? I'll be hanged if I know. In today's poisoned politics, and the wholesale corruption now invading the swamp in DC, and the media's inability and unwillingness to even begin to attempt to do anything but cheer it on, nothing is predictable.

I don't KNOW, nor does anyone else KNOW precisely what she's going to do. For certain, she has said she intends to do something to attempt to alter the course of our country. In other words, she's not just "going away". What I can predict... Is that under no circumstances will you EVER see her playing the present political game that the pundits are now calling.

Yes, she scares a lot of people. And they should be. Their corrupt little game is seriously threatened with being laid open to see. The notion that the long laid plans of radicals might get disrupted and reset to zero exists, and that SHOULD scare those who want them.

Some just fear what they don't understand. Many of those post here, in spasms of anger and venom against her. That's ok, they're just children venting their fears in predictably juvenile ways. Palin'ss proven she can be trusted - as a public servant, as a person, and as someone who earns her own living, and all the naysayers are just bloviating in the dark.

There has been and continues to be such a question regarding Mr. Obama.

Only among the portion of the populace who hate Obama with a passion and would therefore believe anything.

Trig's birth certificate was never released. Which is another reason Sullivan was so hot on that trail - the whole brouhaha could have ended with a release of the bc.

John E. - Agn Stoic
July 7, 2009 1:48 PM
I can't imagine why you'd then turn on someone who did that and call them a "quitter".

What else do you call someone who resigns their position?

She didn't want to be Governor of Alaska anymore, so she quit
=========================

I'm wondering if should call you stupid... Or just imply it. The question was answered before you asked it.

I am somewhat puzzled by your desperate need to "label" her negatively. You're unable to admit that someone actually could just act for the good of the people, while in public office. You could hardly hardly call it "the public good" when the governor's time is spent doing little besides dealing with an endless and orchestrated stream of false ethics charges, for the governor to then just spend the next two years wasting the people's money on frivolity, forced by those with a personal and political agenda of retribution.

To accept your assertion that she should have stayed, no matter what, is to presume that somehow, the needs of Alaska are met by her, again, just dealing with the endless stream of false charges. That's just silly, and you know it. So, you present two false choices, prepared to condemn for either. She was condemned for being governor in the first place, because women should be home and raise children. And then you condemned her for resigning.

So, the people of Alaska's true need, is to have their government deal with endless false allegations, which it legally must investigate. The oversight board ALONE has spent nearly 300,000 dollars. Additional billed lawyers hours, investigators, outside costs, and diversion of people and resources to these things was accounted to Palin as being nearly 2 million dollars already. You demand she should have just stayed, clinging to office until election day, perpetuating this wasteful nonsense... Or you call her a "quitter"?

Please justify it for us. I want to see this mental circus.

Is Arrrrgh really Sarah Palin? Todd? Bristol? Curious...

I have long believed that with its embrace of "men" of such gross testicular atrophy like McCain and any of the bushes, the death of the GOP was inevitable and to be joyfully welcomed and even hastened wherever possible to bring about the rise of a new conservative political party, in a manner in which the Whigs replaced the Federalists and the Republicans later replaced The Whigs. Moreover, while I've never been politically enamored of Mrs. Palin, I would happily join a political party of which she was a foundress if it supported serious conservative principles in a way the GOP no longer does.

=====================

You point out something few remember to keep in mind... Political parties are ephemeral. They rise and fall, being as solid and principled only as the people who they embrace or embrace them. The "GOP" brand is only what those in office make it to be. If it's weak, it's because of them. If it's strong, again, it's because of them.

However, the SYSTEM of having two parties is not so ephemeral. It gains stability by having lots of laws and conventions that embraced and then gave it stability.

It is difficult to play outside of that sandbox, with the rules making the mountain much higher to climb. To say that the GOP is dead, is to ignore the inertia which holds it in place as the place keeper when leadership fails to emerge.

On the other hand, it can just as rapidly be revitalized and become strong and vital and become vibrant, should those kinds of people rise and become the core of its soul. Thus, I think talk of parties coming and going is the "long shot". It would be far easier, in my estimation, to simply change the GOP to reflect a new reality and new leadership.

Note, I'm not saying EITHER is easy. Please don't misunderstand me. Just that one idea has far more odds stacked against it.

MBunge
July 7, 2009 2:57 PM
"Please justify it for us. I want to see this mental circus."

Sarah Palin is NOT the first office holder to come under assault by her enemies. She is not the first political figure to come under public ridicule and personal attack. By your logic, Dan Quayle and Dick Cheney should have resigned the Vice-Presidency. So, either Palin is a quitter or Quayle and Cheney were selfish glory hounds who cared nothing for their country. Which is it?

Mike
=====================================

This presumes that Palin quit because of ridicule and criticism.

Palin refutes that claim, by her own words, and that of her family. When asked if they wanted to fight in some other way than as governor, the answer was the famous "hell yeah". Wait until those kids reach the age, and if they have the itch to make a difference. they're just wolverines waiting to be uncaged.

Palin's stated reason for quitting was the interest of the people and state.

So, did Cheney OR Quayle consume large amounts of the government's time, resources, and money over frivolous, fake and false ethics charges? No. Since VP's do not govern, the question is basically pointless.

Remember, the reason for these was mostly "personal vendetta", but nicely orchestrated. If you examine them, there's two distinct kinds. One designed to tie up resources, one designed to accuse of wrongdoing. The vast majority are the former.

For instance, the accusation about state expenses for her children's travel with her. This consumed many hours of both auditors and lawyers time attempting to unravel and apply the complex reimbursement and benefit laws the concern them. The direct costs to the state was likely in excess of 100,000 dollars to attempt to delve into every last detail. In the end, they ended up with a small amount that might have been worthy of question, so the Palins reimbursed the state and that ended it. The purpose of this was not to "prove" they were theives as it could not be done. But to cost the state lots of money and to tie up it's financial and auditing people.

So, let me ask you again, other than your imagination, what evidence have you that she quit over criticism and media attention? None.

What evidence do you have that she resigned, simply to spare the state and the people of Alaska the inane stupidity that continued on unabated? Plenty. INcluding her own direct and clear statement.

RSG
July 7, 2009 3:15 PM
Arrrrgh, what are you talking about? Please use fewer cliches and give us just one little concise POINT.
======================================

You're clueless.

Ahh. Nice to see good old simplistic nonsense alive and well.

You would argue the counterpoint - that since Palin quit her position as Governor, she is not a quitter?

Oh now this is just getting funny. You're right, Arrrgh. I haven't a clue, specifically how a human being of reasonable intelligence can take a ride on the train of thought for which you seem to have purchased round trip tickets.

This is the point when all people of good will and straining good nature should shake the sands from our intellectual sandals and let poor Arrrgh, obviously a cousin of the Palins, hear nothing but the silly sounds of his/her own voice.

I think Rich Lowry over at NRO has the right idea:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Nzc0MzY3MWRjMjE1OTE0NmI1ZjYzYzQwMWY1ZTE5Njk=#more

Sarah Palin’s words served only to throw a tissue of rationalization over a calculated choice made in her personal self-interest. In all likelihood, Palin is going to embrace her political celebrity with gusto, freed from the burdens of the geographic isolation of the Alaska governorship and its (relative to national politics) petty distractions. Her decision wasn’t particularly public-spirited, but neither was it crazy. She has seen her opportunities, and she’s going to take them.

Arrrrgggh wrote: "It is difficult to play outside of that sandbox, with the rules making the mountain much higher to climb. To say that the GOP is dead, is to ignore the inertia which holds it in place as the place keeper when leadership fails to emerge."

The problem IS that the GOP is NOT dead, but that it's been little more than a cadaver of its former conservative self since Poppy Bush first won his party's nomination in 1988. In short, it's been on conservative life support since then with the party pooh-bahs only dressing it up with political make-up akin to how a mortician puts make-up on a corpse to make it look conservative.

Indeed, we do need a two party system: One to tack with the political winds, The Democrat Party, and the other to provide a fixed point against which to objectively measure ourselves and our country; first The Federalists, then The Whigs and once upon a time The Republicans. Since The Republicans decided that being Democrat-Lite was good enough, they've lost their raison d'etre and it's time for them to take the gas pipe themselves or for true conservatives to finally (and mercifully for everyone) render them the "coup de graces."

Rod Dreher
July 7, 2009 3:36 PM
Aaaargh, I think I know who you are, and I think you've been banned twice. I'll look into that, but meanwhile, you've said the same thing 50 times on this thread, at great length. You've moved over into troll territory. That's quite enough here.
end quote

I'm not sure what "troll territory" is, but after reading this thread through, I decided to see if I could figure it out... So, please bear with me.

First, I found all the deep insights posted here and copied them down... here they are:

"She's-a-grade-A-flake"

out of her way to backstab people

She has now broken that promise.

spewing irresponsible, ignorant vitriol.

stupid as Mrs. Moosebreath

have to have an abnormal ego

Christ told his followers to love their neighbors, but the self-professed Christian right just can't be bothered.

Which good faith has not, and never existed on her part.

she does have a history of lying

Evangelicals had their golden boy Bush in power and now our country is in a huge mess. I'm really getting tired of the Evangelical persecution complex

the inner-Al-Sharpton in a lot of conservatives

And all those are fine.

Arrrgh appears to say that Palin's an honorable person and did an honorable thing, and seems unwilling to concede anything different. THAT is trolling.

Gotcha.

I checked the archives. Since Friday, you have posted apparently 6 items on Palin, all of which are negative, the last one titled insultingly about Palin being unstable?

But saying she did something honorable in resigning is "trolling".

You betcha. Wink. Wink.

Is this REALLY a blog about the highest ideals and morals of Christian conservatives?

"By your logic, Dan Quayle and Dick Cheney should have resigned the Vice-Presidency."

TR: This was to someone else, but you know maybe they should have resigned. At one time it wasn't unusual to switch VPs. Maybe both Bushes would've done better with Quayle or Cheney. Or at least maybe the country would have.