ę Uh-Oh: Republicans Beating Democrats 48-45 on Generic Congressional in WashPost/ABC Poll | Main | When The Government Doesn't Like Its People It Can't Elect A New One. Or Can It? Ľ
February 10, 2010

Sarah Palinís Politics Of Resentment

Bumped by ace. Fresh posts below.

First thing, the title is not my theory, thatís the thrust of a piece by The Atlanticís Marc Ambinder.

Second, let me say while Iím not a tremendous fan of Palin, Iím not a hater either. In fact, the more ridiculous attacks I see on her (and yeah Iím look at you Bobby ďThe PalmĒ Gibbs), the more interested I become.

With that out of the way, hereís what I see as the gist of Ambinderís post.

(Palin is the) only presidential candidate who is able to put the boots to Obama and get away with it. What's she running for? Not the question. What's she running against? Not just Rockefeller Republicanism and the media, or pointy-headed law lecturer presidents, or Katie Couric: she wants to relitigate a bunch of issues that once were settled but now seem to be unraveling. The unrestricted embrace of immigration and the dilution of an American culture. Overweening Greenism. A complicated socially engineered tax code. A much larger role for government (embraced by the president who said that the era of Big Government Was Over and his successor, who was a Republican). The rule of experts. Even the concept of bipartisanship itself.

I guess thatís what it looks like if sheís running against you but it seems to escape Ambinderís grasp that maybe Palin and he supporters arenít against all he and his friends hold dear but rather are for something else entirely. (In fairness, Ambinder is really a stand in here for a lot of people like David Frum, Democrats and just about anyone who has worked on the editorial staff of the NY Times)

Perspective is a very important thing in life. When you are for one thing and another person is for some completely different, it looks to you like they are against you. Now that might be the functional outcome of their prevailing but it doesnít mean that their motives were simply opposition to you. Itís quite possible they didnít know or care about your thoughts or feelings, they simply wanted what they wanted because they preferred it and thought it good in and of itself. Your Ďlosingí was a by-product, not the goal.

The problem is the liberal establishment in this country doesnít just think their personal preferences are just that, preferences, but rather they see them as natural and correct state of the world. They bemoan the loss of the bi-partisan good old days when for the most part Republicans were fine and decent men like Howard Baker, Gerald Ford and Robert Michel, men who knew their placeÖin the minority helping Democrats pass important social programs and tax hikes.

Note how Ambinder couches the ideas of immigration, taxes and big governmentÖ ďsettledĒ. You see, everything is set in stone the second liberals think they have won. Any desire to impact these changes gets you labeled an extremist, a racist or just a hick. Itís funny but I donít remember ever agreeing to the idea that Ďthe rule of expertsí (or any of the rest) was something we signed off on forever and always. In fact, I donít recall signing off on it even on a temporary basis.


Apparently anyone who disagrees with this settlement is simply a rejectionist rabble rouser. Itís not possible that Americans actually yearn for more freedom or want to have greater control over their own lives and more of a direct say how and where government gets involved because these are good things by their nature. No, that sort of nonsense is simply rejection of whatís been decided.

Those who dismiss Palin and her supporters as only running on a negative agenda never seem to see that trait in groups like ACORN, SEIU or the politicians who support them. You never hear about people who see the fruits of otherís labor and only Ďwant to spread it aroundí being charged with resentment. They are the chosen ones who have accepted that redistribution of wealth is Ďsettledí and the natural state of things, therefore they are doing the right thing and for the right reasons.

Advocates of Ďsettledí issues simply see wanting something different as a temper tantrum by children, albeit potentially dangerous children, against those who know better (which not so coincidently is them).

The reaction to Palin by these people simply reflects their narcissism. They look in the mirror together and tell themselves and each other how beautiful, smart and kind they are. Then along comes this person, an attractive woman no less, who looks at them says, Ďmeh, Iíve seen betterí and they lose it.

Confronted with this heresy, the advocates of Ďsettledí truths can either consider the ideas of the people she represents or they can call her, and by proxy her supports, crazy. This allows them to go back to marveling at themselves in the mirror. Not surprisingly, they, like most people, elect to do the latter. Itís easier to call names and dismiss people than confront their ideas. Heaping scorn and lowering someone else is the cheapest way to make a person feel better about themselves. Besides, when people are challenging something so patently obvious and true (namely your wisdom), you donít need to take them seriously.
To me, thatís why Palin engenders such hostile reactions. He mere presence on the scene makes it ok for everyone else to notice the emperors arenít wearing any clothes.

After all of that I should say a few other thingsÖ

Iím no populist. I donít necessarily think crowds or ďauthenticityĒ equate to being right. At the same time, I donít think those qualities automatically make something wrong either.

As for Palin herself, Iím still agnostic. Sheís not my first choice for the nomination but neither is anyone else. Itís got less to do with her and more to do with the fact that I donít get enthusiastic about any politician. I think they are all very odd in fundamental ways and are nothing more than a necessary evil. No one politician can or should ever be in a position that they can make that much of a difference in our lives. Personally my goal is to see government shrink in overall importance at every level and take politicians and public sector workers with it.

Where Palin is concerned thereís far too much focus on her style. This is true on both sides. A lot of people either seem to have a natural affinity for her or a strong dislike.

I do agree with some critics who say she speaks in generalities, but so what? Sheís setting up a narrative right now for her campaign (I do think sheís running) and positioning herself with her base. Every politician has to and does do that. Why is she, a private citizen and not officially a candidate for anything, supposed to be giving detailed policy speeches at events that are purely political rallies? She doesnít need to, nor should she, be the policy spokesperson for the Republicans. Thatís not her role right now.
If she does run, will she engage the more wonkish types or run a mostly aspirational candidacy? I donít know. Weíll find out when and if she does run. Until then, thereís no reason to bash her for not running the type of campaign pundits would prefer.

What bothers me the most is the attempted marginalization of Palin and the people she seems to represent. I may not agree with her or them all the time or ever, but I see no reason to write them out of the national discourse with a contemptuous wave of the hand.

And just out of curiosity, since things are so bad under ďThe rule of expertsĒ why shouldnít people be dismissive of experts? It seems having continued faith in a system and group of people who got you in a mess is the height of stupidity. Arenít the people who want to try something else, you know, the smart ones?

digg this
posted by DrewM. at 02:45 PM

| Access Comments




Recent Comments
5/8 Mex: "Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at December 16, 2017 ..."

JQ: "KT, saw your reply re: turnips/ greens-- thanks so ..."

Bear with Assymetrical Balls: "A good future movie thread might be movies that we ..."

blake: "Sigh. How about a complementary compliment? ..."

The Inexplicable Dr. Julius Strangepork: "Hi, is anyone still here? I used to raise dwarf r ..."

Stringer Davis [/i]]/b]: "But Hitchcock DID make a Titanic movie. He did the ..."

Northernlurker : "I thought In Cold Blood was a very good movie. ..."

blake: "Posted by: KT at December 16, 2017 08:54 PM (BVQ+1 ..."

Bertram Cabot, Jr.: " [i]Emperor of the North .. anyone ? Posted by: ..."

Hands: ""The Right Stuff" is very good. It can't be easy t ..."

troyriser: "I've seen 'The Passion of Joan of Arc' twice now. ..."

Harvey Weinstein: "Ain't nothing to phrenology neither. Posted b ..."

Recent Entries
Search


MuNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat
Archives
Powered by
Movable Type 2.64