House of Eratosthenes

I’m revising my position. After reading this well-thought-out article linked by our blogger friend in New Mexico, I have experienced a spiritual awakening, the scales have fallen from my eyes, and I can see Sarah Palin is a thoroughly inadequate candidate. We’ve got to do something to make this woman go away before she scuttles our chances in 2012, and Barack Obama coasts to an easy second term…which I don’t think this country can survive.

This is the passage that really turned me around:

The years since 2008 were Mrs. Palin’s opportunity to redefine herself, to shake off the McCain tinge, to shatter the press stereotypes of her as a right-wing zealot. This was certainly within her ability. After all, prior to getting tapped in 2008, Mrs. Palin’s reputation was as a clear-eyed, inclusive reformer—one with soaring bipartisan approval ratings.

Instead, Mrs. Palin has chosen to cater mostly to her loyalist base. She’s purposely chosen to insert herself into nearly every national controversy—all but forcing voters to be for her or against her. Far from being reassured, many independents have felt confirmed in their fears about her temperament. She remains radioactive among a majority of voters, and she has even polarized Republicans. A March poll showed that 37% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents view her unfavorably, a number that far outpaced that of any other potential GOP candidate.

The stakes in 2012 are high. Mr. Obama is a sitting president. It will take a mighty GOP nominee (not to mention a lot of luck) to knock him off. Mrs. Palin would come into this race with little or no infrastructure, a near complete lack of a policy agenda, and eye-popping unfavorables. Nothing is impossible in politics, but her start is not encouraging.

Yes, now that I’m looking in on this “other” world from the outside, and making my first moves toward joining it, I can understand the appeal.

Making decisions a certain way, because & only because nameless, faceless strangers, whom you don’t know and never will meet, made the same choices. Choices you embrace fully, but the logic to which you will not, and cannot, explain.

It’s like a great weight has been lifted from my shoulders. No responsibility. Don’t ask me why this is the right choice, I only know that it is! Look at all those other people! Whoops, sorry, you can’t see them and neither can I. Oh well, they’re out there. Somewhere. Other nameless, faceless no-account busybodies keep telling me about ’em…and they wouldn’t lie. Why would they? They have no preconceived agenda at all! I think.

Anyway, I can certainly see the appeal. “Everybody knows it’s true because everybody knows that everybody knows.” No one taking individual responsibility for figuring out what the facts are, or what they might mean. Proxy fact-gathering, proxy-inference-forming, proxy-freakin’-everything. It’s like going back to high school or something.

Well, here’s one nagging problem with my conversion: If Palin is not the good candidate, then who is? So far, in spite of my asking this question of the rightward-leaning libertarian-spirit Palinophobes…I haven’t got back a single cogent, coherent response. Not one. Not a single time.

I haven’t even got the beginnings of a list of requirements to be applied, to figure out who such a candidate must be.

So I figured I’d do this legwork for them. Heck, if they were ever going to do it themselves, let’s face facts, they’d have done it by now. And they won’t put together such a list, so it falls to me.

They’ve been unified, and enthused, about why they disapprove of Palin so much. So the way I figure it, this is just building on top of the foundation they’ve already laid. So onward with Step 2 — your “Good Candidate” requirements document…

1. Male, or ugly woman; either way, never wears a skirt or dress
2. Went to Yale or Harvard, or a school with the right “prestige”
3. There is nothing novel about the state of origin, which rules out not only Alaska but probably a dozen others
4. Enlisted, saw combat, but not in any war or engagement that was particularly controversial
5. Meticulously puts “g” on the ends of all words
6. No pregnant daughters, no family members with mental disabilities
7. Children all have common names
8. Never participated in any gross or disgusting work that might show up on Mike Rowe’s Dirty Jobs
9. The usual with kids’ education; candidate is an advocate for public schools, but kids all go to Sidwell
10. Takes “moderate” positions on global warming, which I guess means we need new taxes to fix it all
11. “Moderate” on the economy, which I take to mean we need more regulation like what caused the mess in the first place
12. “Moderate” on stimulus spending, means we need to keep trying it again and again until it magically works
13. “Moderate” on drilling, which means don’t
14. “Moderate” on education, and that would have to mean don’t make any waves with the teachers’ unions
15. Wears all kinds of expensive clothes, but for unexplained reasons the media will never question it
16. Knows that Gaborone is the capitol of Botswana and that it has a population of 192,000…or isn’t asked about any such thing
17. Refuses to talk about Bill Ayers or Jeremiah Wright
18. Despises waterboarding
19. On record as thinking Dick Cheney is pure evil
20. Friend to Oprah
21. Gets along great with Joy Behar
22. Bill Maher thinks he’s a swell guy
23. David Brooks likes him
24. Plays a musical instrument while guesting on Letterman
25. Laughs good-naturedly at jokes at his expense, even if he’s called a baby killer or a war criminal

And after all that, don’t tell me let me guess…everyone to the political left of Orin Hatch is going to stay home, or vote to re-elect Obama anyway. Because He’s cuter. Sounds like a plan!

Hmmm…you know, after looking this plan over, along with what details I can cobble together and the likely outcome of it all…I dunno. It’s like I have a feeling of deja vu. Like I’ve already been through this a couple years ago…plus six months and twenty-nine days. Just a feeling I can’t shake. Am I imagining it?

Cross-posted at Right Wing News and Washington Rebel.

Cute, Morgan. VERY cute. And you know what comes next: Cue up Arte Johnson.
- bpenni | 06/04/2011 @ 21:09
I do have to concede the point: I haven’t found anyone who will express a single note of approval of this policy change of mine anywhere.

And your reason for thinking this will work out differently for the GOP, when they make the same change in direction, is……?
- mkfreeberg | 06/04/2011 @ 21:19
I’m starting to come around on the whole Palin thing. The downside to her candidacy (which I still believe to be near-insurmountable) is that every single middle class woman I know viscerally loathes her. You don’t beat Dear Leader without a significant female vote, and you’re asking the GOP to run the prom queen and the captain of the cheer squad all rolled into one.

The upside? The media keeps tearing her down, which indicates a deep-seated fear she might actually pull it off. Remember 2004? For about a month there, R*n Pa*l was the media’s favorite Republican. They couldn’t get enough of the guy. They loved running stories about Democrats fleeing in terror from the RP juggernaut. Anyone remember that? Truth is, R*n P**l couldn’t get elected dogcatcher in a nationwide election, and the media damn well knows it. That’s why they were so “scared” of him. A similar dynamic was at work with their coverage of Teh Donald’s “candidacy” (always with the caveat that he kept making them play defense about their Magic Boyfriend’s certificate of authenticity). If Palin really were the doofy hick idiot the media portrays her to be, they’d be all but begging her to run.

In fact, I’ll put my money where my mouth is on this one. Who is the least electable yet semi-plausible candidate in the GOP field? It might be too early to tell, but once it becomes reasonably clear, I predict a spate of “Could X Beat Obama?” stories cluttering up a newsstand near you. Stories about what a great guy X is, how he’s got mad grassroots support, how “even Y [insert traditional lockstep Democratic victim group] are changing their minds” about him, etc. etc. They might even get Rahm Emanuel or somebody saying “yes, X could definitely beat Obama under the right conditions.” The leading indicators will probably be places like Salon.com and HuffPo (i.e. the obvious agitprop outlets), but it won’t be long before MS-DNC joins in.

If I’m wrong about this, please do taunt me mercilessly. (And yeah, for the record, I’m aware we have one of those “X could beat Obama” quotes in re: Palin from Howard Dean. That doesn’t cancel out the roughly 1,00,000 “she’s totally unelectable!” jeremiads coming out daily from the MBM).
- Severian | 06/05/2011 @ 08:51
And your reason for thinking this will work out differently for the GOP, when they make the same change in direction, is……?

TOO easy, Morgan: Obama.
- bpenni | 06/05/2011 @ 09:59
TOO easy, Morgan: Obama.

Actually, isn’t that the very reason the bar is exceptionally low on selecting the successful GOP candidate? Isn’t that an argument that suggests the whole “perfect candidate” thing is a bunny trail & nothing more?

We both know if this was a point worth considering, you would have helped flesh out my list of qualifications for this “good candidate.” Some of the items within my 25 are quite silly (although they do reflect some of the supposedly-serious criticism hurled at Sarahcuda, so…). How about help me out building the list? Or even better yet, pick a candidate.

See, at this point I think people who pronounce Palin “unqualified,” just like to complain. They don’t have any ideas and they won’t get any. Otherwise, this exercise would’ve netted me some new friends. Or at least someone would have emerged to congratulate me, and let me know in all seriousness that I’m on the “right” track. Hasn’t happened, not one single time. Not. Once.

Palinophobes just like to complain.
- mkfreeberg | 06/05/2011 @ 10:20
Heh. “Palinophobes”.

I like it. It should be my new slur.

And incidentally, “every single middle class woman I know viscerally loathes her.”

Well I know one middle class woman who likes her. I’m married to her. And she doesn’t like her because I like her. She really likes her.
- philmon | 06/05/2011 @ 18:21
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again.

Nobody, but nobody who voted for Obama, has any business whatsoever ever calling any presidentialy candidate “unqualified” ever again. Not this year, not next, not in 2016, not anytime between now and when our Sun finally goes nova.

The Left has utterly thrown this away. Forever. They threw it out the window in the last election. It was a one-shot, one-time deal, they’ve used it, it’s gone. And whenever I hear the U-word uttered anytime by anyone, anywhere – between now and November 2012 – I’m going to ask, “Did you vote for Obama in 08?”

If the answer is “yes,” I’m going to go apeshit on the person. I’m coming unglued. I’ve had it with this.
- cylarz | 06/05/2011 @ 23:04
Or even better yet, pick a candidate.

I haven’t seen him… or her… yet. I DO like Bachmann, though. She’s Mrs. Palin with actual accomplishments and defined positions, with less than half the negative baggage. AND Young Michele has a voice that doesn’t call to mind fingernails scraping slowly down a blackboard, slowly. I mean SERIOUSLY, Morgan… could you STAND four years of THAT voice? Aiiieee. One wonders how Todd deals.

I hear Rudy might make another run, too. I might could get behind him again.
- bpenni | 06/06/2011 @ 11:48
So noted. We have found the source of our disagreement.

You aren’t aware of any accomplishments by Gov. Palin…you aren’t ready to acknowledge their existence…and you’re choosing the candidate by voice. After listening to Hillary for sixteen years, I must say it’s not that easy for me to blame you.

I’ll make a note to add a 26th requirement tonight. Must not warble.
- mkfreeberg | 06/06/2011 @ 11:50
Fergot to comment on this… See, at this point I think people who pronounce Palin “unqualified,” just like to complain. They don’t have any ideas and they won’t get any. Otherwise, this exercise would’ve netted me some new friends.

Oh shit, oh dear. Are you sayin’ your readership doesn’t recognize sarcasm for what it IS? Is your opinion THAT low of folks who read The Blog That No One Reads? Really?
- bpenni | 06/06/2011 @ 11:51
Oh, I could deal with it (her voice) easily as long as its attached to her. For one thing, it really doesn’t bother me. I think I’ve got a pretty good bead on her, and I think she’s my kind of people. Smart, but down-to-earth, and not the least bit pretentious. Loves the outdoors. Loves her Country, Husband, and kids. Then all this got thrown her way by McCain. She’s taking advantage of it. I would, too.

I like Bachmann as well. I did hear a Democratic strategist say, though, that Bachmann would be their “dream” candidate to run against.

Strategy would be to tie her to the Tea Party (she is, and IMHO that’s a good thing from a philosophical point of view), and then what you’ll hear is “extreme” and “extremist” from the Democrats the entire campaign season. Actually, you’re going to hear that anyway, but they feel it’ll stick to Bachmann best.
- philmon | 06/06/2011 @ 11:56
At least we got him to tell us who he does like, Morgan. And actually, Bachmann wouldn’t be a bad choice. I understand her to be a solid conservative. But contrary to how Buck’s description, I’d call her, “Palin without the name recognition.”

One of the things I like about Palin (among many) is that the Left has tried SO hard to destroy her. The fact that she pisses off all these people I don’t like, is just a bonus. If Bachmann were nominated, the media would do the same to her.

Rudy? Is he even running? I haven’t heard his name mentioned in three years.
- cylarz | 06/06/2011 @ 11:56
Rudy’s looking in to it. Which means, he’s making vague threats in that direction.

Yes, actually I don’t see a whole lot of difference between Bachmann and Palin philosopically/politically. They are very similar.
- philmon | 06/06/2011 @ 11:58
This just in….Santorum has thrown his hat in the ring. Thoughts?

I’m surprised to hear this news. The man was defeated for his Senate re-election a few years back. I thought running for president after that was a no-no.
- cylarz | 06/06/2011 @ 12:00
“To hell with the rules! – Paul Henley, Fantasy Island pilot (1977)
- philmon | 06/06/2011 @ 12:23
Actually it was the guy about to shoot Paul Henley.
- philmon | 06/06/2011 @ 12:24
For nailing his wife.

Pretty sure if I tried to slide down a hill on a table like that, while someone was shooting at me, it wouldn’t work out so great.
- mkfreeberg | 06/06/2011 @ 12:50
I’ll make a note to add a 26th requirement tonight. Must not warble.

Warble? Birds warble and birdsong amuses me to no end. I like birdsong. Palin doesn’t “warble,” she talks thru her nose. So your 26th requirement should be worded along the lines of “must not be a nasally, whiny, self-absorbed woman.” Or sumthin’ similar.

I’ll ignore your snark about how I choose my candidates. Rest assured, voice quality ain’t a criterion.

By the way… do you hear sumthin’ in here, Morgan? Some faint chirping or sumthin’ like that? (That wouldn’t be you, Phil)
- bpenni | 06/07/2011 @ 10:14
Rest assured, voice quality ain’t a criterion.

You just got done telling me it matters. Not only that, you just got done debating with me the finer points of exactly how it’s annoying, in a classic argue-like-a-prog move of “I didn’t say A I actually said B” hair-splitting. You’re going to simultaneously insist it “ain’t a criterion”?

Even ABC admits government action is getting in the way of the economy. We need a President who will independently figure out, between said President’s left & right ears, that government is in the way…and then take executive steps to move it out of the way. Perhaps, because of this “ain’t a criterion” nasally-warbly whatever, you think the candidate can be found who is more experienced at going through this cycle than Palin, or can be more relied-upon to continue it. Very well, show me who’s got better cred.

As far as I’m concerned, everything you’ve said about Palin’s lack of experience is entirely imagined and invented. It might feel comfortable because other people are saying the same thing…I just file this away in the “When conventional wisdom is wrong” file. Generally, once people get such a file started, there’s no shortage of stuff to put in it. Maybe you haven’t started yours yet? Whatever. Experience isn’t a matter of opinion; she has some; the folks in charge now are entirely missing it, and it’s hurting us badly.

I note that you’re no fan of the folks in charge now. It doesn’t matter. We still have a sickness and she’s the cure, until a better one comes along.
- mkfreeberg | 06/07/2011 @ 10:30
The idea that a candidate’s voice has anything to do with being qualified is….amusing.

Palin doesn’t have a nasal voice anyway. She’s a great public speaker. That alone would be a vast improvement over the stumbling, lost-without-prompting, clueless fool we have in there now.

The guy from Access Hollywood has a nasal voice. The two sound nothing alike to speak of.
- cylarz | 06/07/2011 @ 10:54
What, crickets? Chirping?

Well, I don’t hear it but when I hear my voice in a recording, I think I talk through my nose some. I don’t like it. But I can’t seem to help it. Don’t know where it came from.

I like Palin just fine. Like I said, when I look at the list of the people she pisses off, she’s gotta be doing something right, because they’re the same people who get pissed off about the way I see things.

You know, she may be “unelectable”. Point is, she shouldn’t be unelectable, and if for no other reason, I will keep challenging people to give me something besides “she talks funny”, “she can see Russia from her house”, and when people howl at her historical “gaffes”, turns out she was the one who knew what she was talking about.l

She’s generally for free markets, for defending ourselves from enemies, against rampant nannyism, for using our own resources, and I’m pretty darned sure her love of the outdoors means she’s a conservationist. I’m just not sure what’s not to like about her. Respect for the country, respect for personal responsibility, love of nature, love for her family, love of her country, and a rare sense (in politics) of humility. She could easily have been someone I grew up with and I’d be friends with today.

Yeah, I said humility. All of this stuff about her being an attention wh*re …. yeah, she’s getting the most out of her new found fame, and found a way to pay the legal bills all those politically motivated frivolous lawsuits that suddenly cropped up after she got the nod from McCain. Look at how she’s done it, though.

A PAC that supports conservative candidates. She energizes conservatives and gets them interested in politics — off of their asses on the sidelines and into Tea Party groups and townhall meetings. She had a TV show that highlighted the natural beauty of the Alaskan wilderness and some of native Alaskan culture. She’s doing a bus tour of national historical sites.

When you concentrate on what she’s doing rather than what her enemies are saying about her… she’s pretty damned cool.
- philmon | 06/07/2011 @ 19:27
If she runs, I’ll vote for her.
- philmon | 06/07/2011 @ 19:27
What Philmon said, on all counts.

And frankly I don’t get why she isn’t more popular among women. If you think about it, she’s everything that “feminists” claim to want – strong, empowered, unflappable. She’s found that elusive balance between being feminine and beautiful on one hand….and an independent, decisive leader on the other. But they hate her because she’s shattered the stereotype of women in politics as always being left-wing, perpetually-aggrieved, whiny miserable (and ugly) harpies. She’s the kind of woman that was probably common back in the time of Susan B Anthony, when feminism and equality for women were actually causes worth supporting.

She’s anything BUT Susie Homemaker, pregnant and barefoot in the kitchen. But that’s how they want to portray her – when they aren’t calling her stupid, intellectually incurious, or a dangerous right-wing radical.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again – I like her for so many reasons, not the least of which is that she pisses off all the people I don’t like, from kook-fringe moonbats, to annoying “pragmatic” fence-sitting centrist types, to mealy-mouthed watered-down “moderate” RINO squishes. And a lot of other people in between.

I’m sure someone will come along and say that she can’t win a presidential election with only the rightmost 20-30% of the political spectrum backing her, but I’d sure as heck throw my support behind her anyway. You’re talking to the guy who wanted Fred Thompson in the last go-around.
- cylarz | 06/07/2011 @ 23:28
You’re talking to the guy who wanted Fred Thompson in the last go-around.

Hey, so are you! 😉
- philmon | 06/08/2011 @ 06:24
Guys, I think I can guarantee that “Fred Thompson” talk will not sway our friend in New Mexico. You think he’s unclear about his reasons for disliking Palin…he’s just an open book on that, compared to his reasons for disliking Fred. But they’re both on his list.
- mkfreeberg | 06/08/2011 @ 06:43
I wasn’t trying to sway him. He’s not sway-able. And that’s cool by me.

Buck’s a good guy. We’re not all going to agree on everything.
- philmon | 06/08/2011 @ 08:27
Guys, I think I can guarantee that “Fred Thompson” talk will not sway our friend in New Mexico.

I gave up on doing anything of the sort a long time ago. Remember, we’re talking about the guy who thinks we lost in 08 because McCain didn’t water down the GOP platform quite enough.
- cylarz | 06/08/2011 @ 11:27
You just got done telling me it matters. Not only that, you just got done debating with me the finer points of exactly how it’s annoying, in a classic argue-like-a-prog move of “I didn’t say A I actually said B” hair-splitting. You’re going to simultaneously insist it “ain’t a criterion”?

Jesus Fucking Christ, Morgan. Are you THAT thick? I said I didn’t like her voice, I told you why I find it irritating, I asked if you thought you could stand listening to her for four years, I DID NOT say nasally whiny voices were grounds to eliminate any goddamned candidate. Your obsession to score debating points gets way the hell outta hand at times. Try to focus on what I SAY and not what YOU read between the lines, mmmkay?

As for your other arguments, most specifically your “you feel comfortable because of what other people say” bullshit… please review the links I mailed you in our off-line yesterday. I note you’ve not rebutted those, nor even mentioned them.

I’m beginning to get a lil bit pissed off here.

And while we’re pissed off: Fuck you, cylarz.
- bpenni | 06/08/2011 @ 12:10
Well I just don’t know what to say about that. There must be some good reason to eliminate her somewhere…you haven’t come up with one. And by the way, how come when it’s her, the conversation is about how to eliminate, disqualify, declare her unqualified — a bunch of other absolute relay-switch stuff designed to jettison her before the discussion turns to how well she’d do. I see Palin fans discuss T-Paw or Mittens, they don’t use the word “unqualified.” They/we deliberate over how many people would be inspired to turn out & vote against O…they/we find the numbers and inspiration inadequate…and they/we are right.

I can declare with confidence a nominee Palin would catch every single vote that would’ve been gotten by a nominee Mitt, Giuliani, Huckabee, Bachmann, et al. At least 95% of those, plus a bunch of other votes those other candidates wouldn’t receive if they were nominated. That, really, is what all the arguing is supposed to be about. A lot of the time, I have strong doubts that the Palinophobes have that firmly in mind.

By the way, I’m not disagreeing; I think her voice would wear on me, too. But that’s true of all Presidents, really — they get on TV a whole lot. “There he is again, what’s he screwing up this time.” I’ve felt that way about every single one since Carter. But what about Congress? Oh, boy…you do not want to go there. We have some droning bores in our Congress, you have to admit that much.
- mkfreeberg | 06/08/2011 @ 12:52
There’s this about that: if push came to shove and it was either a Palin or Obama vote I’d hold my nose and vote for your heroine. But in the primaries? Not only no but HELL NO.

I’ve stated my reasons for opposing her nomination numerous times, Morgan: thin resume (vs other contenders… e.g., the mayor of New York manages a MUCH larger budget with a larger and much more diverse constituency than Palin ever dreamed about), lack of defined positions (as of this writing), and a demonstrated lack of commitment to the job at hand (her resignation). I dunno what else I can do. But, Hey… we believe what we wanna believe, according to Tom Petty, and the boy was correct. 😉
- bpenni | 06/08/2011 @ 14:47
Linked. I’m tired of bein’ the Lone Ranger here. Mebbe some of the folks who agree with me… and comment to that effect at EIP… will show up here and give me a lil back-up.

But, Hey! This is mostly good fun, with ONE notable exception.
- bpenni | 06/08/2011 @ 15:06
Very mature and articulate rebuttals you’ve issued there, Buck. It’s good to know you can keep a cool head during an animated political discussion. (chuckle)
- cylarz | 06/08/2011 @ 19:09
[…] I put up a post last weekend declaring that I am no longer a Palin fan. I linked to it on Facebook, so that people there would […]
- House of Eratosthenes | 06/12/2011 @ 08:11
[…] I put up a post last weekend declaring that I am no longer a Palin fan. I linked to it on Facebook, so that people there would […]
- “My Name is Morgan Freeberg and I’m a Sarah Palin Fan” | Right Wing News | 06/12/2011 @ 08:12

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

The Good CandidateSaturday, June 4th, 2011

The Good Candidate
Saturday, June 4th, 2011