Sarah Six-Pack was in Loveland, Colorado today, saying Barack Obama is an advocate for “Socialism,” and that “. . .now is not the time to experiment with Socialism.”
The recent groundswell of Republican pundits with enough character and honesty to look fairly at Barack Obama, or at least John McCain and Sarah Palin, are having a rough time coming to grips with the vicious mental indolence of their own “conservative” base. Though not the most recent one to come out of the cold, Peggy Noonan, whom Americans came to know most famously as Ronald Reagan‘s “Surly bonds of earth” speech writer, has also felt the indiscriminate sting of valueless conservative thuggery.
(My bold) Peggy Noonan:
. . .[W]e have seen Mrs. Palin on the national stage for seven weeks now, and there is little sign that she has the tools, the equipment, the knowledge or the philosophical grounding one hopes for, and expects, in a holder of high office. She is a person of great ambition, but the question remains: What is the purpose of the ambition? She wants to rise, but what for? For seven weeks I’ve listened to her, trying to understand if she is Bushian or Reaganite—a spender, to speak briefly, whose political decisions seem untethered to a political philosophy, and whose foreign policy is shaped by a certain emotionalism, or a conservative whose principles are rooted in philosophy, and whose foreign policy leans more toward what might be called romantic realism, and that is speak truth, know America, be America, move diplomatically, respect public opinion, and move within an awareness and appreciation of reality.
But it’s unclear whether she is Bushian or Reaganite. She doesn’t think aloud. She just . . . says things.
Her supporters accuse her critics of snobbery: Maybe she’s not a big “egghead” but she has brilliant instincts and inner toughness. But what instincts? “I’m Joe Six-Pack”? She does not speak seriously but attempts to excite sensation—”palling around with terrorists.” If the Ayers case is a serious issue, treat it seriously. She is not as thoughtful or persuasive as Joe the Plumber, who in an extended cable interview Thursday made a better case for the Republican ticket than the Republican ticket has made. In the past two weeks she has spent her time throwing out tinny lines to crowds she doesn’t, really, understand. [sic]
Find me a hundred Americans in any particular media market who could diagram that sentence to determine if Ms Noonan was talking about Palin not understanding the “tinny lines“ she parrots, or the “crowds” that wallow in them.
This is not a leader, this is a follower, and she follows what she imagines is the base, which is in fact a vast and broken-hearted thing whose pain she cannot, actually, imagine. She could reinspire and reinspirit; she chooses merely to excite. She doesn’t seem to understand the implications of her own thoughts.
As if McCain, her ventriloquist puppet master, understands his? Only Karl understands: it’s point number three of the 14 defining characteristics of fascism; i.e.,
3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause — The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
No news conferences? Interviews now only with friendly journalists? You can’t be president or vice president and govern in that style, as a sequestered figure. This has been Mr. Bush’s style the past few years, and see where it got us. You must address America in its entirety, not as a sliver or a series of slivers but as a full and whole entity, a great nation trying to hold together. When you don’t, when you play only to your little piece, you contribute to its fracturing.
Come on, Ms Noonan; say it with me: You. contribute. to. its. total. dis. int. igration.
You. contribute. to. its. total. dis. int. igration. Thaaaaat’s the ticket.
In the end the Palin candidacy is a symptom and expression of a new vulgarization in American politics. It’s no good, not for conservatism and not for the country. And yes, it is a mark against John McCain, against his judgment and idealism.
“A mark against John McCain“?? “Vulgarization”??
Ah, no, Ms Noonan.
It’s an indictment of John McCain‘s judgment and idealism; a condemnation of John McCain‘s judgment and idealism; a criminal conviction of John McCain‘s judgment and idealism.
I gather this week from conservative publications that those whose thoughts lead them to criticism in this area are to be shunned, and accused of the lowest motives. In one now-famous case, Christopher Buckley was shooed from the great magazine his father invented. In all this, the conservative intelligentsia are doing what they have done for five years. They bitterly attacked those who came to stand against the Bush administration. This was destructive. If they had stood for conservative principle and the full expression of views, instead of attempting to silence those who opposed mere party, their movement, and the party, [?] would be in a better, and healthier, position.
Some people may never come to realize, at least in this life here, that “conservative principle” has been an oxymoron since Reagan sold arms for hostages to terrorists. And dealing with the monsters of hate and fear that “conservatives” have cultivated in their base are just like a certain rabid black preacher has warned; like chickens coming home to roost.
Oh. The “S” word? No. It’s not “socialism.” That’s a fuckin’ joke.
The “S” word is: “Stupid.”