The Party of Palin

The Trump tidal wave is about to wash the Republican brand out to sea in its wake. The group that is so proud to wrap themselves in the title, "party of Lincoln", is about to become irrelevant. I'm not saying that the party will disappear, but it will no longer be able to make a claim to the lineage of Lincoln. The Party, which so proudly adopted the southern strategy in the 60's and doubled down on that with the Lee Atwater tactics of the 80's, is about to fully reap what it has sown. 

In the last election cycle, I thought that Sarah Palin was the ultimate payoff for what had been done to the Republican brand over the past 40 years. I was incorrect. She was merely the town crier for what would be the ultimate invasion. As the Vice Presidential candidate, her jingoistic, vapid and simplistic slogans electrified the crowds, however she was not the main voice of the Party. The crowds ate it up though. So much so that John McCain became the warm up act for the red meat that the crowd hungered for from Sarah Palin. When a supporter said that Obama was a Muslim, McCain immediately said that he was not. That was clearly not what the crowd was looking for. They wanted blood. Sarah gave it to them, but unfortunately, she was not at the top of the ticket. 

Those of us who fancy ourselves as political observers should have taken more notice of the Sarah phenomenon. For while she and John didn't win the election, it was clear that at the end what the crowd wanted was more of her and less of him. The foreshadowing was clear, we just chose to laugh it off. Sarah Palin became a punchline of sorts because she had no substance to back up her lack of substance. Her family life became fodder for the tabloids, she quit her job in government and tried to become a reality star with terrible results. She even started her own pay TV channel, which apparently no one outside of her family subscribed to. She basically made herself irrelevant, but the blueprint that she left behind was there for someone to pick up and run with.  

So now we have someone who runs on the same sort of empty, jingoistic slogans, but has the semblance of substance behind him. Perhaps not since the days of Huey Long have we seen this type of appeal be this successful. "Make America Great Again" is just an updated version of  "A roof over every head and a chicken in every pot". The promises have no basis in fact and there is no way to accomplish them. First of all, just like the people who wanted to take America back, I ask the same question, whom and what do you speak of? Take America back from whom and what time period are we speaking of when we refer to the greatness of America? It must be a rhetorical question because it has no logical answer. 

The problem with the Republican party is that it has courted the angry white voter for some time. It has used the dog whistle call to let them know that they have a home in the Party. They have created or accentuated the idea that "America" is being stolen, watered down and lost to... (pick your minority group) for so long that they don't really know how to do much else. Every election cycle, they pick an issue (integration, abortion, immigration, gay rights, welfare, health care) and frame it as an "us against them" issue. Everything has been black and white, for lack of a better term. They blow their whistle and wait for the angry American to show up at the polls to maintain their position in the pecking order. 

The biggest aid to the call to arms in the last 20 years has been Fox News. Fox News broadcasts propaganda and alarmist rhetoric as fact. According to the Murdoch mouthpiece, real Americans and the American way of life are under attack every day from the forces of evil. Is the President a Muslim? Fox News can't be sure. Will the President open up camps to indoctrinate our young people? Fox News can't be sure. Will the Democrats bring about Armageddon if they control the White House and Congress? Fox News can't be sure. Is there a war against Christians? Fox News is pretty sure there is.  Is global warming real? Fox News is very sure that it's just a hoax cooked up by the people trying to ruin this country. That type of nonsense "journalism" broadcast into the homes of millions every night has made America a less intelligent country, and it has also made us an angrier country. 

Until now, the Republican running for president has always been able to maintain the cover of "compassionate conservatism" while still managing to blow the dog whistle call to the minions. Sarah Palin had no such pretense to maintain. Pat Buchannan was not afraid to paint the country as conflict between good and evil, but he lacked the disarming charisma and charm of Palin. His argument came across as scary to too many, even in his own party. Palin never looked scary. She was however spewing the same kind of rhetoric that excited the voter who believes that their way of life is under attack. 

Donald Trump has never claimed to be a compassionate conservative. I take that back. Donald Trump has claimed to be everything under the sun. His opening salvo in his run for the nomination was to claim that Mexicans are rapists and that he was going to build a wall and have Mexico pay for it. Many in the media laughed at the idea that he could be taken seriously. What many, including myself, missed was that the angry voter, that the Republicans had courted for so long, had grown tired with pretense. The rise of the Tea Party after the election of Barack Obama should have been a warning to the Republicans that their voters were growing wary of pretending to be part of system. They didn't want incremental change, they wanted to blow the whole thing up. The Republican party thought that they could control the Tea Party, but as we have seen on numerous occasions, they can't. 

Donald Trump doesn't really stand for anything. That has allowed those angry voters to latch on to his brand of populism. His followers don't want to work within the system, they want to start something new. In poll after poll, the Republican primary voters have spoken about the appeal of an outsider. They are looking for someone who is not a Beltway veteran. They want someone who speaks to their frustrations and who can shake up the system. They are looking for a transformative figure who will lead them to the promised land of relevance. They want to matter. They want their voices to be heard. They don't care about gay rights or immigrant rights or abortion rights or welfare rights, they only care about their right to be heard. They believe that they are losing the war for America. They believe as Fox News has told them over and over that their religion, their guns, their families, their very way of life will be lost if they don't make a stand. 

The saddest part of this story is not that their are so many Americans who believe that they are under constant attack. The saddest part is that they have put their faith in someone who is so unworthy of it. I think the perfect ticket for the GOP in 2016 would Trump/Palin. It makes perfect sense. She  opened the door and showed the way and he went barreling through. It would only be fair that he join up with the heart and soul of the new Republican Party, The Party of Palin. God have mercy on us all. 

In the Crosshairs

I have written before about the deplorable state of political discourse in this country. In fact I'd like to start out with a paragraph from a piece I wrote a couple of months ago: 

"The real problem with this open animosity is that it allows the actual issues of the day to be pushed to the side in an all out attempt to win. You see the idea that the end of the world is nigh becomes the driving force behind all political action. Politicians use the most extreme language to describe the opposition in order to evoke a visceral reaction from their followers. The actual policies are not the important thing, the most important thing that voters take away from these demagogues is that if the opposition wins, their lives as they know it will be over. I could get into more complicated explanations about the backlash of white males and the similarities to the strategies employed by Nixon in '68 and even more forcefully in '72, but there really is no need. Both parties are guilty of overuse of hyperbole in describing the repercussions to America should their opponents be victorious in the next election."

The tragedy in Arizona over the weekend has given us all another chance to sharpen our collective rhetorical knives and start attacking the other side. The problem, once again, is that the issue, the real issue is being lost. The issue that should be at the forefront is how was this nut was able to 1) legally buy a gun and 2) buy one that held a 30 bullet clip. His attack was finally stopped when he had to reload that gun. What exactly are the gun laws in Arizona? Isn't it time to revisit the laws pertaining to what exactly is needed by a civilian in order to go hunting or to protect their home? When are we going to get serious about enforcing the assault weapons ban? 

I know the gun lobby was already painting the President as someone who would take their guns away when he got into office and so this issue has received no attention from this administration or this Congress. I would hope that this horrible incident will allow those in government the opportunity to discuss this problem with slightly less rhetoric than usual. The people who died and were injured should not be used as fodder for a new round of political name calling and finger pointing. There is a real issue here and while the political discourse needs to find a new level of civility, that is not the main point that we should be discussing. There are literally people's lives at stake here. You can't stop insane people from thinking insane thoughts and committing insane deeds, but perhaps our government can try a little harder to keep the instruments of mass mayhem out of their hands.

The Enemy Within

The political atmosphere in this country has now become so toxic that it is practically impossible to have a genuine conversation that results in a productive exchange of ideas. We have all become convinced that the other side is in league with the devil. The conversation is not about philosophical ideas of leadership, but about the Armageddon that awaits should the other side either remain in power or regain power. There is no political middle ground anymore. The President is a fairly moderate left leaning politician. What has that gotten him? The right thinks he's an African Manchurian candidate, anti-Christ. The left thinks he's a sell out with no backbone. That is what happens to you in today's climate if you attempt to walk down the middle of the road. 

The real problem with this open animosity is that it allows the actual issues of the day to be pushed to the side in an all out attempt to win. You see the idea that the end of the world is nigh becomes the driving force behind all political action. Politicians use the most extreme language to describe the opposition in order to evoke a visceral reaction from their followers. The actual policies are not the important thing, the most important thing that voters take away from these demagogues is that if the opposition wins, their lives as they know it will be over. I could get into more complicated explanations about the backlash of white males and the similarities to the strategies employed by Nixon in '68 and even more forcefully in '72, but there really is no need. Both parties are guilty of overuse of hyperbole in describing the repercussions to America should their opponents be victorious in the next election. 

Lost in all the noise is the actual policy. Which politician or political party is simply talking about what would be the most beneficial to the people of America? The political parties are too busy bashing each other over the head to seemingly pay much attention to that. The Good of the people (which has long since taken a back seat to the greed and ambition of politicians), seems to be absolutely missing from our political discussion these days. The sad thing is that the followers of both parties have allowed this to happen. We have all played a part in turning politics into just the next "thing" that we have to win. "Our side won, hurray"!, who cares whether it will actually help "We the People". Republicans were disappointed by George Bush, so what, at least he won 2 elections and God knows it would have been the end of the world  if Al Gore had won. Those on the left are disappointed in Obama, but so what, at least we won and God knows it would have been the end of the world if John McCain had won.

The rhetoric and the hyperbole and the scare tactics have come to define political thought in our time. We no longer live in constant fear of nuclear annihilation, but apparently we have replaced that boogey monster with a new one called the OPPOSITION PARTY. It works for politicians because it allows them to whip their supporters into a frenzy without ever addressing any real issues. TV friendly soundbites are so much easier to come up with than actual policies and ideas to address the many real problems that we face. The part that's harder to understand is how WE the PEOPLE have allowed ourselves to become the standard bearers of and town criers for this sideshow. Perhaps it is just the fact that we need a mortal enemy in order to justify our own existence. I'm not sure what the answer is. I've certainly been guilty of it myself. But when I see and hear the noise that is generated by the media and the nonsense that is spewing forth from the mouths of our elected leaders, I just have to wonder if there's any road back from this. Is this it? Is this what our republic has come to? I think the quote "We have met the enemy and he is us" sums up my feelings.

Rose Colored Glasses

Image via WikipediaA poll was done by Research 200 for Daily Kos that asked Republicans some questions about the president (thanks to TomCat for the info). The results are to be expected from the members of the losing party in a historically bitter environment of partisan politics. I can also imagine that the numbers would have looked very similar if those questions (slightly altered) would have been asked of Democrats four years ago during the second Bush administration. I'll illustrate the point below the actual questions.

Research 2000 for Daily Kos. 1/20-31. Self-identified Republicans. MoE 2% (No trend lines)

OBAMA and AMERICA

Should Barack Obama be impeached, or not?

Yes 39; No 32; Not Sure 29

Should GWB be impeached?
The numbers from Dems would have been fairly high. Now I thought he should have been impeached for cause, but those on the right would certainly not agree.

Do you think Barack Obama is a socialist?

Yes 63; No 21; Not Sure 16

Do you think that GWB is trying to a establish a plutocracy?
Not quite the same as the socialist question and actually requires some intelligence, but once again you can see my point on what the Dems would have said.


Do you believe ACORN stole the 2008 election?
Yes 21; No 24; Not Sure 55

Do you believe that the Republicans stole the election by using dirty tricks in Ohio?
Much like the ACORN question, I think that the numbers would reflect the frustration of losing an election and trying to find someone or something to blame it on.

Do you believe Sarah Palin is more qualified to be President than Barack Obama?

Yes 53; No 14; Not Sure 33

Is John Edwards more qualified to be President than GWB?
I'm using John Kerry's VP candidate as a substitute for Palin, but you get the point. Once again the numbers would probably have matched the numbers in the current poll. Obvioulsly I'm talking about Edwards before the whole "I fathered a child with another woman and tried to get one my friends to take the blame by offering him money so that my political career wouldn't be ruined" fiasco.

Do you believe Barack Obama is a racist who hates White people?

Yes 31; No 36; Not Sure 33

Do you believe that GWB is a racist who hates Black people?

Certainly in the aftermath of Katrina, there was a sentiment that GWB certainly had no love for those who were not in his social strata. I don't think the number would have been quite as high for this one, but certainly there was a feeling that GWB didn't care as much about the less fortunate in America

It's clear that there is a deep divide in this country, but I don't think that the divide is any worse than it was during the Bush years. The race of the President makes it easier for some to cast aspersions on his motives and his qualifications, but in the end I don't think that the numbers would have been much different if Hillary Clinton would have won the election. Democrats hated GWB. Republicans hate President Obama. It's that simple. If this poll would have been published when GWB was President, the Right would have said that it showed just how out of touch the Dems are. The Left and Right in this country are absolutely sure that they are correct in their assessment of the country, that any opposing views look absolutely crazy to them. I'm not writing to justify the numbers in this poll or to say that I agree with any of them (which of course I don't), but they have to viewed in context.

The point is that we have to remember how we on the Left felt when GWB was in office. We were absolutely sure in our convictions that he had harmed the country and that certainly his first election was illegitimate. Those on the Right disagreed. Those of us on the Left felt that we had the law and the Constitution on our side. Those on the Right disagreed. Those of us on the Left were called loons, crazies, anarchists, communists or worse by those on the Right. My point is that a little perspective is needed now that the situations have been reversed. Everything is colored by perspective. Now I happen to think that those of us on the Left were correct in our assessment of the Bush administration, but you'd be hard pressed to find a Republican who agrees. The numbers in this poll may appear to "crazy" to those of us on the Left, but then crazy is in the eye of the beholder(or the party in power at the time ).

The Most Dangerous Person in America

Sarah Palin announced her resignation as Governor of Alaska in a rambling and unfocused press conference last Friday. In fact, she made Mark Sanford seem like the epitome of coherence. Those on the left were quick to proclaim that this was the death knell for Mrs. Palin as a serious candidate for President in 2012. Those on the Right were quick to point out that she is now free from the burden of running a state and can now make even more appearances where she can spread her message.

If we were living in "normal" times, those hopeful thinkers on the left may indeed be right, but we are not living in normal times. The Republican party has been reduced to its core elements. Social conservatives now dominate the base of the party and those are the very people who find Sarah Palin irresistible. We must also remember that over 58 million people voted for her in the last election. I understand that she was not at the top of the ticket, but she was only a heartbeat away from the top job which would have been held by a 73 year old, 2 time cancer survivor.

Sarah Palin is the most ill-prepared person proposed for national office that I have ever seen. She has no understanding of the Constitution (illustrated by her constant misstatement of what the 1st Amendment means), she couldn't explain what Conservatism is if you spotted her Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan and she is dead set against learning what she doesn't know. That last point is what makes her so dangerous. Anybody with the lack of understanding of national and international issues that she has demonstrated and with the family issues that were forced to be played out on a national stage, would have declined the offer to join the McCain ticket. However her personal ambition outweighs any family obligation or reasonable action.

Despite all her shortcomings, the base of Republican party has anointed her as the savior of the party. Republican pundits have even compared her to Richard Nixon. Nixon uttered the famous, "You won't have Nixon to kick around anymore", after losing to Pat Brown in the California Governor's race. Nixon, of course, returned 6 years later to become a two term President. However comparing Richard Nixon to Sarah Palin is like comparing an Indy race car to a scooter. At the time that Richard Nixon made his famous concession, he had been a 2 term Congressman, a Senator, a two term Vice President and had lost a closely contested and controversial election for President. For all his shortcomings, I don't think that there is anyone who would question his intelligence or his skill as a politician and statesman. Sarah Palin, a first term Governor of Alaska, was as recently as 4 years ago, voted mayor of a town with approximately 600 votes. The comparison is ridiculous on its face and becomes even more ridiculous when you compare the two. She has also been compared to the great communicator himself, Ronald Reagan. Of course Reagan had become politically aware as part of the Conservative movement. He was schooled by the likes of Barry Goldwater himself and cut his teeth as Governor of California. Ronald Reagan's intellect will never be confused with Richard Nixon's, however he knew what he stood for.

Sarah Palin doesn't know what she stands for. Her speeches contain no details, no policies, no directions for how she intends to "make America a better place for all Americans". She simply spews talking points and applause lines. Her ego is so large that she would probably never allow someone around her who doesn't agree with everything she says, or at least they wouldn't be around her for long. I have nightmares about this woman being in charge of our international policy. Can you imagine this woman as our representative around the world? Can you imagine her having a serious discussion with the leaders of the rest of the world? George Bush at least had the awareness to understand that he needed smart people around him. They were evil for the most part, but they were undoubtedly very intelligent. I don't think Bush ever had a problem with not being the smartest guy in the room.

Sarah Palin, almost unbelievably, thinks that she is the smartest person in any room that she's in. She would surround herself with people who would be unwilling or unable to disagree with her on any topic. It would be an absolute disaster. I honestly don't understand how anyone could hope for this to come to pass. There are smart people on the right, who for unknown reasons support Sarah Palin. It could be desperation, it could be... actually there is no other reason. It has to be desperation. I hope that in the years before the next Presidential election, the Republicans come up with an alternative. I fear, however, that wishful thinking will not be enough to get rid of the spectre that is Sarah Palin. She will be with us for the foreseeable future. Unless there's a scandal out there that we don't know about. That might be more wishful thinking I'm afraid.

Country First

In today's edition of the Omaha World Journal Chuck Hagel (R) of Nebraska had this to say about Sarah Palin,

"She doesn't have any foreign policy credentials. You get a passport for the first time in your life last year? I mean, I don't know what you can say. You can't say anything."

"I think they ought to be just honest about it and stop the nonsense about, 'I look out my window and I see Russia and so therefore I know something about Russia. That kind of thing is insulting to the American people."

"But I do think in a world that is so complicated, so interconnected and so combustible, you really got to have some people in charge that have some sense of the bigger scope of the world. I think that's just a requirement."

"I think it's a stretch to, in any way, to say that she's got the experience to be president of the United States."

I appreciate the fact that there is at least one Republican member of Congress who is willing to put his country ahead of party politics. I know that there are more members of the Republican party leadership who must feel grave doubts about Sarah Palin. They have to speak up. This is no longer about partisanship. This is about the future of the country. This is about (to coin a McCain campaign slogan) putting "Country first".

There are multiple crises that the next President is going to have to deal with, from the meltdown on Wall St. to a foreign policy minefield. I cannot believe that there is one Republican member of Congress who can honestly say that they would be comfortable with Sarah Palin leading our country during these dangerous times. Obviously it is John McCain at the top of the ticket, but his choice of a running mate illustrates a serious lack of judgment. It shows that he is willing to put himself first ahead of his country. For someone so quick to wrap himself in the flag, it showed exactly where his loyalties lie.

The only question I have is, where are the rest of the principled Republicans? Anyone, anyone?