A Philosopher's Blog

Going Rogue

Posted in Politics by Michael LaBossiere on November 18, 2009
GOP Vice-Presidential nominee Sarah Palin givi...

Image via Wikipedia

Sarah Palin‘s book, Going Rogue, recently hit the shelves and is selling quite well. Eager to cash in on this, magazines such as Newsweek (which features a ‘pin up gal’ style cover shot) and other media sources are putting forth stories about Palin. Naturally, the left leaning folks are being rather critical and those on her right wing bandwagon are completely thrilled.

What I find most interesting about Palin is the fact that she has been lifted out of obscurity and placed under the bright spotlights of fame for doing very little.

True, she was governor of Alaska, but then quit. Weirdly enough, this made her even more of a hero rather than making her seem like someone who cannot stick with her responsibilities and duties. I am not sure why some people see this as a sign that she would be a good choice for a presidential candidate. After all, if someone cannot handle being governor, then she surely would not be able to handle being president.

True, she was also picked out of the blue as the VP candidate in 2008. However, this did not seem to be based on any merit on her part and even many conservatives regarded this as a bad idea. And, of course, she lost.

Of course, being famous for being famous is nothing new. The media engines did, after all, lift people like Paris Hilton on high so that she might be gazed upon by the masses. While Sarah purports to criticize the media, they have served to put her face on TV and on the cover of magazines. While some folks in the media criticize her and almost cast her as a monster, in many ways she is their monster.

To merely say that she is famous for being famous would, however,be unfair to her. She manages to appeal to a very loud demographic in America-folks who are angry and afraid and who seem to be looking for someone like her to express their views to the world. The fact that she seems to be somewhat confused and unclear about such things as history, science and political ideology merely makes her more appealing. After all, those who find her so dear seem to be in the same boat.

It must also be said that Palin does represent one aspect of the American dream: she arose from humble origins to the national stage, fame, wealth and success. As such, her story is very appealing in a very American sort of way. Even her critics cannot deny that she has become, at least for the moment, a political force. While she might fade into obscurity, she is burning bright across the sky for now.

Naturally enough, people are speculating about 2012. I share the view of many conservative thinkers: Palin simply does not have what it takes to be a good President. I think she could probably match George W. Bush, but we certainly do not need that sort of Presidency again. Apparently 74% of Americans think that she is not qualified to be president, so I am not alone in this. But, of course, what people think and how they vote are two different matters. After all, being seen as unqualified does not seem to be grounds for not electing a person-folks on the left say this about Bush while folks on the right say this about Obama.


Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

36 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. magus71 said, on November 18, 2009 at 9:21 am

    The media cares. It really does. They just can’t be balanced in their caring:


  2. magus71 said, on November 18, 2009 at 9:27 am

    “She manages to appeal to a very loud demographic in America-folks who are angry and afraid and who seem to be looking for someone like her to express their views to the world.”

    Who are these people? I’d really like to know. Her appeal to me stems from the fact that she just riles leftists like yourself and Matt Damon to no end.

    I have not heard one popular or credible conservative say, at least recently, that she should be president. I still think that her pick by the McCain campaign was a stroke of genius; who else would everyone still be talking about this long after a loss? The McCain campaign was terribly run by the way.

    • kernunos said, on November 18, 2009 at 3:09 pm

      It certainly couldn’t be worse than it is now. This economy will be decimated before the next Presidential Election. 12 Trillion in debt, 10.2 unemployment and they are both still climbing. When the interest rates start climbing the crap is going to hit the fan hard.

      • Michael LaBossiere said, on November 18, 2009 at 10:50 pm

        It can always get worse.

      • kernunos said, on November 19, 2009 at 10:07 am

        It will. My point was that the economy would be better if a Conservative were in the Oval at this point in time. Crazy government spending is not something a true Conservative would do. That is bad for the economy.

    • Michael LaBossiere said, on November 18, 2009 at 10:59 pm

      Are you not angry?

      • kernunos said, on November 19, 2009 at 10:08 am

        Angry at how simple it is to fix the economy and how complicated Leftist intellectuals are making it.

      • magus71 said, on November 21, 2009 at 7:13 am

        It’s much more simple than leftists make it, Mike. It really cofuses me as to why they just don’t copy the economic priciples of presidents that were in power when the economy was strongest.

        • Michael LaBossiere said, on November 22, 2009 at 8:22 pm

          Um, like Clinton? 🙂

          Also, it is not clear that the president has a huge impact on the economy. After all, the economy has done well under liberals and conservatives.

          That said, the political system does have an impact on the economy because of the role of the state relative to currency, interest rates, and regulations.

          • kernunos said, on November 23, 2009 at 1:59 pm

            Um, like Clinton what? Yes, he was better at the economy than Obama? Is that what you were asking?
            I think government spending has a big effect. That is a cooperative effort between the Executive and Legislative branches. The higher government spending compared to GDP then the higher the rate that the government sucks the life of wealth from the people. The government just pisses money away 99% of the time.

            • Michael LaBossiere said, on November 23, 2009 at 8:05 pm


            • magus71 said, on November 24, 2009 at 2:33 am

              I’ll say it again: Bill Clinton 2012.


            • Michael LaBossiere said, on November 24, 2009 at 5:59 pm

              He’s ready to run.

            • T. J. Babson said, on November 24, 2009 at 7:45 pm

              He could probably win the GOP nomination 🙂

            • kernunos said, on November 24, 2009 at 9:04 pm

              I know they have gone left but,….please no.

          • magus71 said, on November 24, 2009 at 2:32 am

            “After all, the economy has done well under liberals and conservatives.”

            Ah yes, the success (or failure) is inevitable, argument.

  3. magus71 said, on November 18, 2009 at 9:42 am

    I see none of Palin’s notoriety as her “fault”.

    You really seem to be out to get Palin? Can you explain why it seems that way? Can you tell me something that she’s done that was bad or evil? I don’t get it. If the leftist media didn’t talk about her so much, her book wouldn’t exist.

    I read an article about her husband, written in Men’s Journal, before Palin became so hated. It spoke about how he was a blue-collar worker who raced the world’s toughest snow-mobile race: The Iron dog, which is 2,000 miles long. http://www.irondog.org/

    He struck me as a normal, smart guy and tough. I think that kind of thing appeals to people. Many are tired of the out of touch elitists–who aren’t really that elite.

    Sarah Palin may not be qualified to be president. But she’s shown the next Republican candidate that people not only want someone who’s smart, but a person who’s lived a life closer to that of the working class.

    The left despises the working class, despite its love of the Proletariat.

    • Michael LaBossiere said, on November 18, 2009 at 10:59 pm

      I’m not out to “get” her. I just have concerns about her-as I have for most politicians. As noted above, I’m sure she would be fun to run with.

      As far as being working class, I think her book advance has elevated her out of that. Assuming there is a class system, of course.

      I don’t think she is evil. Never said she was. But I do agree that the left did help create her-the more they attack her, the more significant they make her. This is a rather neat irony.

  4. kernunos said, on November 18, 2009 at 3:05 pm

    “She manages to appeal to a very loud demographic in America-folks who are angry and afraid and who seem to be looking for someone like her to express their views to the world.”

    This is why you will never understand Mike. If you think that we support someone because we are angry or afraid then you are really missing the point. Maybe we want someone who will do more of the right things. Unlike the current President.

    • Michael LaBossiere said, on November 18, 2009 at 10:53 pm

      I don’t think Sarah will save the GOP. My main concern with her is that she seems to have been elevated beyond her capabilities and my second concern is that I am not sure what her substantive views are on critical issues. Of course, I have similar concerns about most politicians. I’m sure she’d be fun to run with, though (literally-no innuendo here).

      • kernunos said, on November 19, 2009 at 10:15 am

        Obama acts like he has no idea how a Capitalist economy is successful, can drive unemployment rates to 10.2(we were assured of much less), can drive the National Debt to 12 Trillion and cannot even commit either way to the Afghan conflict. I’m sure we would be fine Mike. after all, WHAT IS going well in this Presidency?

      • magus71 said, on November 20, 2009 at 3:51 am

        Excellent point, kernunos. I really don’t see any reason we should elect Obama again. His adoring fans can’t really show me something that’s worth voting for.

  5. T. J. Babson said, on November 18, 2009 at 5:22 pm

    It’s perfectly obvious what is going on.


    When the former Republican vice presidential candidate and former Alaska governor wrote her autobiography, the AP found a copy before its release date and assigned 11 people to fact check all 432 pages.

    The organization did not review for accuracy recent books by the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, then-Sen. Joe Biden, either book by Barack Obama released before he was president or autobiographies by Bill or Hillary Clinton. The AP did more traditional news stories on those books.

  6. T. J. Babson said, on November 19, 2009 at 9:57 am

    Absolutely brilliant insight from Andrew Breitbart.

    Breitbart: Palin for ‘Red-State Oprah’, Not President of United States


  7. PhilK said, on November 19, 2009 at 7:41 pm

    Even intelligent gays are obsessed by the rouge one. http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/11/deconstructing-sarah-ctd-2.html I do like his bit on late degenerate republicanism. But he’s not American, he’s a Catholic who supports choice, he supported W in 2000 and edited The New Republic, so his wiring just doesn’t seem normal.

    • kernunos said, on November 20, 2009 at 9:36 am

      I think this guy is an attention whore more than anything else. He says one thing and does another.

      • PhilK said, on November 20, 2009 at 11:37 am

        Then again, it’s not too hard to figure why someone might support Bush in 2000 and not support him in 2004 lots of American catholics support abortion and he’s spot on about the current sloganized republicanism. The New Republic is a sort of fiscal and foreign policy conservative social liberal mix.I should have said “his wiring doesn’t seem typical”.

      • kernunos said, on November 20, 2009 at 4:17 pm

        How many Catholics are lots? You mean those liberal Massachusetts Catholics like ‘Liveshot’ Kerry?

      • kernunos said, on November 20, 2009 at 4:19 pm

        Yes, agreed, his wiring is not typical. It just seems like he is Liberal on polarizing issues.

      • PhilK said, on November 20, 2009 at 6:44 pm

        I’m url happy today http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/thomas111909.php3
        About the only thing that bothers me here is that Thomas seems to think sharpening your intellect is like sharpening a knife and that is just plain loopy. Numbers on pro-abortion catholics?Another url– http://www.catholicleader.com.au/news.php/features/polls-catholics-and-abortion_53189
        Reading this araticle probably won’t satisfy your taste for numbers to support the word “lots” so I’m changing my statement to “quite a few” or “more than a few”

      • kernunos said, on November 20, 2009 at 7:35 pm

        That’s alright. I figure it is above 90% in the world that oppose abortion in the Catholic faith. Most liten to the Pope after all. The US is weird in that we think we can pick and choose our beliefs al a carte. Yes, I think I’ll be a pro life atheist that does not believe in evolution. Oh, could I throw polygamy and Relavitism with just a touch of Existentialism?

      • PhilK said, on November 20, 2009 at 9:16 pm

        What’s weird about it? It’s America! Everyone doesn’t have to fit into a mold. What’s wrong with an atheist who’s pro life other than he’s made the mistake of being an atheist? Or a christian whos pro abortion other than she’s made the mistake of being a christian? Or thinking it’s alright not to have all the answers?

      • kernunos said, on November 20, 2009 at 9:21 pm

        Well put but I just would not put much stock in their opinions.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: