Palin and the Elites
Is it just me, or does anyone else get the sense that Andrew Sullivan didn’t even bother to read Ross’s latest column before he came out spluttering at it? I mean, how is it possible for someone to write a “rehash of the Nixonian class resentments and Rovian cynicism” when he criticizes the “Mrs. Spiro Agnew” role that Palin played in the McCain campaign, or simply blame “her elitist enemies” for her downfall when he admits that the American democratic ideal was “tarnished by Palin herself, obviously”? Like the game lately played by Governor Palin herself, it appears that this is a contest that the Palin-sympathizing commentator simply can’t win.
Similarly, here is the inimitable Freddie deBoer, taking issue with Ross’s take on Palin’s by-her-bootstraps rise to prominence:
Ross– Sarah Palin’s family makes better than five times the national median household income. Five times! The Palins own a huge mansion, four other properties, two boats and a plane! I will never be as rich as the Palins, in all likelihood. Hell, the odds are pretty good that any three readers of this blog combined made less than half what the Palins made last year. There is no earthly sense in which “lower class” can retain any meaning and include Sarah Palin.
Uhh, Freddie? What Ross said was that Palin grew up to be a great success story, which is not at all incompatible with her having, and retaining the very evident marks of, her small-town, middle- (note that Ross did not say “lower-”) class, humbly-educated background. Criticizing Palin’s startling lack of policy knowledge and almost total inability to communicate positions effectively is one thing, but calling her “slutty” and mocking her religion and her "white trash concupiscence" is quite another, and naturally opens the way for columns like this one: for no unbiased observer can seriously deny that Palin’s class and gender were consistently seized on in the attempts to discredit her, and no one who takes the democratic ideal seriously should look back at that saga without some real concern for the role that class plays in American politics.
In any case, when it all shakes out I pretty much agree 100% with Radley Balko:
It is possible that Sarah Palin was both unfairly mistreated and personally attacked by the media and many on the left, and that her family was rather ruthlessly and mercilessly run through the ringer . . . and that she’s a not particularly bright, not particularly curious, once libertarian-leaning governor who sadly devolved into a predictable, buzzword spouting culture warrior when she was prematurely picked for national office by John McCain.
This is, I think, pretty much the same thing that Ross was saying, albeit with more emphasis on the first conjunct than the second. That someone who devoted thousands of words to speculating about whether Sarah Palin faked a pregnancy can read Ross’s column and come away complaining about Rovian cynicism is a pretty hilarious example of false consciousness.
(Image via Flickr user ToFuGuns. Cross-posted at The American Scene.)
Filed under: media/culture, politics
I read the Douthat op-ed today; it was one of the first things I did this morning. While I certainly gleaned that there is some lingering sympathy on his side for the Palin saga, in know way did the article come across as “Rovian cynicism,” which, along with the term “christianist,” is the main critique in 99% of Andrew Sullivan’s posts on
everythingGOP politics.I think there is a bit of resentment on Sullivan’s part toward Douthat. Ross was (is?) an up-and-coming fresh face in conservative journalism who never quite fit in with Sullivan’s brand of waffling/doubting libertarianism. Ross is steadfast in his efforts to build on social and religioius conservatism for the GOP, which entails a continuation of the merger of religion and politics that is anathema to Sullivan. Ross also took his work out of Sullivan’s beloved blogosphere and turned to, arguably, the most mainstream media outlet around, the Times op-ed page.
I’ve read both their works for a while now, and I have never gotten the sense that Sullivan is enamored with Ross’ writing or political philosophy. Particularly on topics such as sexuality, they couldn’t come from more opposite ends of the spectrum. Mabye Palin was the best topic to bring about the long-held disagreements between the two, much like two roomates who get along fine until one of them misses their first rent payment.
Ross – Palin is a pulpier compared to democrats like Reid, Kennedy, Pelosi and most of the senators and representatives in Washington. Ross – you sound jealous. Hey! why don’t you move to Alaska and see how far you dollar goes!!
[...] what the folks at FOX declare, the test of Sarah Palin’s political future will be decided in the 2010 GOP congressional primary midterms, when establishment candidates face [...]
What happened to Sarah Barracuda?
It was obvious from the start.
Consider, Sarah Palin was a popular Governor of Alaska of whom nobody would know about in the lower 48 states. She was dragged into McCain’s presidential campaign when it was imploding for good reasons. She nearly dragged John McCain to victory. Where the Republican’s justly gained their hard won reputation for being brain dead was not only nominating McCain but not hitting back at the Democratic attacks. From the very start Sarah Palin was under attack by nonsensical criminal and civil lawsuits. Not only did John McCain or the Republican party did not support her, but when Sarah Palin outshined McCain, she was thrown to the media wolves. The McCain staffers even went so far as to sabotage Patin’s part of the campaign through media leaks.
When the campaign season came to a end, the attacks from the left did not stop. Even when all the current lawsuits were proved to be pure bulls—t, more lawsuits were filled. Not one Republican “leader” stood up for her. The Republican party members treated her as a competitor and rival.
The leadership must be brain dead to allow one of its members to be savaged by the political opposition without response. By leaving one of its members deep in debt by political opposition lawsuits, the party elders have proved themselves unworthy. If a party does not support its members, why should the members support the party or its leadership.
What was over the top despicable was no one considered Sarah Palin was telling the truth when she said she was calling it quits. Why should she go on without party support. She did not have the family wealth to absorb the lawsuits. The sad fact was Sarah Palin was too good for Republican party politics.
She was too honest for both the Democratic and Republican party’s politics. Now she is gone, to the Republican party’s loss.