"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have"
Thomas Jefferson

Saturday, December 20, 2008

This Was Good Enough For A Free Lift

This is a good piece posted on Josh Painter's Blog over at Red State that kind of puts two issues into perspective.

Princess vs Palin, Parker vs Painter

The debate over Caroline Kennedy’s qualifications for a seat in the U.S. Senate is getting louder, and the number of side arguments over the way JFK’s daughter and Alaska’s governor have been evaluated in their respective quests for higher public office are increasing. Sweet Caroline’s supporters say she deserves her shot at the Hillary Clinton chair. Sarah Barracuda’s troops point to the rank hypocrisy of those who give Ms. Kennedy a free pass after having savaged Gov. Palin.
National Review’s Jonah Goldberg argues that Sarah Palin earned her job as Governor of Alaska through her own hard work and dedication, and he decries the viciousness of the personal attacks that were made on her and her family after she was nominated by John McCain and approved by the delegates to the Republican National Convention as the party’s 2008 vice presidential candidate. He says that Caroline Kennedy hasn’t earned a Senate seat:
Simply, the Kennedy clan is no priestly caste, serving as the conscience of the nation, and its progeny do not deserve eternal deference.

Now, I know the comparison between Palin and Caroline Kennedy is not perfect. Each has strengths where the other has weaknesses, and the jobs of senator and vice president aren’t identical (the former actually has more responsibility, for starters).
But the comparison is nonetheless revealing. Palin’s selection triggered troughs of bile, vomited up from nearly every respectable liberal quarter. A Florida congressman, and Obama surrogate, insinuated that Palin was a “Nazi sympathizer” and anti-Semite (she’s not, but Caroline Kennedy’s grandfather was). Her by-the-bootstraps story was ridiculed by nearly every ex-debutante newsreader and avowed “feminist” in America.
Meanwhile, Caroline, with a resume perfectly suited to being a Kennedy and little else, is a Cinderella who deserves a Senate seat because, well, she just does.
Whatever Palin’s faults, Sarah Barracuda’s America has a lot more going for it than Sweet Caroline’s.
Most pundits to the right of political center make similar arguments. But there is one glaring exception - columnist Kathleen Parker. Parker has already earned herself a reputation as a Palin-obsessed Christophobe, and even her friends have had enough of it. Her latest Townhall.com column argues that it’s no big deal to hand Caroline a Senate seat because the Kennedy heir would just be one among one hundred in the chambers and therefore couldn’t do that much damage. Palin, on the other hand, gasps Parker, wanted to be just a heartbeat away from having her finger on the button labeled “nuclear holocaust.” It never occurs to the caustic columnist that Sarah Palin has a deep and abiding respect for life and would be one of the last persons on the face of the earth to casually bring an end to so many lives on the scale demanded by global thermonuclear war.
But Parker gives herself away as just another e-mail inbox addressee for the sort of anti-Palin talking points widely distributed by our Democrat friends:
Palin’s demonstrated lack of basic knowledge, her intellectual incuriosity, her inability to articulate ideas or even simple thoughts all combined to create an impression of not-quite-there.
Even Stevie Wonder could spot the talking point memes in this paragraph, memes which the anti-Palin elites have been spouting for months. Let’s take a look at them.
It’s curious that the “lack of basic knowledge” meme hasn’t dropped of the talking points white paper, considering that Joe Biden is about to take the oath of office to become Vice President of the United States, the same office Parker and her fellow elites insist Sarah Palin was not qualified for. Biden has demonstrated a lack of basic knowledge on the subjects of American History, the Constitution, basic foreign policy, elementary school arithmetic and even the energy policy of the administration he will be working for. And, yes, he will be just a heartbeat away…
The “intellectual incuriosity” meme is one that I have already addressed when I pointed out that the President of Afghanistan, after meeting with Palin, “found her quite a capable woman” and said that “She asked the right questions on Afghanistan.” That is not the impression a person who is intellectually incurious makes on a head of state. But there are some additional arguments to make on this point. Elaine Lafferty, feminist, Democrat and former editor in chief of Ms. magazine, writes that Gov. Palin is smart, curious and insightful:
Now by “smart,” I don’t refer to a person who is wily or calculating or nimble in the way of certain talented athletes who we admire but suspect don’t really have serious brains in their skulls. I mean, instead, a mind that is thoughtful, curious, with a discernable pattern of associative thinking and insight. Palin asks questions, and probes linkages and logic that bring to mind a quirky law professor I once had. Palin is more than a “quick study”; I’d heard rumors around the campaign of her photographic memory and, frankly, I watched it in action. She sees. She processes. She questions, and only then, she acts. What is often called her “confidence” is actually a rarity in national politics: I saw a woman who knows exactly who she is.
Finally, Parker drags up the “inability to articulate ideas or even simple thoughts” meme that is a popular weapon among the elites to fire at Palin. Had Parker and her Palin-bashing fellow elites bothered to watch the interview of Gov. Palin conducted by CNBC’s Maria Bartiromo, they would have witnessed the object of their venom ably and effectively articulating ideas on energy independence, jobs, conservation and other issues. Her appearance on Charlie Rose with Gov. Janet Napalitano (as well as a few minutes with her solo in the green room) again showed Palin to be able to discuss ideas effectively without benefit of teleprompters, written notes or coaching. Palin’s performance in the vice presidential debate has been praised by Frank Luntz’s focus group, a host of bloggers and pundits such as Politco.com’s Roger Simon:
Sarah Palin was supposed to fall off the stage at her vice presidential debate Thursday evening. Instead, she ended up dominating it.
She not only kept Joe Biden on the defensive for much of the debate, she not only repeatedly attacked Barack Obama, but she looked like she was enjoying herself while doing it.
Steven Keller, Director of the George Washington University Debate Team and an Assistant Professor of Media and Public Affairs at GWU, said:
“I thought Sarah Palin hit a grand slam to right field. It was an excellent debate. Joe Biden did a fine job, but Sarah Palin exceeded expectations by a 100 miles with her poise, her self-confidence and her ability to stay even with Joe Biden all the way.”
With each new column she produces taking her further around the bend, it’s clear to many, even her friends, that Kathleen Parker is the one who’s “not quite there.”
And so the debate will rage on unless Caroline Kennedy somehow doesn’t get a free ticket to the Senate for at least two years. But those who have attacked Gov. Palin’s experience, intellect and abilities and who also want to see another Kennedy representing New York on Capitol Hill can hide neither their hypocrisy nor the emptiness of their arguments against Sarah Palin.
- JP


Anonymous said...

The age old adage goes, " Its not what you know, it's who you know".

Final score.

Kennedy- knows everybody, even people you never heard of.

Palin- Ted Stevens(convicted felon)
John McCain(loser)

Besides if something should befall Ted. A US Senate without a Kennedy would be like a day without sunshine.

Dan Francis said...

My take on the current media frenzy /Upstate educational blitz by Caroline Kennedy can be seen here with regular updates as we continue on this "Caroline Camelot Lite" saga CLICK HERE

It's not who she is or where she comes or where she wants to go; it's how she and those around her
are involved in this circus.

[FYI: my interest and resume have been sent to the Gov.] ...
~ dmf

Anonymous said...

Why are you so defensive of Palin? She is yesterday's news. (as opposed to Danny, who was last decade's news).

"Sarah Barracuda’s troops point to the rank hypocrisy of those who give Ms. Kennedy a free pass after having savaged Gov. Palin."

How do you know that these are one and the same people? Clearly Gov Palin was given a free pass by many Righties, based upon a 30 minute performance at the RNC. But that does not mean that all Repubs felt this way. I know many that did not vote for the ticket, specifically because of her selection.

Likewise, there are numerous Lefties that do not support Caroline, for a variety of reasons: the primary of which that her background, while commendably varied, is not preparatory for the Senate Seat. (Which, by the way was NOT Hillary's seat, but rather was the seat (soon-to-be) formerly held by Ms. Clinton.)

Whenever someone does not support the candidate that you support, they are not necessarily gushing bile. In a democracy, we are each allowed to form, and voice, an opinion. In fact, without contrasting opinions, there is NO democracy.

Anonymous said...

8:40pm The treatment of Palin can hardly be dismissed as yesterday's news. The entire experience showed what is wrong with our nation, and what promises to contribute to its continued decline. Problem being, media bias, and folks like you who are completely willing to accept it. I'm not sure what Palin was about. We will never really know. Instead of giving her an honest review, we instead focused on her clothes and her breasts, all while smugly talking about how "we" valued the increased contributions of women. You won't hear the media talking about Caroline's clothing preferences, or her breast size. But you don't see that as unfair treatment, do you? That's the problem, and it is a continuing one, not yesterday's news. You speak of the need for contrasting opinions. I agree. That's why we need a more balanced media.

Anonymous said...

Media bias or not, it was painfully clear Palin was not up to the job, and should never be heard from again. If the republicans want to make themselves a viable party for the future, they will drop losers like this. What they need are common sense, fiscal conservatives like Chuck Hagel. As for Caroline, she is a democratic version of Palin (albeit with a higher SAT score).

Anonymous said...

Read Carefully: Sarah Pain IS yesterday's news. She came from Obscurity, and she has returned to Obscurity.

No one gives a rat's tail about her breast size, and this is the first that I have heard ANYONE mention it (or them). And why would you think that NO ONE mentioning Caroline's breast's as somehow inappropriate?

From a 100 word posting, you can have NO idea what I am willing to accept from the media. But I can tell you that in the 70 some days from when she was introduced as a 'running-mate' until the election, SP showed NO COMPELLING REASON for America to support her. THAT is why she became a 'punchline'.

There are indeed many things wrong with this nation, but thankfully, the the majority of voters in this nation did not fall lockstep behind Sarah Palin. You would be wise to not admit in mixed company, that YOU did.

BTW, it was her own REPUBLICAN handlers that decided that her clothes were unfit for the task at hand, not the voters.

Anonymous said...

9:31 Repeating pablum doesn't make it the truth. There is nothing "painfully" anything about Palin, because we never gave her a fair shot at presenting herself. That is the point.

You say it was clear that Palin wasn't up to the job. Well, the people of Alaska obviously believed she was up to the job of Governor. But I concede that this is a backward state populated with stupid people.

The implication that Caroline is smarter is just your version of media bias. You have clearly memorized what they have taught you. Again, that is the point. I'm not arguing any of your assumptions. You may very well be correct. But the way the media unfairly packaged Palin we will never know what she was about.

And the way they will protect Caroline, we will never know what she is about. If our politicians have a rival for dishonesty, they face it in our media elite.

Anonymous said...

I don't think the media unfairly packaged Palin. The McCain staff took care of that. The handlers would never allow her to venture by herself for a press conference or whatever for weeks out of fear she would come across as uninformed and not up to snuff. If her own team was that uneasy with her, don't blame the media for shedding light on it. The bottom line is she was just a gimmick, a desperate hail Mary pass for McCain that didn't pan out.

Anonymous said...

Well Sir, Palin answered many more questions than Princess Caroline has answered. She also has refused financial disclosures. But I'm sure you're willing to accept that. I'm also taken by the "rats ass" comment. The strength of your verbage is impressive, even though the argument is not. Admit it, Palin's looks were a central issue with media's framing of the entire campaign. And I think Caroline's breasts are just as relevant as Palin's breasts should have been. I ask you to not only read slowly but to think.

You cite Palin's return to obscurity. Obscurity as a governor? Again, it may not be a huge state population wise but Biden's Delaware has limitations as well. I don't see your point. You're getting a bit emotional on that one. Why, I have no idea.

As far as "mixed company" is concerned, and admitting my support for Palin, I again ask you to think. I never said I supported her, I only cited media bias. I also try to make decisions on my own, not allowing peer pressure to dictate who I admit supporting in the political area. If you have trouble standing up for yourself, my suggestion would be to cease limiting your contacts to only like-minded people. It can help you keep an open mind. And at the very least, it could help you formulate a more cohesive argument in forums such as these. Denying your beliefs to avoid uncomfortable interactions with others is something I would suggest you avoid as much as possible.

The issue really isn't Palin's qualifications or Schlossberg's qualifications, it is the media bias that presents issues as it does. Then there is the willingness of folks like you to take it all in, and explain it away as balanced. And then get upset when you are called on it. I guess to you media is balanced. Which shows how much trouble we are in. Because overall, you're not a stupid guy.

Dan Francis said...

♫♫ Sweet Caroline ♫♫ update for you at my blog click here

Hey, one more millionaire in the 40 percent millionaire's club [U.S. senate] - no biggie, right?

Anonymous said...

So you choose your candidates by the size of their breasts? Very interesting.

I prefer the size of their intellect.

It's a shame that the 'media', who are owned and controlled by conservative mega-corporations, do not 'report' events to your liking. You prefer to perpetuate the 'bias' myth and to dismiss any viewpoint contrary to your own, as 'uninformed'. Pity.

Better to kill the messenger than the message, heh?

Anonymous said...

Now there's a comeback. Next you'll be preaching about the military industrial complex. Please, be somewhat focused on the topic. It isn't about breasts, bro.

Merry Christmas.

Damn, are we gonna make it till next year with brains like this?

Live Blogging