The American Spectator : Rousing the Rabble

Rousing the Rabble

By Robert Stacy McCain on 12.23.08 @ 6:09AM

Evidence that Democrats consider Sarah Palin a potent political force for the future continues to mount. A Huffington Post blogger went rooting around the comments at the Team Sarah website over the weekend and emerged to announce that he had discovered "something very ugly happening out there in the hinterlands these days -- a brewing cauldron of racist anger being directed at President-elect Barack Obama."

This accusation of "mean-spirited bigotry" was based on a relative handful of comments, far less dramatic than the huffy HuffPoster's hyperbolic introduction suggested. The Christian ladies who run Team Sarah -- Marjorie Dannenfelser, Jane Abraham and Emily Buchanan of the pro-life group Susan B. Anthony List -- responded immediately with sanctions against commenters who cross the lines of political decorum. (Of course, decorum is not even an afterthought at Huffington Post, DailyKos or any number of liberal blogs where the comment fields routinely boil with vitriol, but conservatives have long since become accustomed to this sort of double standard.)

The tactic of blaming Palin for "racist anger" toward Obama developed as a theme during the fall campaign, evidently based on post hoc ergo propter hoc thinking within Team Obama. Threats against Obama increased as the campaign heated up after Labor Day, and since this followed the Aug. 29 announcement of the Alaska governor as Republican running mate, Palin herself was scapegoated.

That claim was distilled in a November article in the London Daily Telegraph with the misleading headline, "Sarah Palin blamed by the US Secret Service over death threats against Barack Obama."

The Secret Service never said any such thing and the Telegraph's story didn't actually say that they had said it. Rather, Telegraph reporter Tim Shipman was paraphrasing a Newsweek account of the campaign that quoted Obama adviser Gregory Craig in mid-October expressing concern about "the frenzied atmosphere at the Palin rallies." The same paragraph of the Newsweek story asserted (without attribution) that the Obama campaign had been "provided with reports from the Secret Service showing a sharp and very disturbing increase in threats to Obama in September and early October."

It was the Obama campaign, not the Secret Service, which suggested a connection between the "frenzied atmosphere" around Palin and the threats. Obama himself appeared to believe there was such a connection, raising it in his final debate with John McCain.

That accusation evidently stemmed from an Oct. 14 newspaper report that an audience member at a Palin rally in Scranton, Pa., shouted "kill him" when Obama's name was mentioned. The Secret Service investigated but was unable to corroborate that account, as Newsweek subsequently reported, and yet the alleged threat has entered the colloquial what-everybody-knows version of the campaign.

All this fits within a narrative arc that Democrats and their media allies are constructing around Palin, portraying her as an uncouth rabble-rouser leading an angry (and perhaps dangerous) populist opposition to Obama.

TO WHAT EXTENT can Palin be blamed for this? She was expected to fill the attack-dog campaign role of running mates that has become customary in presidential politics, and she filled that role with considerable gusto. In fact, she got ahead of the McCain campaign in raising Obama's ties to former Weather Underground leader Bill Ayers with her now-famous "pallin' around with terrorists" soundbite.

There is nothing to indicate, however, that negative attacks are Palin's preferred mode of political discourse, or that she consciously courts the kind of populist "frenzy" for which she has been blamed. Because she is a Christian mother of five who speaks the language of faith, she is seen as an avatar of the religious right. Yet in interviews, Palin most frequently describes herself as a fiscal conservative primarily interested in energy policy, reform, and economic growth.

Democrats clearly aim to expand this gap between the perception and reality of Sarah Palin by making her an all-purpose symbol of right-wing menace, an emblem of "oogedy boogedy," to borrow Kathleen Parker's evocative epithet.

The eagerness with which a HuffPo contributor seized on a few unfortunate comments at TeamSarah.org indicates that destroying Palin's political viability is a high-priority progressive project. The folks at Team Sarah are clearly aware of this, and moved quickly to declare that the site would "not tolerate comments that can be perceived as racist or hateful."

Policing an online network with more than 60,000 members is "a tough thing," Dannenfelser told me in a phone interview, because Team Sarah "has been such an organic phenomenon…utterly grassroots." The group has no official relationship with Palin, except as a "fan club," Dannenfelser explained.

"A lot of [Team Sarah members] are people who've never been involved in politics before," Dannenfelser said, describing how many of those supporters feel "inspired and uplifted" by Palin.

Inspiring and uplifting the grassroots? Or "something very ugly…in the hinterlands"? Two ways, perhaps, of describing the same phenomenon.

Letter to the Editor

Jason| 12.23.08 @ 7:08AM

I was taken aback by the hatred directed toward Palin during the campaign. I don't think we've seen anything quite like it since Reagan. Leftists react to Bush with a deep seated seething hatred. They react to Palin (and reacted to Reagan) with a frenzied and explosive rage.
http://www.rightklik.net/

Melvin| 12.23.08 @ 7:12AM

In the next two years the spiritual, cultural, communal, and environmental nirvana that the Left has tried to create since the 1960's will come to it's zenith.
America is already half fed up with diversity, and multiculturalism being shoved down it's throat by an overzealous government run education system.
Now with Hillary Clinton attempting to infuse the State Department with the Country's economic making decision process and avowed undeclared Communist running the labor department, and Leftist moonbats running amok in the Environmental Protection Agency. Sarah Palin will be the savior from the North. Sarah will give America a direction out of the hell that Hillary and Obama will have created.
I know this post is wordy but as Neal Boortz keeps telling his listeners. "Elections have consequences."

Paul Bunker| 12.23.08 @ 7:26AM

Hatred directed toward Mrs. Palin, a decent public servant, a nice lady with a loving family?
What would you expect from empty headed radicals? Logical thinking? When there is no sensible thing to say, expect radicals to bray in public in full voice.

Kitty| 12.23.08 @ 7:37AM

Such attacks will toughen Sarah Palin, although she seems to be a pretty tough woman already, having taken on the corruption in her own party in Alaska before ever walking into the national spotlight.

I am a TeamSarah member.

...

James Pawlak| 12.23.08 @ 8:41AM

Mr. Obama's America hating church still stands; Ms. Palin's evil-hating church was burnt to the ground.

Bob| 12.23.08 @ 8:49AM

OK, RSM, still trolling for Palin discourse on this board? I'll bite....

There was significant vitriol on both sides. The hate speech seen against Obama far outweighed that seen with Sarah. Whether it be that he was Muslim, or a terrorist, or a socialist, or a Marxist, or even the pseudo-Russian phraseology of an Alinskyite. Hard right social conservatives always attract the David Duke groups just as hard left groups attract the environmental whackos.

But all of that aside, it was her complete and utter lack of knowledge about NATIONAL issues regarding foreign policy, the supreme court, and economic issues that caused most of us to vomit. Add to that, her "real America" beliefs and cutesy, anti-intellectual winking and "leaving off the g's" behaviors, and not that many of us could envision her as leader of the free world.

If you guys have any intellectual honesty, you'd agree with this and tell everyone she is a sham and a disgrace for the Republican party. We need a smart, knowledgeable, and educated fiscally conservative candidate -- and she is not it....

Bobbi L.| 12.23.08 @ 8:58AM

Gov. Palin is hated by the left because of the life she leads. She is an unabashedly pro-life feminist and that makes their heads explode. It all comes down to two things-abortion and being feminine. She has proven that you don't have to look or act like a man to be successful. Women can wear skirts and makeup and still be tough. Her precious son, Trig is a glaring example of her pro-life stance. She walks the walk as well as talks the talk. That is why the knives are out for her. The feminist movement is all about abortion on demand. That is all that they care about, period. Gov. Palin cannot and will not (in their eyes) be a role model for the next generation of women. They will lose. Well, too late. She is and they will.

Louis Jenkins| 12.23.08 @ 9:20AM

Why do "they" hate her? "They" cannot stand someone who represents the huddled masses from fly over country. "They" cannot tolerate someone with an education from a non-Ivy league school. "They" look down their noses at someone who has a career and a family with all the problems it can bring. (And she's done a fair job handling those problems.) "They" cannot stand someone who attends church on Sunday, and believes in Jesus Christ. "They" cannot understand someone who, almost overnight, became resoundingly popular with so many people. How dare a country bumbkin come from no where and connect with the great "unwashed" populace who, by the sweat of their brow, earn their bread. It's jealousy. How dare she speak about taxation fairness, express a respect for the constitution, address a need for wise government spending, state that we need to develop our domestic energy resources, and worst of all- point out the contradictions and false faces of those "who say they really care for America." How can she be so popular and not promise "redistribution of wealth", not promise extra benefits/programs here and there, they ask? And she's a Conservative?

But the topping on this hate speak cake-- "they" hate her because of her respect for the unborn. Her belief that life, even in the womb, is sacred and this, most of all, has made her a target for the liberal word assassins.

Hey you Libs !! Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer. You'd best pay extra attention to this woman. She's not going away anytime soon.

sre| 12.23.08 @ 9:34AM

Many conservative columnists called it the day she was nominated - she's a threat so she must be destroyed.

Have you ever read the comments after an interview with or excerpt from Gov. Palin is published on CNN or another "mainstream" website (ignoring for now how those websites insist on transcribing, word for oral word, without the friendly editing bestowed upon a lib)? The attacks are absolutely looney - and the ratio must be 95 crazy/5 objective - as if there is some secret call to arms directing the zombies to immediately march on The Politico.

It's just so dispiriting to watch the media machine grind her up without any recognition of her considerable virtues. I confess some hesitation about her "readiness" (even while acknowledging that no single human being is ever ready to be President) but at this point she's almost become a national test on whether or not an ordinary citizen will ever really be allowed to "grow up to be President."

SAW| 12.23.08 @ 9:34AM

Sarah is too real for the phony baloney liberals to stomach. I, like so many Americans, need to look up to someone who is their role model, and whom they could trust. Normal Americans do not trust the northeast academia circles of "greater than thou".
You go Sarah, we will vote for you.

syn| 12.23.08 @ 9:35AM

"you'd agree with this and tell everyone she is a sham and a disgrace for the Republican party."

No I cannot agree, actions speak louder than words. For example, Gov Palin took down the corrupt in Alaska while Senator Obama dwelled amongst Chicago's corrupt.

Given this, Gov Palin is God's grace to the Republican Party; she reminds me of what is greatness in America.

"The hate speech seen against Obama"

Obama has seen absolutely nothing compared to the hate speech against President George W. Bush.

Andrew | 12.23.08 @ 9:58AM

Bob, if the hate speech against Obama outweighed that against Palin, it was on the Democrat side. Remember the polls that over 10% of Democrats refused to vote for Obama because of his race? You probably forgot that one. And syn has a great point about the vitriol heaped upon W.

Palin did very, very well in her debate against Biden (anybody in their right mind want to see THAT guy as the leader of the free world?) who has been in the Senate for 2 or 3 centuries and apparently has yet to read the Constitution. And she knows a lot more about important things like not stealing from taxpayers and cutting spending than Team Obama (ooh, did I just commit hate speech?)

But getting back to the article: I noticed that Obama hate speech started increasing as temperatures got cooler therefore I predict that Obama hate speech will increase as we bring global warming under control. Think I can get that non sequitor published on HuffPo?

Joseph| 12.23.08 @ 10:02AM

I had made the comment at least three weeks ago on another website that Sarah Palin will be viciously targeted by the liberal thugs who tout "tolerance" as long as it is for liberal ideas.
Obama has only one urgent goal in his sights which is now to win a second term in 2012. All hands are therefore on deck with his Chicago handlers to either 1. buy out any opposition or 2. destroy any opposition. Sarah Palin is now firmly in their sights because they cannot buy her out so will try to destroy her image and hense her political options in the near future. She will not see where the attacks are coming from but they will be well organized and done by Obama surrogates whether political or media.
My biggest fear is that the Republican who led us down the garden parth for 8 years will also join the bandwagon to politically kill off the brightest star and only straight thinking leader who can bring the US back from the brink particularlty after the massive borrowing and spending that will take place under Obama.

rollinson ford| 12.23.08 @ 10:21AM

Democrat voters are complicit in murder since B.O. is willing to have born alive babies killed if they survive an abortion attempt.
Since when is ANY credit given to murderers and accomplices?

Nick in Virginia| 12.23.08 @ 10:32AM

Bob,

First, 0bama was born and raised a Muslim. According to Muslim tradition, there is a specific procedure to follow to renounce Islam, and 0bama never did that. Therefore, it is not outlandish to declare that 0bama is STILL a Muslim.

Calling someone a socialist, or a Marxist, hardly constitutes hate speech. Calling him an "Alinsky-ite" only describes what he learned as a community organizer. Calling someone a terrorist would not really be "hate speech", it would be more like "playing the fear card", but I'm not sure I heard people calling him that (other than the joke about "what 0bama and 0sama had in common - friends who attacked the Pentagon"). When Palin said he was "palling around with terrorists", you tell me - how do you describe Bernadine Dohrn and William Ayers?

If you had any intellectual honesty, you would listen to Palin hold a discussion on energy policy, and you would find that she can dance rings around any of 0bama's people. Yes, she was out of her element at first, and that was the fault of McCain's campaign planners. But within her area of speciality, she is top-notch.

And like 0bama, who comes into office with absolutely no executive experience or governing expertise, we can always assume that she will have advisors who will fill the gaps in her knowledge. Fortunately, she won't need as many advisors as 0bama needs, because he is indeed an empty suit who has defrauded his supporters (not his opponents, we saw through him from the beginning).

Jeremiah| 12.23.08 @ 10:40AM

Many people who saw clips from those rallies on television came away with the impression that Palin was particularly nasty in her attacks and that she at least tacitly sanctioned a kind of klannish atmosphere of hatred against Obama.

This may not be fair. Television can distort reality by selecting one clip and looping it repeatedly. (Not that that was the case with Rev. Wright. Looping repeatedly two or three minutes of sermons from his 25 years of sermon making was completely fair. We all know why that is.)

Still, in my view Palin went too far with the Ayers business. She all but accused Obama of being sympathetic with terrorism. This was unfortunate for her, since a few weeks later, after he'd won the election fair and square, she could be found ingratiating herself to Obama and claiming to be eager to work with the new administration. This would be understandable if Obama were just an opponent.

Joe B.| 12.23.08 @ 10:50AM

Frustration by the white majority that voted for McCain, expressed sometimes inappropriately on blogs, is understandable. For the first time, blacks and immigrants tipped an election in favor of a socialist candidate for president. Our current immigration policy, mainly the result of Democrat legislation, has ended up crowding our country with 80 million people we don't need who are simply here either to take jobs from citizens or collect health and welfare benefits -- and vote for Democrats. Obama will make the situation worse by refusing to deport illegals and by pushing for a path to amnesty. It should be no secret by now that the growing Hispanic crowds in our towns and cities will be in the half of Obama's New Deal America which don't pay taxes but collect considerable benefits, and stand in line ahead of us in emergency rooms. They will also vote to tax white Americans even more (for services most whites either don't need or don't want provided by the state). Also, the White middle class will be further impoverished as they shift resources away from retirement accounts toward primary and high school tuition so their children can avoid sitting in public school classrooms filled with language disabled, hyperactive, criminal kids of Hispanic and Afro-Carribean immigrants. It's really very simple. Democrats are out to punish middle class whites who don't happen to have the benefit of Ivy League educations and lucrative government employment.

Nick in Virginia| 12.23.08 @ 10:58AM

Jeremiah

I'm not sure why you say "Palin went too far with the Ayers business". Are you saying you have forgiven Ayers for what he did as the founder of the Weather Underground? That you would be so beneficent towards him would be more understandable if he had ever apologized for what he did, but he isn't referred to as an "unrepentant terrorist" for nothing.

Even Chrissy Matthews (you know, the guy who admitted to having orgasms whenever he heard 0bama speak) blasted Ayers for what he did nearly 40 years ago, because at the time Ayers was setting bombs at the Pentagon and the Capitol Building, Matthews was working as a Capitol Hill police officer. Guess Matthews didn't care for the possibility of ending up in dozens of pieces scattered across the city of Washington.

So with what we know about Ayers, I'm puzzled how anyone could go "too far" when criticizing him and his friends.

Elijah| 12.23.08 @ 11:20AM

The treatment of Sarah Palin is all the more appalling with the current hype surrounding Caroline Kennedy. Palin, the product of a humble blue collar background, worked her way to becoming both a Mayor and Governor. Caroline Kennedy has never been elected to any position, never held a real job (let alone held an Executive position of any sort), and has spent the majority of her adult life spending her inheritance at charity dinners. Wow. In addition, a Senator has far more responsibilities than VP.

But hey....she's a Kennedy!!!

ked| 12.23.08 @ 11:41AM

No "aim" necessary when shooting fish in a barrel.

Jerry| 12.23.08 @ 11:43AM

They (the media and the Dumocrats )were so quick to smear Sarah with the rascist label while ignoring Obamas 20 years in a Black Seperatist church whos pastor was spouting
poison about America and white people. Oh but that's not a double standard; is it?

JamesJ| 12.23.08 @ 12:07PM

Liberals are abject cowards

Katelyn| 12.23.08 @ 12:19PM

Thank you, Bob. Sarah Palin is a decent person, but completely unqualified to represent Republicans or conservatives. She may or may not be a good governor of Alaska, but she shows no deep interest in the foreign or domestic issues affecting this country, nor does she display any evidence of having thought deeply about political philosophy, conservative or otherwise.

Chris| 12.23.08 @ 12:20PM

from "Bob"... "We need a smart, knowledgeable, and educated fiscally conservative candidate..."

We had one. His name is John McCain. Sorry "Bob"(or is it really "Colin" as in Powell) but your problem with Palin is not what she knows or doesn't know, it's who she is. In your eyes she's nothing but a Bible thumping redneck hick, which makes her stupid no matter what, intruding on your status quo. Admit it, Bob. She can't be president because she leaves "g's" off the end of words? Are you serious? And someone should have told Ronald Reagan all that winking was "anti intellectual."

Why don't you look at what she's accomplished in her political career? Let's compare her state of Alaska(which is in surplus) to RINO Ah-nold's "state" of Kah-lifornia. And as for her lack of knowledge, I think you should be more alarmed that President-elect Obama thinks they speak Arabic in Afghanistan and that he said Iran wasn't a threat because they have a small defense budget. That he wants to use the Supreme Court to undermine the Constitution and that his economic policy is essentially Marxist. But I guess that's all ok to you as long as leaves "g's" on the end of his words. How petty! Sorry again, Bob. But you're being neither "intellectual" or "honest" in your critique of Governor Palin.

Whenever I see or read comments like this I am reminded of the parallels to Reagan in 76. How "me too" RINO's like "Bob" kept telling us he was too "extreme" or unknowledgeable. All that made him "unelectable," we were told. Those people were wrong 30 years ago about Reagan and they're wrong today about Palin.

Tim| 12.23.08 @ 12:30PM

Well awarding "Tina Fey" the AP entertainer of the year award should leave no doubt at the amount of soil dripping down the wacko' left's collective leg at the mention of Sarah Palin.

Fear of her is the understatement of the decade!

Some of these clowns are so paranoid that she is the second coming of Reagan in high heels that they probably won't stop at just burning down her church.

But as is often the case in politics run a muck regardless of party, the far left over reach with this Palin paranoia will be their undoing and actually allow Palin to become a bigger nightmare for them then they ever imagined.

Should be fun to watch all of this unfold.

Robert Stacy McCain| 12.23.08 @ 12:37PM

Bob, "cutesy, anti-intellectual winking"? Really? Is winking now considered an anti-intellectual gesture?

Andrew| 12.23.08 @ 12:39PM

And another thing: was it a right-wing magazine that put Obama in Muslim garb on the front cover? Or his wife in terrorist garb? No. Bob, you may interpret Palin's comments about Obama's friendship with Ayers however you want, but I heard them as yet another example of how Obama, faced with moral turpitude, did a whole lot of go along to get along. Or is that hate speech to suggest that Obama is a moral weakling?

Joe B| 12.23.08 @ 12:51PM

Palin will be a fabulous standard bearer for the Republicans in '12. It has already has been demonstrated how woefully ignorant Democrat voters were on issues in the past election. Most of Obama's supporters voted for him because he is black. Most Whites (98% of whom cannot join Mensa) will vote for Sarah not because she is some genius policy expert but because she is an American original with an inspiring life story, who stands for clear moral and governmental principals. As for young voters, when they find out how bad the economy is after four years of Hopey Change, they will tip to Sarah or just stay home and watch TV. As for Obama being smart, well, I hope the RNC has the good sense to demand half of the debate venues are at places like Hillsdale College or University of Kentucky, and two debate moderators are used each time, one from the left and one from the right. That way we don't have the travesty of the recent debates where Democratic candidates were signaled the questions in advance so their speech writers could prepare sound bytes for Mr Hopey Change and the Dullard from Dover. Sarah's gonna do awlll right against Hopey! By the way, has our affirmative action emperor gotten around to releasing his abysmal SAT and LSAT scores yet? Didn't think so. Bet he's no smarter than Sarah. He surely isn't as good a human being. In they end, presidents just pick advisers to think through the tough issues for them.

DaveS| 12.23.08 @ 1:08PM

It's all about shedding light on the decadent culture. Everyone knows the culture/moral war is always hot, and elections never tie a bow around anything. Sarah Palin represents moral normalcy, and for this she will continue to suffer.

Tim| 12.23.08 @ 1:32PM

Democrats must be denser than I thought if they still have not figured out that personal attacks against Sarah Palin are counterproductive.

Jeremiah| 12.23.08 @ 1:57PM

Nick in Virginia --

When I say that Palin "went too far" with the Ayers business I mean she went to far in attributing guilt by association, a tactic justly associated with McCarthyism in American politics.

In fact, I don't know what Palin thinks about Ayers or the Weathermen because she never spoke at length about them. Rather, she simply associated Obama (and by implication, his supporters) with a "domestic terrorist" and urged her audience to see them as virtual partners in violent subversive activity.

How could she then three weeks later announce that she is eager to work with the new adminstration? Is she now to be tarnished by Ayers, seeking as she does an association with an association of a domestic terrorist.

The whole business is just absurd. The governor of S. Carolina, a conservative Republican, now sits on a educational board with Bill Ayers. The same board Obama served on with Ayers was begun by a Republican philanthropist. All of these "associations" were and are very tenuous, and it was acting in bad faith to claim that Obama would "pal around" with "terrorists."

The word "terrorism" was not applied to these activities in the early 70s, and applying it now is egregious and an abuse of the language.

I find it equally outrageous when people use words like "racist" against anti-immigration activists. We have words and we should use them wisely.

Bob| 12.23.08 @ 2:18PM

RSM said this:

"Bob, "cutesy, anti-intellectual winking"? Really? Is winking now considered an anti-intellectual gesture?"

In normal behavior? No. As part of her only debate with serious topics to the American people? Yes. The same holds with the dropping of G's. She didn't do this when she was a TV person. If she thinks that's what her base wants her to do, she's playing all of you for fools. (I never said she wasn't smart, only anti-intellectual).

For some of you, Reagan was my candidate and I voted for him. He had a history of involvement with world issues, ran one of the largest states for a long period of time, was head of a union, and didn't impose his personal beliefs upon the electorate. Palin is NOTHING LIKE Reagan.

Oh, and RSM, you can't see it, but I'm winking at you.... (it's hard to drop the "g"'s when you are writing....

Pecos Pete| 12.23.08 @ 2:46PM

Bob:

You are right...Gov. Palin is nothing like Pres. Reagan. She has the potential to be better than Pres. Reagan. And, you say Gov. Palin imposed personal beliefs upon the electorate...awwwww, come on. When and were did she do that?

Me thinks you protest too much.

Alan Brooks| 12.23.08 @ 3:45PM

I think Bob and Jeremiah are right, i'm going to start growing my sideburns again and wear bell bottomed trousers.

BTW has anyone seen my eyebrow pencil?
my very credibility is at stake.

DaveS| 12.23.08 @ 3:48PM

Palin on Reagan's level? As much as she incites, let's just lean back a little, take a breath, and think this declaration over a little. Reagan belongs on Rushmore; the same cannot be said of any other American political leader since TR.

WB| 12.23.08 @ 4:09PM

Ah, yes! Palin unfit to be President or hold national office -- this from the same liberal clowns who are ready to award Hillary's Senate seat to another Kennedy because of her impeccible credentials (political or otherwise).

Please ....

Bob| 12.23.08 @ 4:15PM

Sarah and Caroline have something in common -- the more we hear from them the less we like them. That said, it would be a travesty to make Caroline a Senator. At least Sarah has held political office.

Alan brooks| 12.23.08 @ 4:28PM

Caroline's very credibility is at stake.

by the way, have you seen her bell bottomed trousers?

Chris| 12.23.08 @ 4:40PM

"Bob," could you please define what you mean by "anti-intellectual?" I believe that it was the same thing "your" candidate Reagan and every other conservative has been criticized for since time immemorial. My comparison to Reagan wasn't based on policy or experience but on the similarities of the political attacks against them and Reagan's eventual success. Please read a little more carefully next time. You don't want to be accused of being "anti-intellectual." And speaking of reading, why not peruse John O'Sullivan's column in today's WSJ... http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122999917373529125.html

One more thing. Reagan didn't impose personal beliefs on the electorate? Come on! We all know what that phrase is code for. Abortion. I believe his position was the same as Governor Palin's. I remember the libs foaming at the mouth over it and accusing him of the same imposition of beliefs. Always thought that was a silly argument against a politician/candidate anyway. Don't they all do that? And since when did the right to life become a personal belief? I remember when it used to be a universal belief accepted by all that didn't need to be "imposed." Sadly, those days are gone now.

Bob| 12.23.08 @ 5:05PM

Chris, by using "anti-intellectual" I mean using belief over reason and analysis to deduce conclusions. You are correct that Reagan and all Republicans who followed, with the exception of Bush 41 derided "intellectuals" primarily as an excuse for either not having a first rate education or for achieving poor grades. Reagan propounded a belief system in defining America. Palin has yet to do so. I did comment on O'Sullivan's column elsewhere. His analogies show that his knowledge of Palin is superficial and weak. His justification bears no resemblance to reality.

Social conservatism at the time of Reagan was not a threat. The Supreme Court did not have an overwhelming number of social conservatives as they have now. He would not have convinced the "Reagan Democrats" to vote for him if he had been serious about his beliefs on abortion. He appointed moderates to the Supreme Court like O'Connor and Kennedy. He also put Scalia on the bench. So yes, Reagan did not impose his personal beliefs on the office.

Jeremiah| 12.23.08 @ 6:01PM

Reagan spoke to the majority of Americans and generally did not engage in divisive rhetoric (e.g. "real America" vs. urban America).

Palin seems addicted to shallow, childish ideas. Consider her claim that Obama had found America "so imperfect" that he chose to "pal around with terrorists."

To my knowledge no one has commented on how inchoate and impoverished the thinking is behind this irresponsible and completely false claim. I think if anything the media were soft on Palin.

Jeremiah| 12.23.08 @ 7:00PM

Chris --

Actually, Reagan's position on abortion was NOT the same as Palin's. In fact, you have to go back to -- alley oop -- Jimmy Carter to find a president who believed that abortion was wrong even in cases of incest and rape, as Palin believes.

I am a critic of Palin, but I have to say that the Palin / Carter view (how delicious to write that) is more defensible than the more "moderate" view: if a fetus is essentially an unborn child, how do you justify killing it simply because it is the result of rape?

Although conservatives have a tendency to idealize Reagan, he actually was not the stalwart conservative on all things that many of you remember. He compromised often and was very pragmatic. Remember the hell he caught for reaching out to the Soviets?

Michael L. Hauschild| 12.23.08 @ 7:59PM

The behavior of a VP running mate is structured and their roles are sculptured to fit the campaign. The MSM vitriol leveled at her is not reflective of her record at battling corruption (bipartisan by the way), her success in the actual arena of her jurisdiction, or her exemplary personal choices. What the left thinks is her “baggage” is actually her strength. By the time we get around to 2012 the stench of the Chicago machine battling the factions of the beltway surnames will reveal Sarah Palin as that “breath of fresh air” the country needs.

greg| 12.23.08 @ 8:00PM

Anyone who doubts the hostility, and hatred directed at Gov. Palin should take a look at Huffington Post, Daily Kos, Democratic Underground, and the sexually perverted Wonkett websites. Then they can review the comments section of any online newspaper or CNN. Many of these comments sound like they come from the rantings associated with people in mental hospitals, and many of them are violent in nature. All this was encouraged by the 0bama campaign, and obama himself called on his internet army to stay on the attack after the election, and they sure have.

Madoff| 12.23.08 @ 8:03PM

What's the difference, between Sarah Palin, and George W Bush?.

A Gun, and Sarah Palin is just a bit more idiotic.

katie| 12.23.08 @ 8:09PM

Sarah Palin is just what we need, someone who makes Washington scared! Come on Sarah lets shake things up!! Every day I look at my Sarah Palin calendar and I am inspired to fight! She will make it to the White House! (the calendar by the way, is on amazon, and is GORGEOUS!! it also makes a great gift!!) SARAH PALIN 2012!!

Dai Alanye| 12.23.08 @ 8:10PM

How delicious it is to behold the fear the Palin phenomenon evokes in liberals and "moderates." The idea that this woman instinctively knows how to perform effectively--and that the public respond to her--has them scared silly.

Despite resemblances in matters of policy, Reagan worked out his political and social beliefs over a number of years, while Palin seems to have developed them internally. What she will do in future crises we can't know in advance, but I suspect those instincts will carry her through. In regard to foreign policy, consider Margaret Thatcher and the Falkland War. I would expect a similar response from Sarah.

BTW, I'm amazed to learn that Reagan caught hell "for reaching out to the Soviets." Was this before or after he demolished the Soviet Union?

Jeremiah| 12.23.08 @ 8:59PM

Dai --

Perhaps you're not old enough to remember, but Reagan was lambasted by the fringe right wingers for his trust of Gorbachev.

Reagan considered it his responsibility to end the Cold War because he believed it would eventually lead to nuclear war. Reagan also knew that he could not capitulate to the Soviets. However, when it because clear that people inside the Soviet Union were ready to work with him, he jumped at the opportunity despite "hardliners" both here and in Russia.

Reagan actually did NOT demolish the Soviets: he held out a hand of friendship to those within Russia who could actually accomplish that end without firing a shot.

It's called history, Dai, and it rarely cooperates with reactionary ideology.

Jeremiah| 12.23.08 @ 9:18PM

Michael H. et al --

I am writing to inform you and other readers of Am Spec. that "Chicago machine" and "Chicago machine politics" are intolerable cliches that are hereby banned from usage here and elsewhere.

Use of these overused, tired, worn-out and shallow metaphors is completely forbidden now and forever.

I make this rule for your own stylistic good and not out of any arbitrary desire to restrict your ability to express ideas. On the contrary, I'm interested in learning more about what you think.

From time to time I will be posting additional cliches with which you will no longer be permitted to bore your readers.

I know that you will respect the few standards I insist upon and do your best to find fresh, creative, and original ways of articulating your ideas in the future.

Madoff| 12.23.08 @ 9:33PM

Sarah Palin, is not fit to run a fish stall in a market. Get over it!

DaveS| 12.23.08 @ 9:33PM

Jeremiah: your 'history' is not supported by the facts. Reagan knew Pershing II could hit Moscow and SS20 could not hit DC. Gorbachev knew it, and the Soviets shortly thereafter caved under the weight of competing. Reagan walked at Iceland, because he could hold a winning hand longer than Gorby (affectionate MSM name).

Anthony| 12.23.08 @ 9:37PM

Now that Bush Derangment Syndrome appears to have run its course amoung the fevered Left, a new virus has taken hold, Palin Derangment Syndrome. Particularily affected are those lefties that dwell in the house of CNBC and the morally, intellectually and financially bankrupt NY Times. I confess to my fellow TAS readers, I also suffer from Palin Derangment Syndrome, only the benign strain, the one that says this woman is as smart as she is beautiful. I believe the only cure for me will come in 2012. I've also changed my name to Todd. Here's hoping.

Jeremiah| 12.23.08 @ 10:20PM

Dave --

I'm not saying Reagan was a fool and I'm not saying he did not play tough with the Soviets.

However, the Russians had thousands of warheads. The accuracy or missile of one class of missile hardly mattered in the grand scheme of things.

We've learned a great deal about Reagan since he left office. One of the most surprising is how convinced he was the we were coming to the "brink" with the S.U. and that it was only a matter of time before there was war.

"Trust but verify" was one side of Reagan. I.e., he understood that the Soviets were aggressive and dangerous. However, he also knew that there were people inside the S.U. with whom we could be friends -- Gorby being one of them.

This caught Reagan enormous criticism, which folks on the right often choose now to forget because as it turns out he was right and the "hardliners" were wrong.

Reagan was a complicated man. It's hilarious and sad when people compare W or Sarah Palin to him. Neither are remotely in his league -- but then again, few are. Kennedy, Eisenhower, and Roosevelt are, but in my opinion, that's about it in the twentieth century.

Interested Conservative| 12.23.08 @ 11:40PM

Jeremiah - you ban the use of "Chicago machine" and "Chicago machine politics"? Ever been to Chicago? Perhaps "the Combine" is more appropriate? That's what the Trib's calling it lately.

Any of these names mean anything - Cellini, Kjellander, Emil Jones, Don Stephens?

I could go on for hours, and only get to the point where RET could pick it up from his youth here - 40 years ago.

Among other tidbits, the US Atty./FBI has had an open investigation of political corruption in Cicero since the late 1920s. And that's just one suburb and one subset of the machine, oops, organized political structure hereabouts.

And you want us to believe that Obama had little or nothing to do with any of this? How do you or anyone know?

And how does any of this diminish Gov. Palin for pointing out that Sen. Obama associated with these folks - she didn't associate him with them - he did it himself. If she'd simply read stories from the local section of the Tribune you'd likely be calling her out for hate speech.

She had a national platform, but nothing she said is remotely controversial to anyone n Chicagoland.

Others can disregard or fantasize at their own risk.

Interested Conservative| 12.23.08 @ 11:44PM

Madoff - I believe she actually has "run a fish stall in a market" - at least she's had a few recipes posted on the state's fish marketing board's website, which, alas, probably exceeds the combined business experience of the incoming POTUS/VPOTUS team.

Wanna pick another metaphor?

Interested Conservative| 12.23.08 @ 11:49PM

Jeremiah - one last item - the word "terrorism" was not applied to Ayers et al in the early 1970s? Really? I remember otherwise, but perhaps "murderer" is preferable? What would you call the Weather Underground, the SLA, etc. if not terrorists? Heck - I recall they even called themselves terrorists or worse.

Jeremiah| 12.24.08 @ 12:25AM

Interested --

Bill Ayers was never accused of murder. The Weather Underground was at odds with itself; some favored more violent actions than others.

I object to the whole conversation, because it ends up assuming that as a Democrat I have some kind of responsibility to defend Ayers. It's ludicrous. Obama had a passing relationship with the man decades after his activities with the Weather Underground.

If Sarah Palin thinks that Obama is a terrorist, why does she say she's eager to work with his administration. Why did she stand silently by while McCain complimented and congratulated Obama on his victory?

The truth is, Interested, you've been duped. These people put on a show -- they crank up the music, because they know the monkeys in their little suits (you guys) will dance.

I don't dance.

Michael L. Hauschild| 12.24.08 @ 8:27AM

God told Jeremiah, "You will go to them; but for their part, they will not listen to you"

Interested Conservative| 12.24.08 @ 8:30AM

Sometimes they will not listen to Jeremiah because he has nothing to say. See Boy:Wolf.

Louis Jenkins| 12.24.08 @ 10:22AM

Ayers, Obama, Blogo, Palin, McCain, etc., Jesus said "You shall know a tree by its fruits." Observe their products, and you judge which of the five is the better.

Jeremiah| 12.24.08 @ 10:48AM

The terror you inspire and the pride of your heart have deceived you, you who live in the clefts of the rocks, who occupy the heights of the hill. Though you build your nest as high as the eagle's, from there I will bring you down," declares the Lord.
Jer. 49.16

I can quote as well as the next.

Michael L. Hauschild| 12.24.08 @ 11:17AM

It is truly a Christmas miracle; Bob is winking laviciously at Ruth and Jeremiah is quoting scripture.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

Studio| 12.25.08 @ 10:39AM

If one were to look at the history of Progressive women in politics, Governor Palin has committed the most unforgivable breach of etiquette. She is physically attractive. That separates her from the vast cadre of leftist women, and is enough to automatically discount the validity of any of her opinions. The the leftist eye, valid opinion must be delivered by a Friedan or a Hillary.
One hopes that Palin keeps a low enough profile to allow those always-vitriolic and hateful voices on the left to turn on the only available targets, the candidates they elected. It's a genetic thing and they can't help themselves. The sneer, the distortion, the smug attack is so ingrained in their ethos that, without a handy target they must turn on themselves. They've already started. It's all they know.

Marc Jeric| 12.26.08 @ 11:14AM

For this refugee from a communist country the parallels are disturbing:
1) Mortgage industry - 50% nationalized;
2) Banking - 50% nationalized;
3) Automobile industry - well on the way;
4) One party rule - just about there;
5) Card check unions - on the way; expect mergers AFL-CIO with government employee and teacher unions, with the aim of a single 100% unionized workforce;
6) Tax the rich and private enterprize; leading to nationalization of everything;
7) health care reform; nationalization in sight;
8) community organizations - akin to block committees in communist countries;
9) fairness doctrine - making dissent impossible and illegal;
10) Stalinist-like election victories of 99.95% coming up soon;
11) hey, I'm out of breath; I'll leave it to other experts to continue the list.
Let us all pull as one for Abu Hussein from Kenya.

Jean Rich| 12.26.08 @ 11:36AM

I am a Republican and she is the reason I voted Democrat.

As a WOMAN she made WOMEN look uneducated on national issues.

Osamas Pajamas| 12.26.08 @ 3:11PM

As well, Democrats pretending to be Republicans or conservatives have been pooping racist comments into all manner of blogs, political events and media stories. If "right-wing racism" does not exist, certainly the party of Jim Crow, the Democrats, has been quick to invent it and plant it in every venue where it can poison the debate and the public perception of the Republican Party. As a registered Libertarian who frequently votes Republican, I am dismayed by the Republicans' inability to call a spade a spade when the charges laid against them clearly are false or misleading. You can't possibly be a bunch of old ladies. And why should I care? Because the best debate over America's future is between Republicans and Libertarians, while the Democrat pary must be defeated and reduced to the usual street muggings to enforce their "redistribution of wealth" swindles.

RetAF| 12.28.08 @ 9:46AM

Jeremiah, are you saying there is no Chicago machine? How many former IL governors are cons or ex-cons? Three so far, soon to be four.

Just because it's a cliche doesn't mean it's not true. Are you opposed to the literary use of the phrase or the connotation?

The current defense of the "Chicago Machine" (uh oh, I better be careful, lest some unfortunate accident befall me) is that "oh, they're just your typical politicians, everybody does that"

Well, I'll stop saying "Chicago Machine" when libs stop invoking the ghost of Nixon to smear every republican for the last 40 years. After all, "he was just doing what all politicians do", right?

Conway Servative| 12.29.08 @ 1:27AM

funny listening to you sore losers whom don't have a clue;the Democrats want you to make Palin the leader of your dinosaur,failed policy ,security dangerous party.They don't attack her for her weak ,phony posturing and "gee golly gumdrops hypocrisy,they find her more humorous, than as any threat to their party power.Sarah is an attractive politician for those whom ignore intellectual honesty on the right,but has no base in the center.She failed to provide meaningful insight into specific policy positions,shunning the scrutiny of the intellectual press Sunday talk shows.The more the right "embraces" Sarah Palin,the more America's center moves left,out of a sense of rational honesty,as to whom her power brokers are,and why would they want this freak curiousity to represent their failed agenda

megapotamus| 12.29.08 @ 12:48PM

The genius of the Palin pick was purely tactical. Certainly she was less experienced than we generally expect from politicians at the national level but she was obviously far more experienced than this absurdist figure, Obama. This moron actually does not know how many states are in the union. The miserable scum of the Left are good at one thing; identifying threats to their fantasy world. Palin was a torpedo fired straight at the Fresh Prince of Bill Ayers and his faux resume. Sadly, McCain, war record aside, is not a fan of direct fire and prefers the oblique redirect. Too late for that now. I don't know if there is a future for Palin nationally but if a corrupt, socialist, Alinskyite (yeah Bob, he is) affirmative action scammer with no worthwhile qualities at all can dupe the putrid anti-Americans that vote in Dem primaries with such success, anything is possible. In any event, the declared genius of Barack Obama is now to be tested. Sadly, this puke is dumber than Geroge Bush was ever accused of being.

Barbarajo| 1.1.09 @ 12:51PM

I find it very insulting that you would attack Gov. Palin as to "stirring" up a bunch on insignifacant,poor,uneducated people for her own good/self interest!
You being a "writer" should be more knowledgeable of the facts before you print, or one could assume that you are the "rabble-rouser" here in this article!

Oliva| 1.1.09 @ 7:58PM

Robert, you missed the message. Sarah has nothing to do with Team Sarah. Team Sarah is only one of hundreds of new websites and blogs recently created to support Sarah and the values she stands for.
Team Sarah members are incensed by the overwhelming torrent of vitriolic smears lies and slander directed at the Governor and worse, the Governor's family. The Haters have even laid into new-born Trip. Can you believe that?
With the gleeful assistance of desperate journalists and the Left-Wing Press the Haters spew their tripe'n'nonsense all over the Internet. In my view the ugly side of America needs to be reigned in and fast. It's not a good look.
When Sarah joined the political debate the Left Side reeled .
Here was a politician who believes in God.
Here was a politician who believes in family.
Here was a politician who believes in America. Not their cup of tea?... no way, too traditional, too boring and actually too hard.
So now they want Sarah gone and they are using every trick in their dirt-bag to discredit her.
But, Robert, Conservatives are not going to stand by and watch their country being destroyed by gangs of political hit-men. Team Sarah is only one of the new forces out there that won't let it happen, there are hundreds of others.

jim| 1.1.09 @ 8:40PM

its so nice yet rare to see people writting decent stuff, I get so tired of reading the hate comming from the left and another group that I have stopped going to certain sites, like yahoo places