Palin, Obama & Not quite pulled together yet

I know it must seem like I’m being lazy and not attending to my work over here; it’s not that. I just can’t seem to settle in and focus on much.

The news feels like it’s all coming in too fast to process, the congress is passing mammoth bills it can’t be bothered to read. As the deficit tops ONE TRILLION DOLLARS for the first time, ever, the president is standing at ship’s helm, a deep gouge in his hull, and blocking our views while saying “everything is mostly great; things are working exactly as they should.” Aware that his ship is in trouble, he tries to distract the masses with the reliable old, “look at Bush!; see how bad Bush was!” schtick.

Meanwhile, Obama has a million little seemingly mad czars behind him busily deciding which of us will get lifeboats, which will get Flotation Devices and which will simply be privileged to go down into the drink for the sake of the collective, because he seems unwilling to try to turn things around.

My email is becoming a daily and disheartening challenge. The hate mail is easily disposed of, but increasingly it seems I have friends who believe that they should send me links to literally everything they are reading – and some of it is good, but I can’t keep up; it feels like every day I am a bit more submerged in email, and it’s going to drown me. Today I did one of those purges that I always regret, but sometimes must do; I went through the email, checking off nearly every box, and just deleted the lot of it.

I hope that’s not rude, and I did try to respond to those emails that seemed to need a response, but I just couldn’t take another “This Travesty Shall Not Stand!” email or another “Sarah Palin is God’s Gift to America” link. I’ve decided we simply cannot have it both ways: America cannot be both “facing the wrath of God” for its sins while also being “blessed with Sarah Palin.” Either we’re in deep doo-doo or we’re being blessed, but I don’t think we’re being both simultaneously – and if you think America is “due” for a chastisement, well then expect the chastisement to be a lot worse than what we’re currently living with before any “blessings” begin.

In other words, if there is gonna be wrath, it’s not going to be pulled back in mid-chastisement. Not even by Sarah Palin!

Look, I think Ms. Palin has many good and admirable qualities; her story is frankly one the Democrats would love to have, and I suspect part of their hatred of her is because she is a great narrative with a bad letter (R) after her name. I also concur that she has been abominably abused by the misbegotten Fourth Estate (some of whom do indeed deserve this drubbing) and the chattering classes. Because Palin has been so vilified, I tend to give her some leeway, if for no other reason than to balance out the hate.

But, let’s keep some perspective on Palin, shall we? Yes, lots to admire, yes, great on energy, yes, she gives voice to many Americans who are feeling plenty dissed and disenchanted, just now. Yes, she’s got charisma, yes, she’s going to make the left’s heads explode. But…she’s only a woman.

I am becoming very leery of the Cult of Sarah that seems to be springing up. It may not have the troubling messianic overtones of “greater than god” and “more Catholic than the pope!” Obamamania (and unlike Obama, I doubt she’d encourage that) but there is still a vibe to the Sarah-Celebrating that feels a little desperate and clinging, and not wholly healthy.

I know people are protective of her – as I implied, I am too a little, because of how she’s been treated – but when I see people refer to a politician as “my Sarah,” and “our Sarah,” I get concerned. Supporting politicians should not preclude recognizing their weaknesses. Even I – an infamous “Bushbot” – could admit that he was an awful communicator, that his WH was even worse, that he did a dreadful job of telling the country why we were in Iraq, to begin with, and that he needed to make some serious personnel and direction changes ‘way before 2006. Sarah-supporters who cannot admit – at the minimum – that she needs a good speech-writer and some first-class advisers and handlers if she is to make progress, should consider that we don’t help our pols, or our country, when we give them passes on everything, either because he makes us “feel good” about electing him or she makes us “feel represented” in the public square.

Ronald Reagan’s current hagiography may give the impression that the right loved him with unquestioning ardor, but the reality is he too endured some criticism from his own side, even from the far-right and that was probably a good, and healthy thing. It’s one thing to have an ideology – it’s another thing entirely when our ideologies become our idols:

If we are determined to shut out whole blocks of people because their thoughts are not ours, their ideas are not ours, their beliefs are not ours, then we’re doing democracy wrong – we’re turning it into something else. And I don’t think the “something else” is necessarily a good thing.

Barack Obama was quite wrong to allow Nancy Pelosi to literally lock the GOP out of the writing of the “stimulus” package – it must be said she (and Obama) also locked out a Blue Dog Democrat who had good ideas, in pursuit of a policy that was ideologically “pure” from the far-left’s perspective.

The Big CIA “secret” that we all knew in 2002 and more related here. Plus, how much damage did the NY Times do, while it worked to screw the Bush administration?
Obama’s Abortion Administration
Did Ruth Bader Ginsberg let the Abortion/Eugenics cat out of the bag?
Americorps: Still stonewalling on the firing of Inspector General. That’s an abuse of power story the press is ignoring. When Bush fired 8 US Attorney’s who served at the pleasure of the president, it was a “scandal” and an “abuse of power.” Obama fires IG’s and does so while breaking a law he helped to write – the press ignores.

About Elizabeth Scalia
  • dry valleys

    I wrote a massive comment to this. It seems to have just died somewhere after hitting send.

    Not minded to reqrite it & can no longer even remember what I said- don’t suppose it is hanging round somewhere in one of your folders, magically?

    That’ll teach me not to think I’m clever :)

    [It's not in my spam filter, so I don't know what to tell you! If you think it again, give a try! -admin]

  • narciso

    I’ll grant you Anchoress, that some of us get a little defensive about some of the comments
    made by some people who have really mis
    calculated on much of the nature of the current reality, and yet others who are considered astute observers, like Dr. Krauthammer. I would think that one should comment if they have a solid grasp of the subject.Specially when they give excessive praise to someone who really hasn’t deserved it like Romney.
    Whose staff has been the most resolute in dismissing her both on and off the record. On energy, defense, on the stimulus, all issues that curiously have not gotten nearly enough attention. Other minutia, real and illusory have filled the gap, as has happened in nearly the whole last year. The “illustrious press”, like the NY Times, gathers together splices of fact, to make almost a tableau of reality, but not one really.

  • joseph

    Take this advise from someone who not only follows politics in your country but also my native country.
    The chatter can definately become oppressive and you simply have to learn how to make sensible choices with regard to what you read and respond to.
    Many article have the same general thread albeit with additional information but unless you intend to comment on every specific issue then pick and choose.
    I know I am letting you what you already know but sometime a little confirmation is a great help.

    Concentrate on your strengths because your ability to connect your political views and what is happening in politics to the Catholic Faith is the backbone of your site and the reason that most eople come back here .
    Expand on that but do not do the frantic thing I see creeping up in your posts.

    Why not bring on board others of your friends to take care of specific sections while you concentrate on the main issues ?

    Be assured though that the main strength of your site can be built upon and is much appreciated.

    One final thing. I come from a small Caribbean state and what Obama is doing I have see in operation time and time again in politics. The idea is to pass reams and reams of legislation, to have so much going on at any one time that everyone is confused. Even if the legislation is poor is irrelevbant as you can hide a lot in a 1,000 pg document that no one reads and it keeps your adversaries on their toes and totally confused.

    [I am unlikely to invite anyone else into the blog - I'm very much a lone wolf - but appreciate the kind words. Your last paragraph is confirmation of what I instinctively feel - what I have previously called political theater, chaos and cajolery. - admin]

  • dry valleys

    Despite being a liberal & an atheist, I like you because you have obviously thought deeply about life & the human condition. I hope the same can be said for me. I think people who only talk about politics are worms, a really insightful observer will have a “hinterland” of interests.

    I actually came here intending to be a troll, but I decided to drop that because you were courteous towards me.

    [Yeah, I'm taking a liking to you, too! :-) admin]

  • tim maguire

    America cannot be both “facing the wrath of God” for its sins while also being “blessed with Sarah Palin.”

    No brainer. America is blessed. Blessed with Sarah Palin? I don’t know, maybe, maybe not. But definitely blessed with wealth, resources, space, beauty, basic decency, fundamental freedoms, an ability to make mistakes and bounce back, to follow our muse, realize our genius (or at least try) and, when we’re done, blessed to pass this imperfect realization of limitless potential on to our children to go out there and do it again.

  • MJ

    I agree with Joseph. Concentrate on your ability to connect your political views and what is happening in our country to our Catholic faith. This is what brings me back day after day.

    You help me realize I am not alone in my thoughts (and doubts) about what is going on in our country. And, the design of your site reminds us to bring all things to God in prayer.

    Yes, I feel the same way, that everything is coming at us fast and furious. Thank you for who you are.

  • That One Girl

    sorry about the e-mails… :-)

    [You're not among the excess-guys! :-) -admin]

  • bertha

    I might be a lunatic, but I actually think that I could be standing in deep doo doo and still be granted the grace of blessings. The doo doo will have a more powerful smell than the blessings at times, that’s for sure. But Christ does not withhold blessings because we humans deserve the wrath. And sometimes doo doo is the fertilizer to pay closer attention to the little bitty blessings of life and to finally do something about climbing out of the pit.

  • Jim Batley

    The whole world is in a terrible state of chassis. – Sean O’Casey in “Juno and Her Paycock”

  • joseph

    Well said MJ.

    I came to a proper understanding of my faith through my wife and I quickly passed on this site to her as soon as I saw the way it connected our wonderful and vibrant faith with everyday life and politics, just as my wife and I have been doing over the past 9 years.

  • CV

    Well as far as the CIA “bombshell” is concerned, silly me, I thought the whole purpose of the CIA was to operate covertly to bring down bad guys. I assume this is what they get paid to do. Call me cynical, but it sure looks like this “expose” is a trumped up distraction to all of the massive domestic change in the works…am I really supposed to believe that the Obama administration really doesn’t want to investigate this stuff but Holder is forcing their hand? Give me a break.

    As far as Palin is concerned (I’m a fan and I’m getting a big weary of hearing her name), I’m just glad she is finally focusing her time on such projects as writing substantive op-eds for the Washington Post and hopefully there will be more to come. I don’t know how anyone can make an informed judgement about her level of intelligence or knowledge of serious issues based on the outrageous and hysterical coverage of her we’ve seen since she burst on to the scene last fall.

  • Germanist

    Dear Anchoress, I didn’t even read all your entries and your links (will do so later); but I’m so very worried since Obama took over. I know you all do not like the Germans, but this is not the point: The USA are just giving up or sacrificing or whatever is the correct term, their leadership of the Western world!!!
    Well, you might not be concerned about Germany especially, but that’s absolutly not the point! It’s about the whole of Western Europe – at least to my mind!
    Oh my God, what will happen to us all with a Muslim President of USA?

  • Anthony

    I just got a copy of the health care bill — 1018 pages.

  • Mutnodjmet

    Every once in a while a good housekeeping is what is needed to restore sanity! :)

  • Andrew Batten

    I like, admire and voted for Sarah Palin. Still, I don’t believe she is the solution to all the World’s ills. I also agree that, if she had a (D) after her name, the press would already have carved her face on Mount Rushmore. Or perhaps Olympus.

    Part of what drives the Sarah-mania, in my opinion, is that she seems like a nice, sane, decent person. We should also not dismiss that she is blessed with tremendous beauty, which can cloud judgement.

    Sarah Palin is the rare kind of beauty that I think appeals as much to women as to men. She is gorgeous, but real. She doesn’t seem like a predator or a vamp, yet she is undeniably hot. It makes it hard to form a clear judgement about her. I hope that people–myself included–don’t overcompensate when assessing her real talents and future.

  • March Hare

    What concerns me most is this rush to get bills passed. Congress “had” to pass the Stimulus, they “had to pass Capt Trade, now Pres. Obama says Congress “has” to pass a Health Care bill by August. What’s the rush? One would think that taking time might be in order, especially since the Stimulus doesn’t seem to be stimulating much of anything.

    This rush worries me morethan anything–what’shiding behind the curtain ? The Lady or the Tiger?

  • reg

    Von Bismarck said that America was blessed with oceans on 2 borders and weak neighbours on the other 2. Of course that was before air travel and nuclear weapons.

  • Sarah Kuvasz

    Dear Miss A,

    While I love my Sarah , I’ve loved you longer. Keep doing what you do and I’ll continue to be happy.


  • Maggie45

    A very loud AMEN to what Sarah Kuvasz said!

    Thank you.

  • Kensington

    I see no “cult of Sarah.” At worst, I see some people who are overly optimistic about her chances at obtaining higher political office, and the worst any of them have done is strongly encourage guys like Allahpundit to resist piling on when the various jackals and cretins do their thing. Seems fairly harmless to me, overall.

    Nobody’s talking about her magical abilities to heal the world, hold the water back ar keep polar ice caps from melting.

    I have yet to see adoration art or Youtube videos of children being taught songs of devotion toward her. Even the most fawning of media admirers has so far managed to depict her without makeshift halos.

    So while I agree that it’s important to keep her political potential in perspective, so too is it probably a good idea to reserve loaded descriptions like “cult” for the real things. There’s a real cult right in front of us, behaving oddly and doing scary things. It’s not composed of Palin supporters.

    [You are correct that we are seeing a genuine cult before our eyes (the man is never off the television, too - keeps the thing going) and it was Obama, himself, who promised that at his election the seas would stop rising and we would have "an epiphany." He very much encouraged the cult and the messianic talk while - as I said - I doubt Palin would. There is no one currently writing songs to Palin, but if my email is to believed, some folks are just looking for an excuse to do so. I do not say there is a true cult already in existance...I merely worry that one could grow, and sadly that's because America seems as off-kilter as any misbegotten banana republic just now. The huge difference though - and what might prevent it from happening, is that many of Palin's supporters are people of faith who have no need of a fake, earthbound godling, because they already have God. - admin]

  • brooklyn

    Well stated Anchoress.

    We all understand about the email, often if I send something it is just to help, no one need review it.

    Agreed on the Cult of any politician. I feel quite validated by my support of the Bush Administration, but this has always included an understanding of flaws, as no human being, or elected official will be perfect.

    The slander of GW Bush and his Administration needed defense, for it was entirely unethical, and the attempt to criminalize continues today.

    But the leadership after 9-11 was indeed heroic, and led to the liberation of over 50 Million in Iraq and Afghanistan. A very impressive record.

    Today we see a joke in Washington. Juveniles who really are completely dishonest, and making matters far worse.

    I think highly of Mrs. Palin, who is a fine American, but share in your concern for the Cult. The hype never matches the reality, and we watched similar fashion which surrounded Fred Thompson. The end result only empowered the weakest candidate to oppose the corrupt Democratic Partisan Machine.

    One hopes this fashion which seems utterly based on emotion, doesn’t only enable the likes of Pelosi, Obama, Reid, etc., further.

    It is surprising, at just how bad it has become. Lies about earmarks, lobbyists, tax cuts, signing statements, transparency, GITMO, etc. With a Partisan Pork spending spree that has only made the economy much worse, as unemployment grows to nearly 10%, and threats of massive taxation in the guise of CAP and TRADE based on fictional Global Warming conceptions.

    It is getting to be a parody of a parody.

    One could not right more embarrassing fiction. The Democratic Party doesn’t look as if it could manage a lemonade stand. With Nancy Pelosi continuing to lie about the CIA?

    Oh my…

  • Ken

    If Palin deserves leeway in order to balance out the hate, then Ted Kennedy deserves the same. Clearly that’s no way to judge a political figure.

    The case against Palin on policy and on behavior is clear. Christian conservatives ought to quit complaining that she’s been mistreated, and try rebutting her critics.

    [There are plenty of people ready and willing to rebut Palin's critics on the issues. Except Palin is rarely criticized on issues. And comparing her to Kennedy is rather odd. Kennedy has managed to have a long senate career sitting on powerful committees after behavior that would have killed any other person's career. I also don't know that Kennedy is especially hated. The press certainly adores him, and I know many Democrats who do as well. Try another comparison, perhaps? -admin]

  • Jack


    Thanks for linking to that Treasury report and that graphic, which is devastating.

    I used to be a measured, optimistic sort of person, but from the data, it’s impossible now to conclude anything other than that the Obama/Democrat government is deliberately destroying the economic future of our children. The signs are all there:

    - spending at a $1 TRILLION deficit
    - tax revenue drying up
    - businesses fleeing the country
    - unemployment in double digits
    - t-bond rates up significantly, meaning the US govt is in deeper hock to China et al
    - inflationary pressures increasing
    - no end to government spending in sight, more spending on the way

    Obama and Emanuel need to be shown the door, fast.

  • Anthony

    Sarah Palin was my first choice for McCain’s VP, though I figured there was no way he would do it.

    That said, I cannot support her in 2012, after her walking away as she did.

    I was living in Chicago, and now live in Park Slope Brooklyn. You want to talk about Obama worship? With the possible exception of a few of the old Italians, I think I am the only person on my block to have voted for McCain.

    And while I am an idealist about America, I also take this biblical phrase to heart — “Trust not in princes”

  • Bill Harnist

    That is the price one pays for administrating a blog. Too much, too fast, too hectic, too fragmenting. It will make us ill, both physically and mentally.

  • Brian English

    March Hare:

    The rush to get all of these monumental changes in American society passed as quickly as possible is motivated by a fear that after the 2010 elections the window to make those changes will have been slammed shut. Once the programs have been established, they will be difficult to reverse.

  • JJM

    “If we are determined to shut out whole blocks of people because their thoughts are not ours, their ideas are not ours, their beliefs are not ours, then we’re doing democracy wrong – we’re turning it into something else. And I don’t think the ‘something else’ is necessarily a good thing.”

    Indeed. I’m no fan of batty old Noam Chomsky’s politics but he was right on the money when he said, “If we don’t believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don’t believe in it at all.”

    I must say I do like this line: “It’s one thing to have an ideology – it’s another thing entirely when our ideologies become our idols.”

    That’s a keeper. Thanks!

    Chin up! Do what I always do when my patience is tested: get out my little pocket rosary and offer it up.

  • JuliB

    I agree with Joesph who said to concentrate on linking faith to your posts. (I may be lumping his ideas in with others, since I read all of the other comments before replying.)

    Dry Valley – I was an atheist for 25 years – welcome to the blog (and a liberal for maybe 5 – I was brought up in the liberal “faith”, but left that much sooner). The Anchoress has helped me open my eyes to being a more fair person. I am truly happy to see that she has a diverse following!

    About my Sarah – I LOVE Sarah. I wished she was running for Pres with McWhathisname running for VP. I would vote for her again in a heartbeat.

    That said, I hope she doesn’t run but instead becomes a force for expressing many of our conservative thoughts and helps to get the more true conservatives elected. She can be much more effective as a king-maker, so to speak, then a ‘king’ herself. And that way, she can stay just the way she is.

  • Ken

    Kennedy is hated by the conservative media, especially talk radio. On the issues Palin has a very thin record and has been a flip flopper. And then there is the character issue, the numerous instances of decidely un-Christlike behavior. I’ve posted examples and links to more examples here and elsewhere, and no one replies.

    [Oh, right - I forgot who you were - you're the Palin obsessive who has tireless energy for this stuff. Admin]

  • March Hare

    to Brian English:

    “March Hare:

    The rush to get all of these monumental changes in American society passed as quickly as possible is motivated by a fear that after the 2010 elections the window to make those changes will have been slammed shut. Once the programs have been established, they will be difficult to reverse.”

    I can only hope that the window will be “slammed shut” in 2010. I also agree that once these programs have been established, they will not be reversed, much like Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid, although Welfare was reformed.

    I am worried that the Press doesn’t seem to find this rush to legislate worrisome and worthy of investigation. I am not a conspiracy theorist by any stretch, but I wonder “who’s zooming whom”? Where are all the young reporters who want to question authority and make a name for themselves? Are they all intimidated? Have they all drunk the Kool-Aid? If you & I are concerned that something’s amiss, why aren’t they?

  • Ken

    No, Anchoress, I don’t have tireless energy for discussing Palin. (Nice excuse for avoiding the issue again).

    I do have the energy to marvel at how a branch of Christendom I once respected has turned out to care so little for Christ-like behavior from someone it calls its own. I keep hoping someone will have try to explain.

    [I know you are going to keep trying to entice me with that spurious charge, but I am not going to bite. I haven' blogged for five years and not learned to recognize when I'm being baited by someone who - regardless of what you put before him - will toss it to the floor demanding something else - such folks consume huge amounts of time I don't have; I barely have time to read a day's news, and I don't have time to keep going over and over and over the same issues. People have "tried to explain" to you, but you keep telling us that porridge is something else. I have no cake! :-) admin]

  • Ken

    Quote one single post rebutting even one single charge I’m made against Palin. Quote one single post rebutting, not sneering at, Palin’s critics.

    No, instead, having never one attempted rebuttal yourself, dismiss me as a type.

    Is this a First Things blog I’m reading? Is this really the level educated conservative Christians play on these days?

    I just can’t believe my own eyes.

    [You're making me laugh. Thank you; I needed that. No, I still won't bite. You've been responded to and others may choose to again, if they want to. I will not since - as you've ably demonstrated - you accept no rebuttals as real rebuttals and do not acknowledge when you've been responded to in good faith. Since you are always civil, you are very welcome to comment here, but you'll not goad me into parlaying with you; I really DO NOT have time! Best, Admin]

  • Ken

    Anchoress, you are either confusing me with someone else or you are lying. Your own responses have usually seemed irritated (understandably so if you’re very busy) but have always been polite. But not one single person has addressed the substance of my concerns in regards to Palin.

    I’m struck by your claim that you really don’t have the time to respond to them yourself. What _do_ you have the time to do here? Why do you blog on political matters at all? The fact is that politically you folks have no witness. Rightly or wrongly, you have a negative witness. You’re a stumbling block.

    I spent years defending your integrity online. Now even I can no longer believe that you put love for the gospel and concern for Christian standards over partisan political gain. And for the life of me, I can’t see how you love your political enemies.

    Think of me as the canary in the coal mine. If you care about the gospel, care about communicating to folks like me.

    [Look, I AM busy, trying to read and keep up with news so I CAN blog, and also so I can write other things. I do not think I have you confused, but if I do, then please accept my apologies, but I don't think I like being called a liar, because -as all but the sickest of Bush-haters know -mistaking something is not lying. If it is difficult for you to believe that a fairly busy blogger who tends to write a lot has not got oodles of time to run back and forth on arguments, well, I can't help you. I AM pretty sure that in the past you've harped with great vigor on Palin and her "lack of Christian behavior" and you've been responded to, in good faith, by myself and others. I choose not to get involved in yet another lengthy exchange, because I do not have time to go on and on. If you have "spent years defending" my integrity online, well, I thank you for it, and I ask God to bless you for it, but I will not spend a great deal of time allowing you to assess the condition of my soul or daring me to either engage with you or be deemed insufficiently faithful by your judgment. There is a line, and this is becoming a very dreary game. You are perfectly free to assess the condition of Sarah Palin's soul - although I do not quite understand why you need to assess anyone's faith-life beyond your own - but don't you think it's a little rude to come into someone's blog and start warning them about the condition of their soul, based on their unwillingness (or lack of leisure-time) to spar with you? That seems rather unChrist-like to me, actually. I won't revisit this with you anymore. -admin]

  • Suds46

    I’m a 62 year old male, not Catholic, and not especially religious. Yet I find it interesting that my list of favorite bloggers includes you, Cassandra at Villainous Company and Neo-Neocon. I don’t read your site every day due to my lack of interest in the Catholic content (that is not a criticism, just not interested). I think what the three of you have in common is common sense, a quality that is sadly lacking in most of the “leaders” of this country these days, not to mention the voters and the MSM.

  • Scott Hebert


    I’ll step up, since our hostess is busy.

    Since I do not always read comments here, I do not know about the many examples of Palin’s ‘un-Christlike’ behavior you have cited. Could your please list one or two so that a discussion can proceed? I will point out here that, should you tell me to ‘go look it up’, then you would be giving the response that our hostess has given you, and you have refused. Do not ask me to do something you refuse to do.

    Also, as a basis for this discussion, may I ask your religious proclivities? As for myself, I am a conservative Catholic with libertarian tendencies.

    I ask for this because of Chesterton’s insightful comments at the beginning of The Everlasting Man; without being in Christianity, the only way of gaining a real insight into it is to be truly outside of it, and that is argued to be nearly impossible in the Western world.

  • Ken

    Anchoress, I didn’t call you a liar, I said you were either lying or mistaking me for someone else. Those were the only two possibilities. And I didn’t speculate on the state of your soul either.

    But you started a conversation about Palin. What I’ve said and what I stand by is that Palin so clearly deserves a great deal of the criticism she gets, that you folks compromise your integrity and you witness by whitewashing her and dismissing her critics as hateful.

  • Ken

    Scott, if you reread the thread you’ll see that I never refused to look something up, nor was I asked to do so. I challenged Anchoress to look up and post examples of posters addressing my concerns. (There are none). I’m a pro-life Democrat with an evangelical background (L’Abri, among other things), not as theologically conservative as I used to be, but enough to recite the Apostle’s Creed on Sunday.

    I’ll be glad to list a few things. For starters, she’s flat out nasty. She cackled when a radio talk show host called an old friend of hers who had declined to support her run for a governor a b. . . . . In her convention speech, she spoke of having a servant’s heart, and then compared herself as a hockey mom to a pit bull. What we’ve seen is the pit bull, not the servant, starting with her dividing the country into the elites and the real Americans and then, incredibly, mocking Obama for his service as a community organizer. She played attack dog all campaign long, stirring up anger and hatred. The FBI even noted a spike in the number of threats aganst Obama while she pursued that line of attack. And not just that shameful line: everywhere she went she lied about Obama’s association with Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, which was extremely brief and fleeting, and consisted entirely of their trying to help him, not the the other way around.

    She lies and everything, big and small. Most recently she lied when she said ethics complaints had cost Alaska $2 million. That figure was based on estimated hours her staff spent handling complaints. (Most of the money the state actually had to spend was in regards to a complaint she filed against herself in order to have it officially rebutted. I don’t blame her for filing; I do blame her for lying). She lied when she said all the ethics complaints had been dismissed ((granted, most of them seem spurious): she settled one out of court, a tacit admission of guilt. She lied about Todd’s having been a member of the Alasakan Independence Party, saying he merely checked a box he thought indicated no Dem. or Rep. afflilation. In fact, the name of the party was clearly indicated. Google “odd lies of Sarah Palin” and hit the first link that comes up and you’ll find Andrew Sullivan’s long list of other lies. I don’t have time to go through them all. She has made an inordinate number of enemies in her short time in politics. Why?

    Read “Palin’s Long March to a Short-Notice Resignation” in the NY Times. Everyone counseled her to work hard as governor and study national issues for 2012, but she spent less and less time on the job and pursued fights whenever she felt slighted. She whines when she’s criticized, for example for clearly knowing little about foreign policy or American legal history. (Oh, but as president the “Department of Law” would protect her from phony ethics complaints). She demanded to be allowed address the nation on the night of the election. She bashed the father of her grandchild when he said she must have known he and Bristol were sleeping together. What kind of an adult publicly bashes a 17-year old (And is there much reason to doubt him?)? She wouldn’t let David Letterman’s sleazy joke go, keeping it a topic of national conversation by repeatedly refusing to accept his apology. (Is that how a mother concerned for her daugher acts?)

    Read Todd Purdham in Vanity Fair, read “Baracuda” in TNR when you have the time. She’s a piece of work.

  • Scott Hebert

    I will take your post piece by piece, as you wish.

    You say she cackled when a certain event happened on talk radio. Can you please source this, as I haven’t heard of this at all until now? I can’t very well discuss something I have not heard.

    You say she has acted as an ‘attack dog’ for the McCain campaign (something I will note is the traditional role of the VP candidate, though that could mean that she should not have accepted the nomination), and that she divided “the country into the elites and the real Americans.”

    Let me point out the difference between ‘dividing’ a country, and noting a division exists. As I recall, her candidacy happened after then-candidate Barack Obama made several sneering comments regarding flyover country while in San Francisco. The ‘bitter clinger’ comments, as it were. Surely if comments regarding a division creates that division (which is a defendable point, at times), Obama created that division before Palin, did he not?

    Also, how, exactly, is this not Christlike? Jesus Christ definitely divided (or noted the division of) the people of his country between the ‘elites’ (Pharisaical self-righteous people) and the rest of them. If Palin saw a similar division, why should she not point it out?

    Could you please link posts that show how she mocked Obama about his community organizing? I’m not saying she didn’t. I simply want to understand what you refer to.

    Your FBI point is irrelevant, as correlation does not imply causation. To say that Palin caused increased threats against candidate Obama requires more than this. Are there any statements by Palin saying that people should threaten Obama at the time?

    Whether or not the Ayers-Dohrn-Obama connection is important or not is hard to state without more knowledge, I will grant. However, that applies on both sides. Also, it is a known fact that Ayers assisted Obama in his political beginnings.

    Will you accept that Obama is a politician from the Chicago Machine, who sees _quid pro quo_ as a legitimate basis of government? If so, the simple connection that Ayers helped start Obama’s political career can be a legitimate cause of concern.

    If she filed a complaint against herself _simply to deny that ammunition to the enemy_, then yes, that is a cost to the state of having her as Governor. I do not see a problem with it.

    Also, settling a complaint out of court is not an admission of guilt. If so, we have an incredible amount of guilty people in this country, including myself, as I have settled custody of my child out of court (as I was given no legal recourse).

    There may be substance to the Todd Palin issue, but I don’t see it as a huge issue.

    Citing Mr. Sullivan and Vanity Fair does nothing for you, as both are known to be incredibly hostile to Sarah Palin. Also, when I want my opinions formed for me rather than by me, I will read the NYT at that time, and not before. I can well understand your view of Sarah Palin if you rely on such traditional methods of gaining your knowledge.

    Is there much knowledge to doubt the father of her grandson? Rather, yes. At least, after the engagement was broken and he started using his new ‘anti-Palin’ status to start talking in the national media. Now, if this occurred before then, I can reexamine this.

    And if my son were the victim of such vicious attacks as those perpetrated by Mr. Letterman, _I_ certainly wouldn’t stop until I received an apology that I felt was geniune.

    Christ wants repentance, not camaraderie. You have a long list of complaints from dubious sources. What I am interested in, though, is your claim of her un-Christlike behavior. How is using Vanity Fair, TNR, and Andrew Sullivan helping to support that argument? The only possible point I can find on this is that you feel Palin lied, and lied systematically. I grant you that if she did, your case is quite strong. Your sources, however, are rather weak for this.

    Finally, I will answer a question you give in the middle with another question. You said Palin has made an inordinate number of enemies in the short time she has been in politics, and asked why.

    Jesus Christ made an inordinate number of enemies in the short time he was in politics (or religion, which was rather similar in that time). Why?

    I know the answer to the second question. It is _possible_ that the answer to the first question is the same. Palin tells the truth, and people do not want to hear it.

    I’ll be back to check on this in roughly an hour.

  • Ken

    Scott, thank you for that detailed response. I’ve just now had a chance to read it. I have others things to attend to now, but I will reply point by point myself before the evening is through.

  • Scott Hebert


    I await your response. If you wish, we can handle this via email as well. Mine is


    My email server is the email offered by the search engine you mentioned in your long post.

    On a slightly more personal level, I will note that I think taking our hostess at her word is of general utility. I have never seen her back away from an argument except by pleading exhaustion.

  • Ken

    I have sent Scott a reply rather than post here because no one else seems interested. If someone does want to follow or join the discussion, I can post my reply here.

  • Scott Hebert

    I don’t think it is lack of interest (on an absolute scale), so much as a relative lack of interest. There is definitely a difference there.

  • Elise

    Oops! I emailed you for the first time in a long time and it was about Palin (although neither critizing nor adoring). I hope I’m not the straw that broke the camel’s back.

    The part of my email I do want to pass along is this: Thank you for your blog. It was one of the major stepping stones in my move from blindly accepting what I was told about George Bush and politics in general to realizing there was a whole other side to things.

    This type of balance post regarding Palin is an excellent example of why your blog had such an impact on me.