Pretty in Politics: Sarah Palin vs. the Laws of Power
Still firmly in place where the glass ceiling once hovered over Washington, D.C., is one final barrier for women in politics: the mirror ceiling.
Speaking from experience — not ego — beauty is an indisputable source of power. I have been offered cars, exotic vacations, jobs, and countless other gifts, and I’m not afraid to concede the role my looks played in these generous offerings.
But in politics, beauty is a show-stopper at a certain level.
In his bestselling book, The 48 Laws of Power, Robert Greene cautions against appearing too perfect, suggesting, “Only the gods and the dead can seem perfect with impunity.”
The human preoccupation with physical beauty, and the resulting diversion from the real issues, was never so prevalent in the national conversation as it was in the 2008 presidential election. America jumped off the bridge with mainstream media to obsess over Sarah Palin — “the beautiful conservative Republican governor of Alaska,” observed one magazine.
Not since the days of John F. Kennedy’s campaign has a candidate’s physical appeal played such a central role in the race for president. Even then, however, mainstream media did manage to avoid the easy, salacious diversion from the issues — primarily Cuba, the space program, and the economy. There were, in news coverage, occasional and brief allusions to his charm and good looks, and those of his wife Jacqueline. But it was never the central focus of coverage.
Flash forward to the 2008 race for the White House. Opinion coverage in mainstream media — as I hesitate to call it news coverage — was sounding more and more like conversations you’d hear at a frat party.
In September 2008, just two months before the election, Time.com ran a story headlined “Searching for Sarah Palin’s ‘Hot Photos.’”
Seven days later, Slate columnist David Plotz announced: “I dream about Sarah Palin. Do You?” He invited his readers to share their fantasies about the vice presidential nominee, even going so far as to set up a dedicated email account to which horny political wonks could send their tawdry tales. His verbal fawning went on and on: “She’s a lioness. … Women want to be her. Men want to mate with her.”
“Palin has suffered from a media obsessed with her appearance.”
That wasn’t her downfall. Her core ideas, incoherent speech, arrogance, abuse of power, lack of teamwork, alleged unethical behavior, failure to complete her term are the reasons lots of people don’t care for her.
Her followers are blindsided by her appearance and 18th century beliefs.
We get what we deserve.
Sarah Palin’s looks were not her biggest problem. That was secondary matter. She made the secular yuppies feel guilty by not aborting her handicapped child. This is the number one reason for their rage. 95% of them would not have hesitated to destroy Trig. You can usually tell how someone will vote by their stance on this sole issue. Palin frightens the “pro-choicers” because they rightfully sense that she could be instrumental in reversing the current laws regulating abortion.
The comments about Sarah Palin were patronising and I think betrayed a certain social snobbery. The feminist reaction is not surprising. Feminists never celebrated Margaret Thatcher’s victory because she was on the “wrong” side.
Unfortunately, nine months after the election, there hasn’t been a let up in low depth of coverage of Sarah Palin. I’ve seen entire columns and “news” stories devoted to her toes, and toenail polish, her legs, and length of her skirts, the state of her hair, and even the corsages she wears. Almost no discussion whatsoever about policies she supports, except in a dismissive, “she’s too dumb to know anything,” way. I have a sinking feeling that the media will stay in the shallow end of the pool when it comes to Palin, because so many of those doing the writing exhibit personal shallowness.
That’s is true that we all are a bit too much preoccupied with her look. But with that comes the recognition that her look is as much a proof of a natural gift from the nature as a result of an eneormous hard work and a self discipline (have you red the article “I’m A Runner” in Runner’s World?). Without that hard work and discipline, she wouldn’t be able to maintain that incredible beauty.
This is the recognition of her discipline and ability to work hard, coupled with our acknowledgment of her accomplishments as a Governor of Alaska that makes us so enthusiastic about her. Her look is really a secondary issue.
Those are the degenerate Leftist “mass-media” or rather we should say, the tools of a mass-brainwashing that have promoted the issue of her look ahead of her other virtues, in order to discredit her as a reliable politician and a leader.
Plus the envy and generated by that envy almost atavistic hatred of human hienas like Dowd, Noonan, Parker, Bernar. Envy of her having such a handsome, hunky husband and obviously succesful sexual life.
This is what drives them MAD!
Now with false rumors of a divorce? Plouffes’ squads are shameless- disguisting.
Palin’s resignation obviously puts yet more pressure on Obama to finally get some results, as the soaring rhetoric isn’t hypnotizing the plebes like it used to… and now there’s another viable alternative waiting in the wings.
The porkulus is a train wreck, all it’s done is bump interest rates and tank the dollar. We are being laughed at by bad guys like Tehran, Pyongyang, and Al Qaida who amazingly turned-down Barack’s friend-requests.
IMO Palin could trounce him in 2012, when Americans would vote for the Gipper-in-Heels in droves- they’ll surely being looking for such an antidote to the Bolshevik con-artist who’s currently taking a wrecking-ball to this society.
Go get ‘em Cuda-
The 2008 campaign provided many insights into what it is like to be a female in American presidential politics. Sexism and lookism is alive and well in the USA and what surprised me was the hatred coming from the left.
The media undertook an orchestrated(?), concerted effort to undermine Hillary and get her off the stage because she was ruining their favorite’s chances for a clean sweep. But Hillary persisted. The more they told her to “sit down” and “shut up” the more she stood up, for the people who were working with her and for the American people. The Hillary that I saw in late March through June was a display of personal courage and professionalism I will never forget. She blew the doors open for women everywhere. And soon thereafter, in walked Sarah Palin.
Why did women on the left hate her so much? I am not the one to explain it, then or now. If you see the world through the lense of identity politics, then I guess a popular, attractive, female Republican is a threat.
What I love about super-smart Hillary and beautiful Sarah (if we have to label them) is their persistence in the face of such nasty, public personal criticism. They resist every effort to be defined and limited by how others see them. Even if you dislike one or both, can you fail to respect the strength of their spirits?
One last thing about these ladies–I have never doubted for one second that these two were anything other than patriotic Americans, who would fight for us all to be stronger and for America’s better days to be in our future. They would not have allowed the policies of generational theft the current administration has pursued.
I hope next time we are considering candidates for the Presidency that we look at the whole person. Maybe next time the “cool kid” doesn’t get a free pass. No one else ever has.
The problem here is more straightforward than you seem to realize, Karen.
The media was doing its level best to tank her, for ’08 and the foreseeable future. They KNEW what they were doing, and the specific way in which they went about it was irrelevant. It was the PURPOSE of this assault that is the lesson.
If she had been fat, old and ugly, yet still inspired her base through her devotion to principle, there would have been endless ‘fat old ugly’ jokes. The media was and is dedicated to making the mention of her name a matter of rising bile among as many people as possible. Her attractiveness was just a lever to pull toward their goal.
“public allowed the media to divide their attn. to Palin” —
what comes after “public allowed media to… ” is not relevant. The media did it, and the inattentive public let it happen. This is how they roll, this body of leftists called media.
Lately, recently, the public has grown ever more awake. I’m enjoying it, and hope the volume continues to rise. The media/politics lefty crowd is on their heels and fearing the future, as it should be. They have gone too far, been too ugly, strayed from values and American principles too long and too widely, and their standard bearer Obama is now genuinely frightening people with his radicalism.
THe media SHOULD go down in flames right along with the narcissist in chief. How it happens is irrelevant, just as how they attack Sarah is irrelevant. They do what they must. Time for them to pay the price.
Now, how does that Temptations song go, Ms. Northon? Oh yes:
“Beauty’s only skin deep, yeah, yeah, yeah…”
Forget it. That’s only the “innocent” excuse (SEE: “distraction”).
It’s the power. Palin used power in Alaska to effect constructive change (i.e. “governing” versus “power brokering” a la Chicago Thuggery).
ALSO: Her life has exhibited traits which are anathema to Leftist hypocrisy.
Think: RAIN to the Wicked Witch of the West in “The Wizard of Oz”.
Unfortunately, the mirror ceiling affects only women. Reporters swooned over Obama’s looks – one openly admitted lusting for him – but that didn’t affect their opinions of his competence.
Well the liberals sure don’t have that problem with Hillary or Nancy. That must be the key to their success. An evil mouth , an evil mind and the looks to go along with them. The real problem with Sarah is, that she speaks to the American people in words that American people understand, and that will never do. Even the GOP don’t like her for that reason, they like losers like McCain. I for one will vote for her if she runs.
Of course, her physical appearance had absolutely nothing to do with her being picked, the pitbull with lipstick was simply the best and the brightest.
This is classic right wing media baiting buffoonery: blame everything on the baaaad MSM media, like trying to pin the Birhters on Chris Matthews.
I’ll tell you what turns me on about Sarah Palin.
She talks limited government, governs as a fiscon, is pro-life, cutting taxes, for business particularly small-business, for getting more of our energy needs met from domestic sources, and keeping our defense strong.
I’m a Reagan bigtent conservative. Of course when she talks like that it TURNS ME ON. DUH
** Not since the days of John F. Kennedy’s campaign has a candidate’s physical appeal played such a central role in the race for president **
All my life folks have been saying that JFK was good-looking. For a long time, I went along merely because I though people knew what they were talking about.
But I gotta tell you, if you really want to know, JFK wasn’t all that good-looking — indeed, most of the Kennedy clan is fairly approaching hideous.
It is amazing though how so many of us can get sucked in to the MSM’s spin and hype, and actually believe that such nonsense is true.
I’m not sure what happened to my comment, which was that I think there is an element of social snobbery in the patronising treatment of Sarah Palin. This was also evident in attitudes towards Margaret Thatcher, whose victory most feminists did not celebrate.
An inoffensive comment if ever there was one, so I am at a loss to see why it got moderated out.
I agree with 6. LeighB. Hillary gained my respect during the last half of the ’08 campaign. I don’t agree with most of her politics, but that does not exclude respect, right vivo?
Vivo, what’s your take on the treatment that Hillary received? Just politics as usual? Could that possibly be part of the reason for the media’s treatment Sarah as well? If Sarah rose to the point she did, could she possibly be what you describe? If she is, then your conclusions reflect on quite a substantial portion of the population in this country, and on you as well. All those people, all morally flawed in some way. Just kulaks…
And bringing up Republican/Conservative /PJM poster misdeeds as an equivalency argument does not wash with me. If they are wrong, then so be it. Show some class, respect your opponents for what’s good in them, rather than being wholly critical. That’s too easy. And please spare me the Hitler type comparisons.
And on Sarah quitting, how many people have quit a job? How many would like to quit their job right now – but are trapped by circumstances?
It is sickening to watch liberals viciously attack Governor Palin, but it shows the world who liberals really are…PHONY!
The way liberals attacked this conservative woman is worse than anything ever done to a liberal, yet they scream for protection if conservatives dare to call them on their transgressions.
It is sickening. It is disgusting. And any liberal that defends what was done to Governor Palin and her family is offering up to us his/her true inner self. THAT is an ugly thing to see.
Well, I can’t imagine what the moderator’s agenda is, when a well-reasoned and temperately argued comment – from one of PJM’s regular writers too – keeps getting delete.
I am quite at a loss.
I’d second Cat’s observation (#9), but with some qualification. John Edwards’ looks only hurt him when that primping video appeared, and I doubt that many Democrats or liberals even saw that. And Mitt Romney is a very good-looking man; in a lot of ways this worked in his favor, but some faulted him for it, saying that he seemed too plastic.
John McCain was fighting an uphill battle (his predecessor was blamed for so much)and he picked for his VP a person who is even less coherent than Borat.
In the State of Washington, we had a governor from 1977 through 1981 who was a professor of marine biology, turned chairman* of the atomic energy commission before running for office. Nobody’s fool, and by the time she ran for governor, too old for attractiveness to matter. She was a Democrat, but not well liked among the party apparatus, because she tended toward the libertarian.
The feminists didn’t get particularly excited about her, either. Like Thacher (in many ways), it was all about ideology and agenda, and didn’t have anything to do with appearance.
____________
*She insisted on using the term “chairman” rather than “chairperson” or some other PC construct, because “chairman” was in the statute. As a scientist, she was maddeningly logical, and drove the political types up the wall.
Mary, I think it’s a site bug. I don’t think there’s any censoring going on, but comments often go to limbo for random periods of time.
LeighB, I am totally in the tank for the Beautious Sarah, but I do want to respond to your comments about Hillary. I’ve never seen the evidence of any particular brilliance or super intelligence about her. As a politician, she was God-awful, and her only credentials were that she was married to a politician, and had his ear on policy questions. But I will say this about her: She may have been a total Commiecrat, but I think that she is at least an honest patriot, and would fight to defend this country. And that is something that Obama will never do.
14. Bender: “But I gotta tell you, if you really want to know, JFK wasn’t all that good-looking — indeed, most of the Kennedy clan is fairly approaching hideous.”
‘Beauty is in the eye……..’ What was striking to my mind about Kennedy was his relatively young age at the time he ran for POTUS. He may have not been the best looking of all but one must give him credit for charisma and an ability to uplift and motivate people. He was also a fiscal conservative (another big point in his favor).
22. Calvin Ball: “Mary, I think it’s a site bug. I don’t think there’s any censoring going on, but comments often go to limbo for random periods of time.”
I have noted that as well while posting on another thread; ultimately though the posts did appear as typed. Also, I note today that the site is not remembering my name and email despite having the ‘remember personal info’ checked. Dunno though if maybe my Firefox settings may not be quite right (browser recently updated to a newer version).
There is no doubt SP is a ood looking lady and that would weigh against her being taken seriously in a male dominated environment. Harriet Harman aka Harriet Harridan, the deputy leader of Britain’s Labour Party, is not by any stretch of the imagination good looking. So why has she been railing against the sexism of her party’s hierarchy this week? Hattie it seems wants gender quotas for the top jobs.
But isn’t that an admission that women cannot compete? Better to get up their without affirmative action like Maggie Thatcher and Angela Merkel did.
Once again, here goes VIVO, our resident soldier against logic and reason:
VIVO states: “That wasn’t her downfall. Her core ideas, incoherent speech, arrogance, abuse of power, lack of teamwork, alleged unethical behavior, failure to complete her term are the reasons lots of people don’t care for her.”
How does one react to Vivo’s bather without expending the better part of a whole day?
Let me try to be brief by breaking down Vivo’s “arrogance”:
1. Palin’s “core ideas”: Oh, this is what turned people off? Her core ideas include limited government, the radical idea that people should be self-sufficient, and otherwise should be left to do what they wish. Oh yes, very offensive core ideas.
2. Palin’s “incoherent speech”: I don’t know what Vivo means here. Can the woman be a bit rambling at times? Yes. Was she a bit flustered in interviews with “news men” who were more concerened about attacking her, as opposed to just seeing what she’s all about (Remember when that tart Charlie Gibson asked Palin for her view on the “Bush Doctrine”, which is something that was yet to even be defined? A week later he asks Obama, “How does it feel to run for President?”). Yes. Incoherent? Never. You want “incoherent”? take the teleprompter away from Obama and you’ll get more “hmms” and “ahhhhs” than peanuts in Georgia.
3. Palin’s “alleged unethical behavior”: Well, at least Vivo got the “alleged” part right, because that’s all it is: “alleged”! I guess you can allege alot of things about someone when you flood his or her little town with 30 lawyers paid to dig up dirt. Oh, what was that? THE PAID LAWYERS DIDN’T FIND ANY UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR? Again, Vivo The Leftist being dishonest here.
4. Palin’s “abuse of power”: What is that? I guess “abuse of power” is in the eye of the beholder, as when Obama orders the dismissal of charges against Black Panthers who quite clearly intimidated white voters with physical violence at voting booths in the last presidential election. Does that bother you Vivo? Or are you much more infuriated by Palin, who fired her lame brother-in-law for not doing what the People of Alaska paid him to do? Oh, I forgot, leftists like violent Black Panthers.
5. Palin’s “failure to complete her term”: Oh yeah, I forgot…this is why I hate Palin. It had nothing to do the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS in legal fees she incurred fending off the paid Democrat “Mudd-Digging” lawyers (see point 3 above), or the fact that she spent an average of 3 to 4 hours of every work day responding to made up ethics charges (none, of which have gone anywhere). Yeah, she’s just a quitter. That’s why we all hate her. Retard.
Remember everybody, a leftist is a person without the facts or who is driven by ideology, which is often supported by a psychological or emotional issue. The leftist will worship at the feet of their oppressors while the oppressor steals their very freedom. This is why Vivo has a hard time seeing why he “hates” Sarah Palin.
Agreed. PDS isn’t comprised of ordinary contempt and hatred. It’s a phenomenon unto itself. It reminds me of the old Susquehanna Hat Company routine:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WIQ67vRg6c
PDS is simply beyond any rational explanation.
AS on cue, the usual right wing moronic fanatics come out to prove that tehy love her cause she is not only smug and stupid, but proud of it like they are.
Mr. Thompson, what you said is utter garbage, but simple minded fanatics always come up with simplistic trash that reflects their hate and fanaticism more than their shallow observations about millions of people they know nothing about.
James C.
typical right wing garbage and cheap liberal baiting. You are obviously so mean and simple minded that all you can do is parrot back the garbage that some talk radio hosts or pundits put into your tiny mind. Vivo made a heck of a lot more sense than your utterly banal, imbecilic Limbo rant.
Funny, how all these right wing morons, who drip utter hate and fear for everyone that doesn’t share their anti-intellectual 1 dimensional world view, should be the first to jump up and project their hate on to anyone else who disagrees with their childish rants
I can understand those who supported her till they lost, but anyone who supports this shallow derivative know nothing quitter, who ran a state dependent not on tax dollars but on federal subsidies and mineral revenues, and flirts with secessionists politics then masquerades as a small government person and patriot, all you are telling the 97% of the rest of the world is that it is safe to ignore you weak crackpots
Mr. Lucky and Immanuel et. al., Appreciate hearing your views. I admit to having a Hillary bias and enjoyed volunteering for her campaign in two states other than my own. In other terms, I guess that makes me a “Reagan Democrat”, “Blue Dog-D”, and my favorite, a “Jacksonian Democrat”.
You know what I also like about both of these ladies? They love the military, they understand what sacrifices we are asking people to make and understand negotiating from a position of strength. And just because I’m thinking about our service people stationed away from home, come back safely (and I love you too).
Calvin Ball
You are the one who suffers from PDS, you are stupid, petty and small minded just like her. But like the mindless Bushbots, who you probably are, you just simply turn any legit criticism against her back on the critic so your childish idol can remain pure in your childish eye.
As for the quitter part, why aren’t you equally mad at Kathleen Sebelius for the same reason? Also Janet Napalotano, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and Obama himself. All of them resigned from elected positions before their terms were up. It happens in politics all the time. Why is only Sarah held to a standard that nobody else is held to? And as far as Obama himself is concerned, the voters of Illinois should sue him to recover his Senate salary, since he quit on that job from the moment that he got it.
Mary Jackson:
Yes there is snobbery, reverse snobbery, Palin supporters celebrate their stupidity, ignorance, fundementalism, backwardness as if they were virtues.
PS I really love the way that twit tried to use the troops to attack her critics, as if the troops in the field really care about her and her silly self caused problems. But if you are a morono-con, you drop to your knees anytime someone mentions God, Guns, or the Military
As for her being a quitter, why aren’t you equally mad at Kathleen Sebalious, Janet Napalotano, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and Obama himself? All of them resigned from elected positions before their terms were up. It happens in politics all the time. Why is only Sarah held to standards that nobody else is held to? And as far as Obama is concerned, the voters of Illinois should sue him to recover his Senate salary because he quit on that job the moment he got it.
Beauty, Brains and a CONSERVATIVE? :SHOCK:
GAWD FORBID!
It’s a good thing Sarah wasn’t black too or she would have been called a ‘race traitor’ on top of all the other crap that has been piled on her and her family.
Off-Topic: Yeah, PJM is glitchy this weekend! My ‘info’ isn’t being saved either and I can’t always tell if my comments have even made it through to even be moderated. Weird.
Horace, Horace, take your meds buddy! I can tell you cold turkey’s not cutting it!
If you’re addressing someone, spell their name correctly.. Thomson
Your vitriol, personal attacks, most invented (Limbo rants..hahaha) by the way. You’re truly showing your ‘intellect’ by your jabs at such nonsensical, juvenile, freshman liberal studies major attempts.
Living in Alaska we saw firsthand the nonsense she’d gone through. I can’t say I agree with her decision to resign but that’s her own family affair.
As for Vivo’s ‘We get what we deserve.’ I’ll say this. I don’t deserve some empty suit with NO Executive experience deciding my future.
Lastly, Alaska is a heck of a lot bigger than little dinky Delaware V.P. Gaffetastic Biden helped run amock.
Check out the unemployment rates between the 2 states, heck include Illinois in the mix and tell us how things fare.
I guess SP’s biggest mistake is not running around with a teleprompter. Yes, she does appear to be a bit flaky at times, but BO would sound this way all the time if it were not for his famous teleprompter nearby to keep him on the straight and narrow. Without it, he promptly inserts foot in mouth and starts to chew. Fact is that those on the other side refuse to cut SP any slack whatsoever in the manner in which they do for one another and hold her up to an impossible standard that no one else (particularly them) could ever achieve.
29. Horace Wells:
“AS on cue, the usual right wing moronic…”
“simple minded fanatics always come up with simplistic trash that reflects their hate…”
“typical right wing garbage and cheap liberal baiting…”
Speak for yourself, Horace. You are the epitome of hypocrisy on two legs.
The Left wants to destroy Sarah Palin because she embodies everything the left rejects; she has true beliefs, morals, & believes in God. The Left believes in nothing save themselves.
“I guess SP’s biggest mistake is not running around with a teleprompter. Yes, she does appear to be a bit flaky at times, but BO would sound this way all the time if it were not for his famous teleprompter nearby to keep him on the straight and narrow”
I would like to amplify this point. not only would BO sound a bit “flaky” if unscripted, but so would we all. Any of us, even the most firmly principled and well educated, would make plenty of mistakes if constantly asked about unforeseen events that we are in the middle of dealing with–if we chose to try and answer them honestly, and to the best of our present ability, at least. This is important, because it raises the question of what kinds of politicians we want–smooth, scripted and relatively error-free; or spontaneous, open, and interested in keeping citizens closely tied to political processes. The only example I can think of of the latter type of politician was Rudy Guiliani, in the days immediately following 9/11–he was authoritative and modest, took responsibility while acknowledging all that he didn’t know and that was beyond his power. And certainly something that is very appealing about Palin is that you don’t know what she is going to say or do next. If we want more of that, we will need a very different media than we have now, and if we want a different media, we must respond to those “gotcha” moments all politicians provide in plenty differently. We should focus on everything politicians say, of course–very often, the slip-ups are clues to their real thinking–but we should avoid the feeding frenzy that follows from insisting on “corrections” and “apologies.” It would also be good to keep generating a lot of different “narratives,” so that what seems to be a mistake in one can be an interesting suggestion in another. And I think this will help conservatives, because the more rigid, carefully scripted narratives are the Leftist ones that have been in place since Vietnam and Watergate, or even further back.
The ugly opposition to Sarah Palin
On the subject of beauty and power I willingly defer to the informed ideas of the accomplished Karen Northon.
But in regard to the fierce opposition to the former governor, I think the question of beauty may be more incidental that dispositive. The divide between Sarah Palin and the left, I believe, is fundamentally a proxy for that between elitism and pluralism.
She is elite, without being elitist. That is a thing the left cannot abide. The aura (self-arrogated) of moral and intellectual superiority is the liberal shibboleth for success, power and political entitlement. Elitism has the characteristics of membership in an exclusive club which rewards mediocrity and achievement alike. In the case of the former it masks, by general consent, personal and professional shortcomings. The tenured second-rate intellectuals of academe, writers and pundits for whom untested assumptions serve in the place of facts, bureaucrats and elected officials who rise by virtue of crafted appearances and in-network support rather than merit — all persons whose inadequacy is concealed under the mantle of club membership. To be sure, there are true elites in the club, but they hold the conceit that their achievements (in whatever field) entitle them to determine the course of the politea.
Elitism is not exclusive to liberals; it is all too common on the putative right. But, in my view, elitism is the defining characteristic of the left and a minor — if disturbing — attribute of the right.
Which returns us to Sarah Palin. She has elite bona fides, but she refuses to “play fair” (by elitist rules), thereby threatening to expose the the life-sustaining (read narcissist “supply”)* fiction of elitist superiority. She has shown a ‘dangerous’ and threatening willingness to name persons, things and ideologies for what they are. And that calls for circling the wagons.
*—-
Narcissist “supply” is the sum of inputs required to maintain a fictional, exalted self-image. For the narcissist it has an existential quality, sustaining the very life of the psyche. It is equivalent to the supply of drugs in substance addiction. I think that idea goes a long way toward explaining the sheer magnitude of the visceral hate-fear response from the far left.
How many other “airheads” in America could have put together an oil pipeline deal with Exxon for 60 billion dollars that previous administrations had struggled with for 30 years?
In addition, how much coverage did something positive for the state of Alaska get?
Oh, I forgot. Exxon only went into the deal because Palin is attractive. The particulars and income to the state and its residents aren’t important.
Translation:
Come on now. She wore 2,000 dollar leather suits, paid for by the Republican party, and had a 5,000 dollar a day stylist travel with her. You people are simply amazing–the party of fiscal discipline threw away tens of thousands of dollars on nothing but her appearance, and you all ate it up. Do you wonder why the rest of America thinks you’re all a bunch of dumb as a post suckers?
@vivo
“Her followers are blindsided by her appearance and 18th century [sic] beliefs.”
One wonders which 18th Century beliefs: those pesky ideas from the Anglo Enlightenment that the Founders embraced? They’re still around. But so are those from the French Enlightenment. Those cherished by such worthies as Rousseau, Robespierre and modern progressives.
As a side note to this story, I wonder if the liberals, progressives (or what (ever they call themselves) have ever thought about the reputation they have established for themselves with the personal attacks on those on the “other” side?
To me, it certainly does not speak well for the character of the writers who engage in demonizing others. All it appears to me is that it is a verbal “food” fight. Nobody wins, and is sure messy. If they are trying to find a way to be shunned by others, they are on the right path.
Her looks are Palin’s only redeeming feature and her only political asset. I don’t hear anyone on the right braying about Kay Bailey Hutchison or Phyllis Schafley. You know why? Sure you do. Because none of the male conpervatives or closeted sapphocans harbor secret fantasies about getting with the ‘Cuda. That’s it. End of story. Don’t worry. It’s OK. She’ll be around for you all to ogle for a long time. She just won’t be burdened with governing anything. We don’t want her overwhelmed by her commitments or promises or responsibilities. My money’s on a cooking/lifestyle show. Hey, I hear she’s getting divorced. Any of you hear that?
No time for full comment.
Our culture has developed a deep sickness around The Good, The True and The Beautiful. Once recognized as the goals and ideals of human life they are now regarded as frightening, confusing, purely mythical or even hateful.
Palin’s got’em. With extra.
If we must have a female leader for the failing American empire, and it seems almost inevitable that we will before long, Palin’s the best we’ve got for that spot so far — from lots of different angles.
Even her “plain folk” seeming lack of sophistication in the history soaked complexities of international throat-cutting diplomacy is archetypically American. And we could expect her, reasonably and perfectly in keeping with our best philosophical traditions to slice through many a Gordian Knot.
The glowing young Alexander to the radiant countryside Sarah. An interesting development. And one with long cultural roots of it’s own.
The rage and loathing that the left display in this context strike me as the most honest expression of their spiritual essence that I’ve seen to date.
One can only wonder why she refuses to release her medical records. Proof Trig isn’t her son?
So many questions, so few answers…
Ever notice how juvenile the Palin haters sound? Sophomoric is another word that comes to mind. Do they really think that such baseless insults carry any merit at all? You can’t marshal arguments against her policies, or her accomplishments without the most vacuous of insults. It’s like they are all teenagers, or pre-adolescents. I never supported Obama, but at least gave him the opportunity to show what he wanted for this country. And he has lived down to my worst fears of him. But for the Palin haters, I wait in vain for an even semi intelligent, or thought out argument from them. It just gets so tiresome.
How about this: imagine Palin’s mind in Newt Gingrich’s body, for example. Can anyone seriously suggest that this new Palin would be even remotely electable?
She’s learned to parrot right wing talking points. Literally. There’s very little to assure us that the concepts actually mean anything to her. Comparisons to Reagan are worse than a sick joke. She not some Reagan-in-the-making. Reagan was well-honed LONG before seeking the presidency. Has Palin given any speeches like Reagan’s 1964 address? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yt1fYSAChxs Reagan was CA governor a few years AFTER this, for 2 terms. Years later, he became president.
I think it’s a site bug.
Yes, I think you’re right. Sorry, one and all.
We can expect more from the state run media, but we won’t get it. The left is not interested in truth. Sarah Palin is light to their darkness; they must destroy her in order to hold on to their power. Their rage and attacks against the Palins do, indeed, show their true colors to anyone paying attention. Anyone who would mock and attack a baby with special needs is evil. Any parent who would laugh at the perverted and vulgar jokes against another’s teenage daughters lacks decency of any kind.
True and decent Americans long for a leader such as Sarah Palin. We’ve seen what the “Elite” and “Compassionate” politicians on both sides of the aisle are doing to our country. The state run media needs to be the first to go when true change comes to this country, and I’ll be there working for our future president, Sarah Palin!
vivo: you so funny ha ha. whats up with big O and the the gates issue…clear, decisive or incoherent, and what was big Joe doing there? somebody said beer and he showed up?
Sarah made things happen maybe because she was good looking and maybe there’s more to her than meets the eye.
horace wells: being plain folk isn’t a crime, being down for your country is how it’s supposed to be. if that makes me a bush bot or a sarah fan i’m ok with the role.
The thought occurred to me more than once. Those who say that Sarah Palin has nothing to say are engaging in plain old deception. She has plenty to say, they just don’t like it.
Man I just hate liberal/communists
You morons say Sarah Palin is dumb, and yet, she was the most successful governor in America. One of the few governors with money in the state’s bank account.
Sarah Palin accomplished more in 2 1/2years than most governors would accomplish in a lifetime.
Oh, and I guess she was stupid when she ran the largest oil and gas regulatory agency of it’s kind, huh?
Or maybe she was down right wacky when as chairman of the agency she saw massive corruption among employees who happened to be high ranking Republican party members and when her boss the governor wouldn’t let her fire them or have them arrested, and she quit.
I’m absolutely sure she must be a nut case when next, after quitting, she took down the entire Republican “good old boy network” including the governor! (whom she beat in a landslide)
Yeah, how many people went to prison, paid fines, and had to resign over this dumb broad?
Look, here’s the video that Barack Obama and the idiot liberal/communists in Alaska who have been filing the phony ethics complaints against Palin have been trying to have banned. Unsuccessfully.
This video shows Barack Obama’s direct involvement in all of the attacks!!!
See the video that Barack Obama and all of those falsely attacking Sarah Palin have been trying to have banned:
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/13302
And here is Pamela Geller’s take on the phony divorce story started by CNN employee Dennis Zaki:
Warning, there are photos of Obama’s mama he’d rather you not see!
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2009/08/cnn-tells-sells-more-lies-about-palin-its-time-to-expose-the-truth-about-obama.html
Zaki, a CNN employee is the loser who made up the story that Trig wasn’t rally Sarah’s baby, and the story that Sarah was under indictment. ALL lies from this CNN employee!
Face it liberals if she wants it, Sarah Palin is the next President of the United States. (unless Obama gets impeached before the next election) Then she will be the next after Joe Biden.
Obama is an abject failure and a one term president. This guy, is done.
Those on the Left have mastered the ability to ATTACK via character assaults as well as other shody ways of then NOT having to discuss the premise and merits of one’s Positions.
To Me, it really didn’t matter about who Sarah Palin was or is. It is what SHE stood for and what she Believed was the TRuth and how she DEMONSTRATED those beliefs within her daily life.
And that is what SCARED the crap out of the Left. They CAN’T afford for these Messages to be HEARD. And yes, that baby CONVICTED Secular Femanists where they Stood. Women who Kill their unborn children for Economic Reasons are well aware of the CHOICE they MADE. Trig is a Testament to why Choosing LIFE is the Correct position to hold when faced with a decision that would error on Innocent life being KILLED.
Just think of ALL those Economists taht DON’T agree with all this Spending from Washington. When those CHECKS come due in the Future MANY People can thank those Populist Rhetoric from the Left for causing the problems in the first place.
Sarah offered up the Fiscal Conservative viewpoint in many matters concerning Spending. So think LONG and Hard if you Think the Government can Spend YOUR Money Better than YOU CAN.
That Message will only GET Louder and LOUDER because that message resonated with millions of people. I would prefer to stand on that Rock of Truth and get Knocked off, then to Stand on the Sands of Error and Win but end up sinking in the quicksand of good intentions on the way to that road to hell.
Truth is Truth… That is the Message that will get Louder.
Vivo:
“We get what we deserve.”
What did we do to deserve an incompetent boob like Obama? Oh, I forgot. He is a creation of the media that shamelessly shilled for him and worked to destroy anyone in his way – Hillary Clinton, John McCain and, most of all, Sarah Palin. Some said if I voted for McCain we would have the dumbest VP in our nation’s history. I did and we have.
The vicious attacks on Sarah Palin reflect justified fear of the future. These remind me a lot of the attacks on Ronald Reagan, perhpas the best President of the 21st Century. “Ronny Raygun”. “Bedtime for Bonzo”. “Shallow”. “Stupid”.”Hollywood”.
How’s this scenario Angry Left?
First, President Obama becomes Jimmy Carter – he’s well on his way already. Then Sarah whips him in 2012 like a rented mule – sort of like what Ronny did to Jimmah. Then, we get another 8 years of an intelligent, no-nonsense President. Plus, better leadership in Congress.
Think about it.
I wonder what “vivo” would offer as evidence id s/h/it was called upon to answer a defamation complaint in a court of law.
The obamatites like the idea that he didn’t quit as a senator after 5 months but instead drew his salary, did not vote, but rather ran around the country, no the world (remember his world speech in germany?) on our tax dollars. That so much better right?
Just like his Czars, I read today 44, at an average of $175,000 each, reporting directly to him, side stepping the congressional process. Nothing unethical about him.
There is a bill right now in the house to make these czars illegal and here is a video by one of the Congressmen proposing the bill:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ClRQvu9ndg
Sonny, the point you made in entry 45 deserves support. Lorne Gunter is a Canadian columnist, who used to work in Ottawa, the Canadian capital, as an aide to a cabinet minister. (Up here, those who sit in cabinet are also elected to the legislature).
Here is what he had to say about the hit to the credibility that the MSM took. I would think it applies to the U.S., as well as to Canada, for the only difference between the Canadian MSM and the American MSM is geography:
Wafergate takes bite out of our credibility
By Lorne Gunter, Edmonton JournalAugust 2, 2009
Wafergate, as many in the national media are calling it, couldn’t come at a worse time for newspapers. Reeling as we are from the twin blows of so-called “new media” and the precipitous drop in ad revenues brought on by the recession, the last thing papers need is another dent in our credibility.
It’s true the Saint John Telegraph- Journal takes the big hit over the phony story that Prime Minister Stephen Harper pocketed the Communion wafer at former governor general Romeo LeBlanc’s funeral mass last month. Never, that I can recall, have I seen a paper make so grovelling an apology–front page, fully complicit, abject.
Without corroboration, the Telegraph- Journal editors inserted into an account of the funeral the claim that Harper took the host from a priest and tucked it away into his pocket without consuming it.
Harper probably shouldn’t have been in the lineup for a wafer in the first place. As a non-Roman Catholic, he is not invited to the alter. Rightly or wrongly, most Catholic churches announce during the mass that the host is to be consumed only by baptized Catholics. Non-Catholics wishing to participate in the rite are to cross their arms in front of themselves so the priests know to give them a blessing instead.
Even if Harper was not wrong to be in the line, he was wrong not to identify himself as a non-Catholic. But taking and eating a cracker he was not entitled to was a minor faux pas compared to possibly stuffing the host in his pocket.
Roman Catholics believe in transubstantiation. When Christ at the Last Supper said: “Take, eat. This is my body which was given for you…” he meant it, literally, Catholics believe. The bread becames his body. At Communion, according to Catholic theology, the bread and wine change their substance –transubstantiate–into the real body and blood of Christ.
Many other Christian churches find this concept barbaric, even cannibalistic. They make no claim that the bread and wine are anything more than wine (or sherry) and tasteless, unleveaned disks. Both are merely symbols of Christ’s sacrifice, not actual body parts.
But imagine you are Catholic and someone–the PM or not–tucks the host inside his suit jacket. It’s insulting to you as a Catholic, like a stranger refusing a meal you have generously offered. But it is also theologically appalling; the stuffer is literally sticking Christ’s body in your jacket or pants.
You are miffed and outraged at one and the same time; miffed by the slight to your practice of your faith and outraged at the abomination you have just seen.
So, yes, it makes a difference whether Harper did or did not defile the host, if not to all voters than certainly to devout Catholoics.
But as we have come to learn, there is no evidence that Harper did anything but eat the bread at LeBlanc’s funeral, as he has maintained all along.
Robert Fife, CTV’s Ottawa bureau chief, was even reporting late last week that the entire story was a hoax, concocted by the Liberals to embarrass the prime minister and drive traditional Catholics back to the Liberal party.
No one has confirmed the allegations against the Liberals, but what is obvious is that the Telegraph- Journal ran with a story containing claims of grave misconduct by Prime Minister Harper–even ran it under a massive front-page headline that screamed “It’s a Scandal”–without proof that it was true.
What’s more, the allegations of wafer-pocketing were not contained in the original story filed by the two senior reporters whose bylines appear on it.
The charges were added by an editor. This is not unheard of in newsrooms, but when the two reporters involved immediately began protesting, the rest of us should have sensed something was amiss.
For her part in the phony scandal, T-J editor Shawna Richer has been fired, and rightly so. Meanwhile, Jamie Irving, publisher of the T-J and son of the paper’s owner, has been reassigned to other duties within the Irving empire.
And the paper chose to run a front-page retraction admitting there was “no credible support” for the wafer-in-the-pocket story.
Whether or not Richer or Irving were directly complicit, what readers are left with is the impression that the Liberals made up the whole thing and pitched it to a Liberalfriendly, Harper-hating editor who ran roughshod over the truth in an effort to get a sensational story out quickly to embarrass the P. M.
The fallout doesn’t just affect the Telegraph-Journal, though. It affects all papers.
The newspaper business is struggling, even as the dissemination of news is exploding with the Internet, blogs, smartphones, tweets and so on. One thing papers have going for them is gravitas, seriousness, credibility.
We may not be as immediate as television, but we dig deeper, provide more context, offer more and better analysis to help readers develop fuller perspectives on the news.
But when an incident such as Wafergate exposes the biases of newspapers, it eats into the remaining credibility of the whole industry.
lgunter@thejournal.canwest.com
Larry,
Your answer will be nothing, I’m sure. One advantage old Vovi has is that he is the first to post on almost every article on PJM. I don’t know how this guy finds the time. I can’t make a living and keep up with this blog at the same time, so maybe he is one of Obama’s paid blog trollers.
Gary:
You morons say Sarah Palin is dumb, and yet, she was the most successful governor in America. One of the few governors with money in the state’s bank account.
You do realize that there are more people in San Francisco than Alaska. Its a part time job at best.
I saw Gov. Palin 3 times in person at rallies – what a crowd draw!!
She has more executive experience than all the other 3 candidates last Fall put together. One was a genuine war hero, but all 3 were professional debaters in the most exclusive debating club in the world. Debating – not making executive decisions.
O.T. – Karen, I must admit I had not heard of you before, looked you up, and found you had attended school in Ballston Spa – have you read Caleb Carr’s “Angel of Darkness”, set in NYC and Ballston Spa??
16. Mr Lucky:
“Vivo, what’s your take on the treatment that Hillary received? Just politics as usual? Could that possibly be part of the reason for the media’s treatment Sarah as well?”
I didn’t think Hillary was treated unfairly. Some women thought she was. Sarah was treated no differently. Again, some people disagree.
Looks like ‘fairness’ is in the eye of the beholder . . .
“If Sarah rose to the point she did, could she possibly be what you describe? If she is, then your conclusions reflect on quite a substantial portion of the population in this country, and on you as well. All those people, all morally flawed in some way.”
I stand by my opinion. I think much of this country behaves like a Banana Republic. Be sincere to yourself.
27. James C.:
“Once again, here goes VIVO, our resident soldier against logic and reason:”
You only show what you think is ‘positive’. You ignore her ‘negative’ side or are simply blind about it. Then you deflect your comments to attack others. Easy way out.
“Remember everybody, a leftist (you can insert here the word ‘rightist’) is a person without the facts or who is driven by ideology, which is often supported by a psychological or emotional issue.” Pretty idiotic, right?
36. paul_unalaska:
“As for Vivo’s ‘We get what we deserve.’ I’ll say this. I don’t deserve some empty suit with NO Executive experience deciding my future.”
We get what we deserve.
57. bc3:
“Some said if I voted for McCain we would have the dumbest VP in our nation’s history. I did and we have.”
We get what we deserve.
59. Larry Sheldon:
“I wonder what “vivo” would offer as evidence id (sic) . . . h . . . was called upon to answer a defamation complaint in a court of law.”
Heard of lawyers?
Defamation can’t stand against the truth.
It seems to me that a key difference between those who have a positive view of Governor Palin as a political leader, and those who have not is this. Those with a positive view have taken some trouble to examine closely her actual record; those with a negative view have not, or if they have, have chosent to ignore it or bury it. Particularly during her first 16 months in office, Governor Palin’s performance as Governor cannot but leave any unbiased observor deeply impressed. And it was not just in the content of her policies and initiatives, her political process skills in winning broad croos-party support was also excellent. I am not an American, and have no skin in this game, but it is at this point that you begin to realize just how desparate the American left was to bury this woman’s real record under a mountain of lies and trivia and what any experienced company person would recognise as a SSJ fest–a ‘smear, snear, jeer fest’. Yet if a President Sarah Palin hd conducted herself in the same manner as Barrack Obama has in the last six months, it would be taken as evidence of her ignorance and stupidity.
It’s a sparsely populated state, in part because of so much government management of the land (70 at last count) but it’s bigger than Texas, Mrs. Northam is forgetting that this was a deliberate strategy by the left to minimize her accomplishments, lets not feed into it.
Sarah would have made our best choice for President of all the others !! She had more experience than Obama at the time.
Please, please don’t run Sarah Palin for president. We liberals are terribly afraid of her because “her” differently-abled son proves we’re all hypocrites, or something, and that’s all you need to be president.
Sorry, but completely disagree with the author. Her physical looks had little to nothing to do with the media focus. It had to do with a successful woman, mother and political leader who did not conform to the feminists political agenda. You see the same reaction to conservative African-Americans (nothing a liberal hates more than someone who won’t stay on the plantation and be called Toby) and every other female conservative. As soon as their identity politics is threatened by someone who doesn’t conform out come the sexist and racist comments from the supposedly “progressive” side of the political spectrum.
“I have been offered cars, exotic vacations, jobs, and countless other gifts, and I’m not afraid to concede the role my looks played in these generous offerings.” What did you have to do in return and what does this have to do with politics?
“her” differently-abled son proves we’re all hypocrites, or something, and that’s all you need to be president.
Not sure where you get that from. How does her son prove anything, right or left? All she did was get pregnant and have a kid, nothing very special or interesting about that. Its not her kid at all–its the fact that she was dragging a newborn around the country for political ambition. As well as the rest of the fammily–I saw an interview of her youngest with Matt Lauer where she admitted she had lost months of school–that she admitted she was having difficulty making up–so that she could be trotted out with the other children at Republican events. That part, I think, makes more than just liberals think twice.
Blarty Blarcklebart, saying the truth can get people in trouble. Would you look inside and outside of the United States, to find these people.
For, you do a disservice to those from outside of the United States who have benefited the United States.
74. David W. Lincoln:
Come again?
I often hear references to the campaign keeping her kids out of school. Hmm, didn’t the other side do the same thing? Furthermore, this is a valuable learning experience for these kids. Don’t you wish your kids could have been on that campaign trail for two months, following a presidential campaign? Literally, priceless!
As to the article, I think the article is only partially correct. Did her looks affect some? Probably. There are always those who focus on prurient things. It wasn’t that way for me, I can assure you. She’s pretty, but her real beauty comes from within. It shines right through.
Mostly, I was taken by her record of achievement in AK. I liked how she got to where she was. I liked how she walked the walk. I liked how she spoke simply. She is derided for her simple speech, how she talks like a bumpkin. To me, this is a feature, not a bug.
Did she perform terribly in those two interviews? Absolutely! She was ill-prepared, having had no prep time, for what she was facing, and it was clearly an ambush. She was destroyed. This was the fault of the McCain campaign. She did far better in subsequent interviews, of which she did many, unlike Biden, who did none. The Obama camp kept him out of interview situations.
She has performed well in all subsequent interviews, but the attention always comes back to those first two disasters. At that point, the MSM succeeded in painting another Pub candidate as stupid. Bush 43 was a dumb frat-boy. Reagan was an amiable dunce. Ford was a klutz. Dole was a (senile, wink, wink) geriatric. McCain was erratic (senile). So it goes. Palin is not dumb. She was merely unprepared for the perfect ambushes, having no idea how brutal the MSM would be.
Moho
Do you realize San Francisco is America’s twelfth largest city and has an 8.2 billion dollar economy?
You’re a moron.
77. Marc Malone:
So tell me, Mr. Malone, what newspapers do you read? . . . OH! WAIT! My god, I am so sorry. That’s no fair. I ambushed you with that question. Please, forgive me, I was brutal. Are you OK? I savaged you, I’m sorry. Can i get you something?
Come on, is there a real man left anywhere in the conservative world? I’ve never seen such candy-asses in my life (and I’ve been a liberal for 50 years.)
Don’t run off, Marc, I have some brie and chipotle on the way.
“Men want to mate with her.”
Rather crude, but true . . . real men do.
Can you imagine mating with Hillary? Send me to the vomitorium first, I’ll gladly clean up the mess.
Some people have charm and charisma and personality, not too many in our party, more like Fuller Brush salesman and used car dealers.
Her faith, family, and love of country is what guides her. She is very conscientous of proper
budgeting, she read the stimulus, including the onerous one size fits all energy code. But the
legislature, swallowed it whole, regardless of the consequences. AS I’ve pointed out before, the Fey faux portrayal of this remarkable courageous woman, as some flighty ditz, the Plotz and other offering on the HuffPo and Salon, even the sleazy porn film by that
degenerate Jabba wannabe Larry Flynt were no accident. They were designed to obscure that Obama, the G.Q, and Esquire coverboy had no record to speak of
The Democratic Party has been hijacked by the progressive wing. Many Democrats aren’t really that liberal, I voted for Sarah and will again if given the opportunity. She is real and she can connect with people because she walks her walk. I love the fact that she didn’t dispose of her baby, everything in life isn’t supposed to be easy. Shes a fighter and I have the utmost respect for her.
You poor poor souls. I can only imagine the hurting you all must feel. Always picked on for doing the right thing. When did love of country become such a punishable offense? No wonder Palin is hot right now. She is the ultimate victim. I have always said that strong leadership comes from strong victimhood and self pity. Palin and Rhianna in 2012.
I agree that her outward appearance reflects some of her principles. Often the problem with women seeking power is that they think they have to be more masculine. Beauty interferes with this idea. Palin is threating to many feminist because she is a real woman, and not a woman trying to be a man.
David Lincoln – Wafergate. I too think that the story was blown out of proportion. However, I wonder what you and your ilk would have done if Obama had done the same thing. I can just see Glen Beck, Fox News an Rushbo frothing at the mouth
Vivo:
That wasn’t her downfall. Her core ideas, incoherent speech, arrogance, abuse of power, lack of teamwork, alleged unethical behavior, failure to complete her term are the reasons lots of people don’t care for her.
You are an ignoramus – crawl back into your hole.
86. Crancocc:
Let’s see, vivo gives 7 good reasons. You give “ignoramus” and “hole.” Tough choice. I’m trying to determine who between you two knows more about the issue and who has spent more time thinking about the people and philosophies and actions involved. Hmm. OK, you sold me, Crancocc. Wow, how do you conservatives do it? I see the light. I do. All it took was the immutable voice of passion and reason, and you got it. You got it and you’re stuck with it. I wish I had it. But not everybody can handle it. You can. You’re wonderful. You’re wonderful and you know it. The whole world knows it. Don’t waste it. Use it. Share it. It belongs to the ages. You wunderkind you. Fabulous.
Why can’t a woman be, all things? intelligent,beautiful,a leader and President?!
Being attractive is a plus+ and as a woman. I think that it is other women & sexist men who take issue and call women like Sarah Palin,a bimbo. Hoe sad-
With the campaign trail to begin, there will be no shortage of political yard signs in every neighborhood.
This blog entry by Daniel hannan, http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100005985/could-the-american-revolution-have-been-avoided/
gives pause for thought. Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan rescued the “special relationship” from the fallout of the Suez Crisis. I propose that the duo of Daniel Hannan and Sarah Palin can rescue the “special relationship” from the odiousness of those currently in #10 Downing street and the Oval Office. There will be others, no doubt, but none
higher in priority than Hannan and Palin. For Hannan is setting the pace of change in Great Britain.