Let us begin by confessing that, if Sarah Palin surfaced to say something intelligent and wise and fresh about the present American condition, many of us would fail to hear it.
That is not how we’re primed to see Ms. Palin. A pugnacious Tea Partyer? Sure. A woman of the people? Yup. A Mama Grizzly? You betcha.
But something curious happened when Ms. Palin strode onto the stage last weekend at a Tea Party event in Indianola, Iowa. Along with her familiar and predictable swipes at President Barack Obama and the “far left,” she delivered a devastating indictment of the entire U.S. political establishment — left, right and center — and pointed toward a way of transcending the presently unbridgeable political divide.
The next day, the “lamestream” media, as she calls it, played into her fantasy of it by ignoring the ideas she unfurled and dwelling almost entirely on the will-she-won’t-she question of her presidential ambitions.
So here is something I never thought I would write: a column about Sarah Palin’s ideas.
There was plenty of the usual Palin schtick — words that make clear that she is not speaking to everyone but to a particular strain of American: “The working men and women of this country, you got up off your couch, you came down from the deer stand, you came out of the duck blind, you got off the John Deere, and we took to the streets, and we took to the town halls, and we ended up at the ballot box.”
But when her throat was cleared at last, Ms. Palin had something considerably more substantive to say.
She made three interlocking points. First, that the United States is now governed by a “permanent political class,” drawn from both parties, that is increasingly cut off from the concerns of regular people. Second, that these Republicans and Democrats have allied with big business to mutual advantage to create what she called “corporate crony capitalism.” Third, that the real political divide in the United States may no longer be between friends and foes of Big Government, but between friends and foes of vast, remote, unaccountable institutions (both public and private)
Great Post! We need more, and I mean many more like this post, and more coverage of the changing political environment that has been transpiring under our noses for years now. And that change has not been good. As Palin and a few others point out the stakes run much deeper now than just right and or left ideology. And like the few who start ringing the bells on alarm, and dare to speak about this issue are ignored, and or minimized. At first, just like the Tea Party was. Our beloved republicans sold us out years ago as their answer as to how best to compete with the libdems and obtaining votes for the continuation of their professional political careers. Career first, country second is now the accepted politician motto. And now we are seeing the republican party actually fighting for its continued existence as a result of more people waking up and realizing that there is a new political battle to fight. Even now we have sides with in sides of the republican party like no other time in its history. No longer are many people willing to just hold their nose and vote for the republican brand. They are not only wanting but demanding a new type of politican who does not see government office as a career,but individual who is willing to take the flak and confront all the problems that our professional politicians have puhed all the way back to the closet, and slamed the door on them. No more campaign promises and positive talk with feel good phrases, but the cold hard truth. Many of us were hoping that palin would run on a third party ticket. Would she win. Probably not. But she no doubt realizes that just the exposure that action would take could benefit many Americans in the long run. More people would wake up, maybe enough in time for 2016 for that new breed of politician. It facinates me, yet saddens me to realize that their are still so many people on both sides that still believe that the very people who gave us all these fiscal and social problems now want them to try and fix them again. In most private companies they would have been fired. But this is government where an individual can continue to do the same mistakes over and over again, and get relected with just a promise to change. One good point though, the change in the American pschye on politics and politicians has begun, and will continue for better or worse as more and more people lose their patience and infatuation with professional politicians. The drawback, the longer till that change happens the more suffering many Americans will have to endure until they wake up and confront the elephants in the living room.
Thank you Curt for the full printing, the Times Company wanted me to register my email address which would put cookies in their cookie jar. The Times reporter attempted to be balanced and fair while writing from a cesspool of monothinkeousous which is an impossible task. He spared around half a bag here then half a bag there when the truth is (present tense) her speech was very enlightening, informative and entertaining. What is true is her words split the atom of liberal-progressive dhimmism. If the Iowa format would have allowed she could have continued for another sixty minutes and none there would be bored. That is why they hater her, she can say things and keep saying things and people keep listening. The best result could be that some members of the unintelligent groupage might, maybe might, access the speech on YouTube giving it the full 46 minutes and then just maybe, maybe it’ll happen, access her speech she delivered in the global warming snow and sleet chills of Madison Wisconsin during mid-March.
About that word “run”, Sarah ran a half marathon without fanfare during her visit in Iowa.
************** ” GAME ON ” ***********************
Hi Curt,
Thanks for posting that article from the New York Times, or as Mark Levin likes to refer to them: “The New York Slimes”. What strikes me as odd, is why the Grey Old Lady would condescend to publish what can be seen as a fairly even handed, if somewhat terse, account of Palin’s crossover ability while serving in Alaska. What the writer neglects to mention is the enormous popularity Palin garnered while Governor, an over 80% approval rating before she joined McCain’s campaign. To achieve those kinds of numbers require Republican, Democrat, as well as Independent support. Put bluntly, Governor Palin was for Alaska, and Alaska was for Governor Palin because she took both parties to task for their political corruption and back room wheeling & dealing.
Palin promises “sudden, relentless reform”, and given her track record of delivering on promises, I’d be a little nervous too if I were a member of the Washington cocktail circuit (you know who you are). The oh so privileged blathering class will be in for a rude awakening when Momma Grizzly comes to town. Better hide the young’uns, there’s gonna be trouble at the old mill tonight!
AMEN.
You go, girl. Right on.
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA
Palin has always held that view, Larry. Or did you not know?
Sleeze, that is what Washington is. Pure and simple. It “ain’t” going to change. Be real cool to see her try though, think she would give them a run for the money.
Where’s the outrage, or rather why isn’t there more of it.