At least three times last night, Sarah Palin, the adorable, preposterous vice-presidential candidate, winked at the audience. Had a male candidate with a similar reputation for attractive vapidity made such a brazen attempt to flirt his way into the good graces of the voting public, it would have universally noted, discussed and mocked. Palin, however, has single-handedly so lowered the standards both for female candidates and American political discourse that, with her newfound ability to speak in more-or-less full sentences, she is now deemed to have performed acceptably last night.
By any normal standard, including the ones applied to male presidential candidates of either party, she did not. Early on, she made the astonishing announcement that she had no intentions of actually answering the queries put to her. "I may not answer the questions that either the moderator or you want to hear, but I'm going to talk straight to the American people and let them know my track record also," she said.
And so she preceded, with an almost surreal disregard for the subjects she was supposed to be discussing, to unleash fusillades of scripted attack lines, platitudes, lies, gibberish and grating references to her own pseudo-folksy authenticity.
It was an appalling display. The only reason it was not widely described as such is that too many American pundits don't even try to judge the truth, wisdom or reasonableness of the political rhetoric they are paid to pronounce upon. Instead, they imagine themselves as interpreters of a mythical mass of "average Americans" who they both venerate and despise.
In pronouncing upon a debate, they don't try and determine whether a candidate's responses correspond to existing reality, or whether he or she is capable of talking about subjects such as the deregulation of the financial markets or the devolution of the war in Afghanistan. The criteria are far more vaporous. In this case, it was whether Palin could avoid utterly humiliating herself for 90 minutes, and whether urbane commentators would believe that she had connected to a public that they see as ignorant and sentimental. For the Alaska governor, mission accomplished.
There is indeed something mesmerising about Palin, with her manic beaming and fulsome confidence in her own charm. The force of her personality managed to slightly obscure the insulting emptiness of her answers last night. It's worth reading the transcript of the encounter, where it becomes clearer how bizarre much of what she said was. Here, for example, is how she responded to Biden's comments about how the middle class has been short-changed during the Bush administration, and how McCain will continue Bush's policies:
Say it ain't so, Joe, there you go again pointing backwards again. You preferenced [sic] your whole comment with the Bush administration. Now doggone it, let's look ahead and tell Americans what we have to plan to do for them in the future. You mentioned education, and I'm glad you did. I know education you are passionate about with your wife being a teacher for 30 years, and god bless her. Her reward is in heaven, right? ... My brother, who I think is the best schoolteacher in the year, and here's a shout-out to all those third graders at Gladys Wood Elementary School, you get extra credit for watching the debate.
Evidently, Palin's pre-debate handlers judged her incapable of speaking on a fairly wide range of subjects, and so instructed to her to simply disregard questions that did not invite memorised talking points or cutesy filibustering. They probably told her to play up her spunky average-ness, which she did to the point of shtick - and dishonesty. Asked what her achilles heel is - a question she either didn't understand or chose to ignore - she started in on how McCain chose her because of her "connection to the heartland of America. Being a mom, one very concerned about a son in the war, about a special needs child, about kids heading off to college, how are we going to pay those tuition bills?"
None of Palin's children, it should be noted, is heading off to college. Her son is on the way to Iraq, and her pregnant 17-year-old daughter is engaged to be married to a high-school dropout and self-described "****in' redneck". Palin is a woman who can't even tell the truth about the most quotidian and public details of her own life, never mind about matters of major public import. In her only vice-presidential debate, she was shallow, mendacious and phoney. What kind of maverick, after all, keeps harping on what a maverick she is? That her performance was considered anything but a farce doesn't show how high Palin has risen, but how low we all have sunk.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=brady's a catcher;2796585]Absolutely spot on. Also, bonus points for using the word mendacious, one of my favs.[/QUOTE]
The Brits are far from my favorite people. I've been fortunate enough to travel the world and I'd say the English and Scots are my least favorite people. I can't
stand their whiny, mean-spirited, sarcastic attitude. But this was not just a typical hatchet job on Americans. Notice how the writer said how far "we've" fallen, not America. This journalist absolutely nailed it. Like I said, if we elect an old man who has had cancer fout times with Palin waiting in the wings, we are truly as stupid as other countries think we are. We have become a black comedy.
[QUOTE=Timmy-y-y-y;2796622]The Brits are far from my favorite people. I've been fortunate enough to travel the world and I'd say the English and Scots are my least favorite people. I can't
stand their whiny, [B]mean-spirited, sarcastic attitude[/B]. But this was not just a typical hatchet job on Americans. Notice how she said how far "we've" fallen, not America. This journalist absolutely nailed it. Like I said, if we elect an old man who has had cancer fout times with Palin waiting in the wings, we are truly as stupid as other countries think we are.[/QUOTE]
Funny, to each his own, that's one of the things I really enjoy about them. Went to London and Wales in the Spring and loved the accent and the snide attitude. Sort of fits my sense of humor. Anyway, the expectedly lowered opinion of the US reminds me of the day after the '04 election. One of the main papers in Paris ran a healdine that said "How could 47 million (or however many voted for 'Dubya) be this stupid". They may be surrender monkeys, but they was right
[QUOTE][B]The only reason it was not widely described as such is that too many American pundits don't even try to judge the truth, wisdom or reasonableness of the political rhetoric they are paid to pronounce upon. Instead, they imagine themselves as interpreters of a mythical mass of "average Americans" who they both venerate and despise[/B].[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=kennyo7;2796694]Im sorry, i didnt see anywhere in the article where they attacked Palins physical attributes?
No serious person could honestly compare Palin's answers to Biden's. I meen say it aint so, golly gee[/QUOTE]
He started with having a problem with a wink. And while I don't dispute Palin's weaknesses, Biden was downright duplicitous when answering questions about his sudden agreement with Obama on everything.
[QUOTE=Piper;2796688]Nothing about Biden's fake tan and super white teeth(while also not answering questions inspite of all his knowledge and expertise)?[/QUOTE]
You sound like Palin!
Any pol. who opens there mouth is going to be somewhat duplicitous-it just
goes with the territory. But Palins' performance was embarassing and the UK
writer nails it. I cringed during that debate for a variety of reasons:
McSame's choice of Palin for VP for starters, the state of our Country and
truly how far we've fallen and the sheer ineptitude of Palin and her inability
to be able to answer many of the questions.
Didn't see the debate, but read some of the transcripts - either way, that is a very well written article. The Independent and the Guardian in the UK have some of the best commentary you will find anywhere in the world.
IMO the world seems to be slipping towards having our elected representatives be part-celebrities - it seems more important that they be more surface than substance.
Having said that, I actually think John McCain has the most depth to him of any of the 4 VP/Presidential candidates - damn shame he's saddled himself with one of those over-confident nincompoops who don't realise just how shallow and talentless they actually are as a running mate.
[QUOTE=Piper;2796702]He started with having a problem with a wink. And while I don't dispute Palin's weaknesses, Biden was downright duplicitous when answering questions about his sudden agreement with Obama on everything.[/QUOTE]
Winking isnt a physical attribute. Its a voluntary action designed to portay her as a cutesy, adorable innocent little hockey mom. Its fine to do, but insulting to the audience if your running for the second most poerful position in the land.