Skip to comments.In Defense of Sarah Palin
Posted on 03/28/2010 8:28:25 PM PDT by Bigtigermike
Nothing annoys certain of my fellow conservative intellectuals more than when I remind them, as on occasion I mischievously do, that the derogatory things they say about Sarah Palin are uncannily similar to what many of their forebears once said about Ronald Reagan.
It's hard to imagine now, but 31 years ago, when I first announced that I was supporting Reagan in his bid for the 1980 Republican presidential nomination, I was routinely asked by friends on the right how I could possibly associate myself with this "airhead," this B movie star, who was not only stupid but incompetent. They readily acknowledged that his political views were on the whole close to ours, but the embarrassing primitivism with which he expressed them only served, they said, to undermine their credibility. In any case, his base was so narrow that he had no chance of rescuing us from the disastrous administration of Jimmy Carter.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
What I am trying to say is not that Sarah Palin would necessarily make a great president but that the criteria by which she is being judged by her conservative criticsnever mind the deranged hatred she inspires on the lefttell us next to nothing about the kind of president she would make.
Take, for example, foreign policy. True, she seems to know very little about international affairs, but expertise in this area is no guarantee of wise leadership. After all, her rival for the vice presidency, who in some sense knows a great deal, was wrong on almost every major issue that arose in the 30 years he spent in the Senate.
What she does knowand in this respect, she does resemble Reaganis that the United States has been a force for good in the world, which is more than Barack Obama, whose IQ is no doubt higher than hers, has yet to learn. Jimmy Carter also has a high IQ, which did not prevent him from becoming one of the worst presidents in American history, and so does Bill Clinton, which did not prevent him from befouling the presidential nest.
Unlike her enemies on the left, the conservative opponents of Mrs. Palin are a little puzzling. After all, except for its greater intensity, the response to her on the left is of a piece with the liberal hatred of Richard Nixon, Reagan and George W. Bush. It was a hatred that had less to do with differences over policy than with the conviction that these men were usurpers who, by mobilizing all the most retrograde elements of American society, had stolen the country from its rightful (liberal) rulers. But to a much greater extent than Nixon, Reagan and George W. Bush, Sarah Palin is in her very being the embodiment of those retrograde forces and therefore potentially even more dangerous.
I think that this is what, conversely, also accounts for the tremendous enthusiasm she has aroused among ordinary conservatives. They rightly see her as one of them, only better able and better positioned to stand up against the contempt and condescension of the liberal elites that were so perfectly exemplified by Mr. Obama's notorious remark in 2008 about people like them: "And it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
But how do we explain the hostility to Mrs. Palin felt by so many conservative intellectuals? It cannot be differences over policy. For as has been pointed out by Bill Kristolone of the few conservative intellectuals who has been willing to say a good word about Mrs. Palinher views are much closer to those of her conservative opponents than they are to the isolationists and protectionists on the "paleoconservative" right or to the unrealistic "realism" of the "moderate" Republicans who inhabit the establishment center.
Much as I would like to believe that the answer lies in some elevated consideration, I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that the same species of class bias that Mrs. Palin provokes in her enemies and her admirers is at work among the conservative intellectuals who are so embarrassed by her. When William F. Buckley Jr., then the editor of National Review, famously quipped that he would rather be ruled by the first 2,000 names in the Boston phone book than by the combined faculties of Harvard and MIT, most conservative intellectuals responded with a gleeful amen. But put to the test by the advent of Sarah Palin, along with the populist upsurge represented by the Tea Party movement, they have demonstrated that they never really meant it.
Whether Buckley himself really meant it may be open to question, but it is certain that his son Christopher (who endorsed Mr. Obama) does not now and probably never did. Listen to the great satirist who blogs under the name of Iowahawk, writing in the fictional persona of T. Coddington Van Voorhees VII, son of the founder of The National Topsider, which he describe as a "once respected conservative magazine" now controlled by a bunch of "state college neanderthals."
"For more than a year," Van Voorhees tells us, "I have warned that . . . the conservative movement risked abandonment by its few remaining serious intellectuals""luminaries" like "the vivacious [Washington Post columnist] Kathleen Parker, Dame Peggy Noonan, and those two mighty Davids of conservative letters, Frum and Brooks"and "being overrun by the unsightly hordes of Wal-Mart untermenschen typified by the loathesome 'Tea Party' rabble" with their "base enthusiasms and simian grunts. As is now obvious, events have proven me right."
I fear that the attitude satirically exaggerated here by Iowahawk is what underlies the rejection of Sarah Palin by so many conservative intellectuals. When push came to shove, they could not resist what Van Voorhees calls Mr. Obama's "prodigious oratorical and intellectuals gifts" and they could not resist attributing Sarah Palin's emergence as a formidable political force to "the base enthusiasms and simian grunts" of "the loathesome Tea Party rabble."
As for me, after more than a year of seeing how those "prodigious oratorical and intellectual gifts" have worked themselves out in action, I remain more convinced than ever of the soundness of Buckley's quip, in the spirit of which I hereby declare that I would rather be ruled by the Tea Party than by the Democratic Party, and I would rather have Sarah Palin sitting in the Oval Office than Barack Obama.
And How high is Obamas do know nope I stopped reading after that
It was more of an complement than an negative considering what his message is about in this article, even if he doesn’t know
With Sarah Palin we would have our first real conservative president since Ronald Reagan. She would be a breath of fresh air.
That statement kind of threw me also, and I almost stopped reading. I seriously doubt whether Obama has an IQ much higher than average. Without a teleprompter he sounds like a bumbling fool.
What evidence is there for that assertion? His great grades? His lucid academic writings? His great understanding of economics? His choice of friends and mentors?
Bush Sr.= Moderate
Dole = Moderate
Bush Jr.= We thought a conservative, second term proved he was just a moderate who like to cut taxes
McCain = Moderate
Heh--I did exactly the same thing, then skimmed to your post. Pretentious Partisan Review--I'm so sick of their pretensions--Kristol, Krauthammer, Brooks...
But he is a elitist that get’s it......the once rebels of the Reagan 80’s have become the elitists, they changed!
What the hell are you talking about? Iowahawk comes off wonderfully in this piece as a master of satire. Please explain.
They don’t read! LOL!!! They got upset because the writer said one dumb thing instead of reading an overall good piece......(kidding!)
Iowahawk’s comment was satirizing Parker and Noonan, not endorsing them..
Oh, I agree. The article ended saying that he would rather see Palin in the white house. It is strange how the pseudo-intellectuals are so taken in by Obama’s supposed intellect. Sarah Palin has coined one conservative rallying call after another she has released more original and inspiring ideas than any of the current “intellectual conservatives”.
maybe he will release those academic records.... DOH!!
You have got to be thinking of someone else other than Iowahawk-aka David Burge.
His hilarious and witty satirical pieces are always demolishing elitist tone deaf beltway type RINOs and hopelessly out of touch leftists and big government establishment types.
Obamas IQ ?? He can’t even talk without a canned speech that empty head Puppet has yet to show any basic intelligence.
Dittos, Amen etc.........
PALIN: "We don't want our Republican -- our senators and our representatives to hold hands with the Democrats if the Democrats are going to keep growing government. And why -- why engage in bipartisanship there if the Democrats are doing the wrong thing? We want our Republicans to stand tall, stand strong for smaller, smarter government, for those principles that so many independents and those in the Republican Party have believed in all these years. We want them to stick with those principles."
People need to stop writing nonsense about Obama's supposed high IQ, for which there is no evidence either from test scores or from his verbal skills without his teleprompter.
Sarah isn’t the one who said premiums would drop 3,000%.
“Nice to see iowahawk exposed for the asshole he is.”
Nice to see you exposed for the clueless individual you are.
Hint: It’s satire. Look it up.
But didn't you know? Obama is an "intellectual"...
The Center for Public Intellectuals & The University of Illinois-Chicago (UIC)
April 19th-20th, 2002, Conference
[Participants include: William/Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn, Sen Barack Obama]
April 19th-20th, 2002
Chicago Illini Union
828 S. Wolcott
This conference is part of the Center's mission of helping to create a more engaged civil society, working towards social change, fostering coalitions between theorists and activists, and combating anti-intellectualism in contemporary culture. It will be both a celebration of ideas and a rigorous examination of the roles and responsibilities that intellectuals play in society.
I. Why Do Ideas Matter? (a keynote panel)
We introduce the meta theme of the conference by hearing success stories from diverse voices discussing their experiences intervening intellectually.
Timuel Black, Chicago activist; Prof. Emeritus, City Colleges of Chicago
Lonnie Bunch, President, Chicago Historical Society
Bernardine Dohrn, Northwestern University Law School, Children and Family Justice Center
Gerald Graff, UIC, College of Liberal Arts & Sciences
Richard Rorty, Stanford University, Philosophy
III. Lunch and Public Encounters
Alternative breakout tours led by Chicago activists. Tours of Bronzeville and other communities, and visits to organizations that are working on partnering theorists with activists.
IV. Intellectuals in Times of Crisis
Experiences and applications of intellectual work in urgent situations.
William Ayers, UIC, College of Education; author of Fugitive Days
Douglass Cassel, Northwestern University, Center for International Human Rights
Cathy Cohen, University of Chicago, Political Science
Salim Muwakkil, Chicago Tribune; In These Times
Barack Obama, Illinois State Senator
Barbara Ransby, UIC, African-American Studies (moderator)
The Center for Public Intellectuals
University of Illinois-Chicago (UIC):
"Dig It. First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, they even shoved a fork into a victims stomach! Wild!"
-Weather Underground leader and wife of Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn ("intellectual"), referring to the Manson murders
Article: Allies in War -by David Horowitz
FrontPageMagazine.com | Monday, September 17, 2001
"Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, kill your parents, that's where it's really at"
--Bill Ayers ("intellectual") (1970), quoted in New York Times, September 11, 2001:
Article: "No Regrets for a Love Of Explosives; In a Memoir of Sorts, a War Protester Talks of Life With the Weathermen"
"It was at the Chicago home of [Bill] Ayers and [Bernardine] Dohrn that ["intellectual"] Obama, then an up-and-coming 'community organizer,' had his political coming out party in 1995. Not content with this rite of passage in Lefty World where unrepentant terrorists are regarded as progressive luminaries, still working 'only to educate' both Obamas tended to the relationship with the Ayers."
Article: The Company He Keeps:
Meet Obamas circle: The same old America-hating Left
Lol, I guess in some circles that does pass as intellectual discourse.
You're a jerk, hinckley buzzard.
It would be great if there was a transcript of that event, because you just know Obama agreed with Ayers on just about everything.
(((((((( SARAH PING ))))))))
A worthy read... guaranteed. :)
Thank you for posting the piece. Other than the IQ part I enjoyed it a great deal.
What a disgusting piece of you know what... no wonder everyone is confused. What a neo-con RINO... First she kisses globalist Henry Kissinger... then she’s campaigning for Traitor Hawk McLame ...Kiss of death and 4 more years of Obama . Get with the program !
People describe Obama in all sorts of ways, but when it comes down to it, he is really just steeped in sixties radicalism of all sorts, with some Reverend Wright, and third world resentment and Chicago thuggery thrown in.
Great article, can't wait for the usual suspects to come and try to whine and moan.
You beat me to it.....
Did I predict this snivvling crap or what......
I’ve never read such bovine excrement in my life. This author is a flippin idiot.
thanks, for a moment there, i thought my thread was highjacked.....with the whole IQ thing, not that it was silly but the overall point the writer was making is wort reading
I had to write-off our friend on this thread last night when he couldn’t back-up his ugly claim that Sarah Palin has trashed a ‘real conservative,’ no matter how many times I asked him which ‘real conservative’ did she trash.
Michael Savage listener. I told him I placed Michael Weiner and Michael Weiner, Democrat, NY, into the same ‘value’ category.
He doesn’t like Sarah Palin. Whoopdeedoo. I’m not impressed...lol.
Why do people assume Obama’s got a high IQ? And Sarah doesn’t?
I'm guessing he's a Paultard, or some other kind of 1%er.
I did predict it though, yes?
I was also stopped by that but then thought about it and it may be true but so what. Say Sarah has a 120 IQ and BO has 180. How does that help the country?
Carter, Clinton, BO..they are all highly educated but also the biggest foulups this country has ever known.
BTW: BO hasn’t released his school records, how do we know he has a huge IQ? We know he has a huge ego.
Intelligence isn’t measured by knowledge, but by the ability to acquire knowledge.
Sarah Palin has, and is being, proved to be a very quick study.
As Poderhertz pointed out, Biden has 30 years of “experience” in international affairs, and has never in that time turned out to be right about anything.
Combine Biden’s foreign policy council and Obama’s intellect and you get a $800 million subsidy to Hamas, a world wide apology tour of our enemies and carefully crafted insults to England and Israel, our two most reliable allies.
Unlike both Obama and Biden, Sarah Palin has actually had a real job. In fact several.
If Obama has so much smart, why can’t he formulate a complete sentence under pressure and without a teleprompter?
I curse every one of the white guilt co*k suckers at fox news. They all knew this and were too damned afraid to report it. I curse brit hume, bill andrea mackris o’reilly, roger ailes, rupert murdoch, every G.D. one of them. They did this to us.
In this context I think it means Idiot Quotient. It's how many well educated idiots you can fool into believing you are smarter than they are by speaking repeatedly about lofty goals, Utopian dreams, and empty promises. The more well educated idiots you can fool, the higher the IQ.
Sarah isn't trying to fool anybody when she speaks.
I never tire of pointing out that Sarah Palin isn’t running for President. Never has and certainly isn’t now. She is in the forefront (not leading) a movement.
Podhoretz, like everybody else, doesn’t seem to be able to keep their minds on the work at hand. Palin has chosen a job right now. Stop a socialist takeover by Democrats who see that as fairer and better.
They are wrong in my view. She is right in my view. Who cares about her intellectual skill set.
She is right.
Forget the Presidential crap. It doesn’t matter. We have our work cut out for us, and we have her on our side. We just can’t get distracted by intellectual blind alleys.
It would help if Podhoretz and other columnists with a conservative bent would just call Socialism by its name.
I will say, though, that Palin knows a great deal more about foreign policy than 0bama or his (God help us) Secretary of State, who are quite possibly the least competent individuals ever to fill that function in American government, and that's saying a lot.
Heh, I wonder what the other conservative intellectuals' think of this!
I don’t see the evidence that Obama has a particularly high IQ, and I suspect there’s a reason we don’t have his SAT and LSAT results, his undergraduate or law school grades.
still drunk on sake and yet to sober up.