“Palin-etics”: The Hobby of Palin-watching

Wow.  I can’t believe it’s almost been a year since I wrote an article on Sarah Palin- (September’s Impresaria or Imposter?) and, now surprisingly she’s back in the news cycle with a vengeance  with her same “caribou in the headlights” antics.  

When Palin resigned from gubernatorial office on the holiday weekend, pundits and common folk alike pondered what exactly was going on with the former Republican VP candidate.  On both sides of the aisle, some saw her resignation as evidence of further ethics scandals about to break, others of her natural reaction to the harsh media and legal spotlight (the same one that faces all high-profile public servants, by the way), and still others remarkably viewed it either as her “complete genius” or “utter folly” in giving herself ample time to ramp up for a 2012 presidential bid.

Personally,  I have absolutely NO IDEA what the woman’s thinking.  Of course—having listened to her rambling, unscripted press conference—I don’t think she does either.

I do know this, however: you can’t be a fighter and a quitter at the same time.  The rules of logic just won’t abide it; it’s called an “oxymoron.”  Or, if you prefer plain old English, I’ll use a fishing metaphor (the kind Palin’s so fond of): “one either needs to fish or cut bait.”

Once again, as in my previous article, I will not go as far as the writer Judith Warner did last year and feel sorry for Palin.  But, I will say again concede that balancing motherhood and working is not, and never has been easy.  Again, I can speak from personal experience in that arena, but without the added complications of raising a special-needs child or the national scrutiny that Sarah Palin grapples with.  I can’t even imagine her life, but then again, I wouldn’t have signed up for her career path.

Let’s be clear: Sarah Palin is no victim; to say so would be sexist and condescending.  She is a savvy-enough operator to know what she was getting into. And, as Rachel Maddow astutely pointed out on her show last night, Palin is circumspect enough to try to control the media-spin surrounding her resignation and use it to focus attention on (what she sees as) the issue of ethics scandals as a hindrance to her public service.  As Maddow noted, Palin’s gripe with the system is a far cry from a selfless attempt to improve our government, but functions more as a referendum on whether political constituents have the right to call their leaders into account for veering into questionable behavior.  Here, Palin appears to be a political trailblazer—the “maverick maven” in full swing.  I can’t think of a single American, other than Palin, who would argue that this type of non-accountability is what we need to see on Wall Street, Main Street or Pennsylvania Avenue.

Though a few people— William Kristol especially comes to mind—are still smitten with Palin and her chutzpah, I don’t think her lack of regard for due process and—more importantly—her shunning of the responsibility to serve her constituents for a full term outweigh any personal drama.  She should remember that she was not drafted for her office, she ran for it and won an election to achieve it.  The onus then fell upon her and her alone to fulfill her promises and her obligations.

She may call herself a feminist (at least when she’s not in Katie Couric’s company), but it’s hard not to feel that she’s giving a bad name to the rest of us working moms who try hard every day to keep it together—no matter which way the wind blows.

In the end, I’m just thankful that  she didn’t make it to the White House where the current simmering issues—foreign and domestic—make the pressures she’s walking away from (as Alaska’s governor) look like child’s play.

Joe the Plumber Springs a Leak

The NY Times has deflated high-profile McCain supporter “Joe the Plumber’s” professional credentials, as well as his much-touted assertion that Barack Obama’s economic plan would unfairly tax his future plumbing business.

You can read the news story here.

The Times ends by saying that new t-shirts have already been printed that read:

“Vote Joe the Plumber ’08—No More Drips in the White House.”

After this news, I would suggest this tagline instead: “Say it ain’t so, Joe.”

—————

POSTSCRIPT (10/20/08):

In light of the many comments I received after posting this—critiquing Obama’s economic plan vis-à-vis small businesses—I thought I’d append an article I read today by the Nobel Lauriat economist Paul Krugman.

Krugman weighed in on the debate over whether McCain’s or Obama’s economic proposals would better serve the average Ohio plumber.  His opinion?  Obama’s.  Read the article here.

“The Prince” and Pandora’s Box

“The Prince” and Pandora’s Box

As I watched the second presidential debate, I turned to my husband and said, “This may not sound appropriate in a democratic republic—but when Barack Obama sits on that stool don’t you think he looks like an Eastern Prince?  You know?  The kind shown in Buddhist images of figures in the lalitasana, the ‘pose of royal ease’?  Look at how peaceful and serene his face looks.”  

Now some folks who are already whipped into a xenophobic frenzy about Obama being “too foreign” and “too exotic” for America would OF COURSE take that kind of a remark as an unforgivable lapse in judgment from an elitist East Coast academic such as myself.  To them, I can’t really offer an excuse, nor an apology.  A peaceful, relaxed figure exuding intellect, confidence and poise is something I desire in a world leader. ‘Nuff said.

But, it only occurred to me later—in re-reading Stephen Greenblatt’s Renaissance Self-Fashioning: From More to Shakespeare (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1980) this week—that McCain, too, reminds me of a prince.  Machiavelli’s prince.

Last week’s dismal news that the McCain-Palin ticket began encouraging race-driven insults and worse from their socially and economically panic-stricken audiences forced me to realize that the Republicans are not beneath any scorched-earth tactic (ahem, strategy) to help them gain the White House. They found loads of company on the low road, and discovered it makes for easy travel.  This was as true in Renaissance Italy as it is today.

As Greenblatt points out, “For Machiavelli, the prince engages in deceptions for one very clear reason: to survive.  The successful prince must be ‘a great feigner and dissembler; and men are so simple and so ready to obey present necessities, that one who deceives will always find those who allow themselves to be deceived.’…The initiated observer can always see beneath the surface and understand how appearances are manipulated by the cunning prince.”1  As Machiavelli explains it, it is in politics as it is in nature, the fox always eats the hens; yet, the sheer willingness of the victims still inspires outrage among the socially-responsible in society.2

In response to the troubling development in the Republican campaign, Georgia Democratic representative John Lewis publicly issued a condemning statement likening McCain and Palin’s tactics to George Wallace’s segregationist vitriol.  ”What I am seeing reminds me too much of another destructive period in American history. Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin are sowing the seeds of hatred and division, and there is no need for this hostility in our political discourse,” wrote Lewis.  McCain’s response was to voice disappointment in his one-time hero for stifling the national political conversation with his accusations.

I have to ask: If we are routinely asked to praise John McCain for his veteran-of-foreign-war status, should we not also exult  John Lewis for his service in another kind of war?  Did Lewis not also suffer physical and mental anguish in the service of ensuring American freedom and liberty?  Unlike McCain, Lewis suffered at the hands of fellow Americans instead of foreign armies, having his skull fractured by police in the “Bloody Sunday” March on Selma, Alabama.  But, I believe that a hero like Lewis deserves every bit as much respect for his exceptional, patriotic experiences.  And, I also trust that he knows racist rhetoric when he sees it, and that he does not wield his opinion on the subject lightly.

For now—after the outright public disgust and outrage with the tactics of McCain and Palin—they have reined-in their poisonous rhetoric out on the campaign trail.  But, it’s incredibly frightening to imagine that they’ve already opened a post-modern Pandora’s Box, that they’ve loosed rapacious greed, envy, vanity, slander, and lying into the midst of our revered political process.

The optimistic news is that—in the original myth—a once-curious, now terrified Pandora slammed the lid closed before “hope” could escape, which would have left mankind utterly inconsolate.

Ah, HOPE.  Thank heaven for it.  And, thank heaven we have another campaign inextricably linked with that very same saving grace.

————

1. Greenblatt, 14.  Machiavelli quotation, The Prince (NY: Modern Library, 1950), 64-65.

2. Greenblatt, 259, n. 3.

Carpe Spes

Carpe Spes

I wrote the following post back in March for Bread and Circus Magazine.  Since then, some of the main players have changed, and the economic crisis now adds a poignant sense of urgency to its message. Yet—considering the seemingly endless nature of this presidential contest—it’s surprising how valid it still is.   I still say “CARPE SPES!”

Enjoy.

Loving the Skin We’re Almost In

Impresaria or Imposter? Aren’t we all…

Impresaria or Imposter?  Aren’t we all…

Staying on the topic of Sarah Palin—if I can realistically count my glasses post as an article—I’d like to comment on Judith Warner’s latest article on “Poor Sarah” in the NY Times (9/25/08).  

In reading her op-ed, Warner made me realize that my already confused stance on Feminism is actually more muddled than I thought.

Where to begin?  

I am a child of the Seventies.  That puts me in the strange position of being a “second wave feminist”—one who has the luxury of reconsidering our “gains” in society and culture from a liberated foxhole (or “DFP” for you military buffs).

I have a product-of-the-late-Sixties mother who worked part-time as an executive secretary during my childhood.  It seems most period career choices for women back then consisted of housewife, teacher or secretary.  So, as a result, my mom was “mainstream”.  While she worked, I was cared-for by my grandmother who came of age in the Forties.  Unlike my mother she neither had a degree, nor could drive a car.  

Even as I child I saw advantages and disadvantages to both of these lifestyles.  My mother was independent, mobile and able to spend her own money.  I might add that she was also seemingly forever stressed-out and/or suffering from headaches.  To the contrary, my grandmother was tied to her house and had little disposable income, but she made her own schedule and had lots of fun teaching me how to cook and keep house.  From that early age it seemed to me impossible that women could be both a successful careerist and available caretaker.  It took a village.  Or, at least two women.

And, here’s where Warner comes in.  

What a provocative idea Warner has, that one could feel sorry for Sarah Palin as a well-kempt working mom who began to wilt under the glaring media- and international spotlights.  Warner perceives Palin as a sister-sufferer of imposter-syndrome.  (Is there anyone who hasn’t yet suffered from, or at least heard of that phenomenon?)  As evidence of Palin’s professional-woman’s strained survivalist-instincts, Warner notes Palin’s slumping posture, impossibly-perfect hair and nervous tics (the folded-hands-on-knees and deer-in-the-headlights look) during her visit with Henry Kissinger. Warner exudes compassion for this girlfriend out of her depth.  

I suppose that we women could feel empathy for Palin.  We’ve all met smarter people, or been put on-the-spot in a high-pressure situation.  Might Sarah Palin be a hapless victim? A woman put in the precarious position of Veep candidate by the irresistible, synergistic forces of an enticing career move and her own hubris?  

But, this scenario would assume that Palin was circumspect enough to realize that she’s out of her league.  After all, she could cry “Uncle!”  Or, “I want to be there for my kids while they’re small.” And we’d all understand.  But, we all know she won’t.  She won’t admit that she’s “just one woman”.  One woman without the credentials necessary for the job she’s applied for.

In a sense the problem is that Palin is just like any other person.  (As she loves to admit with her small-town, hard-working rhetoric.) In fact, like most people who are unqualified for something due to a lack of gifts or experience, she just don’t see it that way.  After all, it takes gumption to say you’re focused on education to Katie Couric’s face when—in actual word and deed—you despise intellectual pursuits.  (In this regard she sounds mightily like our intrepid former National Education Secretary, William Bennett, who spent the other morning on the Today Show bashing intellectuals.  Fine sport for a Ph.D. in philosophy.)  

Fortunately, in the real world, when people without credentials apply for management positions their cv never gets past the door.  Unfortunately, in this election year, a desperate, eager-to-reinvent-its-image GOP was not beneath finding a pliable and perhaps gullible “hick chick” for its ticket.  Not kosher, no matter how classically good-looking she is.

At this point you might well ask what my life is like.  Do I work?  Yes.  Do I have kids?  Yes.  Am I, therefore, in taking Sarah Palin to task somewhere between deeply conflicted and suffering from split personality disorder?  Absolutely.   Every day I question whether or not I am doing either of my vocations (maternal and professional) well.  And, I have a sneaking suspicion that most women are in the same rickety boat.  Unfortunately, as a post-modern woman I remain compelled to do both.  And, that’s why I can fathom why Warner’s feeling sorry for Palin.  And, yet, my platonic intellect tells me that Palin is not up to the task of world leader.  (Never mind the our polar opposite political stances…)

Couldn’t we at least get someone who knows why being an “elite” is a good thing?  Even Martha Stewart understands that one…

Through His Glasses, Smartly

 

Through His Glasses, Smartly

Has anyone else noticed that Stephen Colbert recently exchanged his glasses for a new pair?  A pair eerily similar to those worn by McCain’s running-mate?  

I can’t remember.  Did it happen right after the Republican convention?  (Somebody cue up footage before and after to check…)

Oh, you naughty, naughty Monsieur Colbert….(Chesire grin.)  Now, every time I watch you on your show I have to giggle when I think about that unmistakeable joke that you’ve placed between us—there on the impeccably aquiline bridge of your nose. (Aquila, of course, being Latin for Eagle.)

Really.  How can I take you seriously when you’re dressed as Arctic G.I. Jane?  In drag?!

You’re too much!  And, just because of it, you always make my day. :)

Thanks.  I needed that.