Why Conservatives are OK with Palin Not Talking to the Media
Sep 25 at 2:02pm by Jagwire X
And why they think this is the Sign of a Strong Leader
Found on reddit and written by marko34. I don’t think I could have summed this up more concisely.
Smash Patriarchy?
I think you have to consider the CONSERVATIVE (not Republican) mindset.
Conservatives are interested in what’s called a “strict father” mentality. In this mentality, the strict father makes all the decisions, and whether or not you agree, or are familiar with the reasons behind the decisions, is beside the point. These are the decisions, live with them. Hence, “I’m the decider.”
This is why Conservatives go along with whatever their leaders tell them. They vote in their leaders/”fathers” based on personality & identification, and basically “trust” them (the leaders) to do whatever they think is right. If they (the voters) agree, great. If they don’t, it doesn’t matter. The voters granted their trust on election day, and that’s it.
From this, it follows that Conservatives aren’t interested in their candidate showing depth or competence. Look at George W. Bush! As long as s/he speaks to them in their “gut”, or if they personally identify with their candidate, that’s all that matters.
Following further on, in their view the press also can’t be trusted. It’s the “liberal media” remember?
So in absence of the press being important, or even relevant in their view, all that matters is speaking engagements. The more places that Sarah Palin can speak, the more she can rile up the base, and the more she can deliver those applause lines that speak to the “gut” rather than the brain, the better. Hence the Bush-like “loyalty rallies.”
This in no way has anything to do with her being a strong leader. It’s all in service of propping up her “image” to the base, and speaking to their mindset. I can assure you, the McCain campaign will do NOTHING that isn’t necessary that will risk shattering her image to the base (which would basically be putting her in a position which she might demonstrate weakness or lack of certainty, like answering unpredictable press questions).
It’s only the rest of us, the reasoning, thinking people, that these things are important to.
It remains to be seen, then, if the independents are going to buy into this, if they’ll react to the “strict father” authoritarian mentality, or if they’ll be convinced to think differently.
You can make a difference, btw, by writing to a news outlet of your choice and DEMANDING that they ask her questions. Put pressure on the news outlets, not the candidate. She ain’t listening.
[NOTE: By "Conservative" I am referring to a subset of the Republican party. Not fiscal or social conservatives, but a radical authoritarian wing and its followers that has gained control of the party over the past few years/decades. They call themselves "Conservatives", having stolen the term from true conservative people. So that is the term I use. It also contrasts philosophically with the term "Progressive". Just in case this is still on the front page tomorrow and people are curious about my use of terminology. If you know a better term, for example Robert Reich uses 'radcon' to mean "Radical Conservative", I'm all in favor of it.]
[NOTE 2: Yes in some ways this can apply to some members of the Democratic party, as well. Or ANY party, really. We all have the "strict father" mentality hardwired into our brains somehow. I am merely attempting to explain why Republicans/Conservatives are largely ok with it, because it is their primary active framework, and why, contrary to our intuition, it works for them.]
[NOTE 3: Credit where credit is due. These ideas are based on the brilliant work by George Lakoff, whose book "Don't Think of An Elephant" is a far better and more in-depth exploration of these topics.]
Looks like it’s a nice sucker’s buy in to the patriarchal Judeo-Christian mindset.
The American Republic will endure until…
Sep 25 at 2:02pm by Jagwire X
Alexis de Tocqueville
“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.”
“The surface of American society is covered with a layer of democratic paint, but from time to time one can see the old aristocratic colours breaking through.”
– Alexis de Tocqueville
How appropriate in these financial times.
Which one is the Elitist?
Sep 22 at 8:08pm by Jagwire X
Which One is the Elitist Again?
Talk about fucking ridiculous. The GOP continues to make Obama out to be an elitist and yet he lives relatively humbly while McCain can’t even remember how many homes he owns at times.
Seriously, McCain is a disgusting pig whose sanity is questionable and is unfit to lead anything. Palin is gold digging political opportunist who doesn’t know jack about national, not to mention international, politics. McCain has totally abandoned the issues (and in fact he is incapable of handling questions about most of them) and his campaign tactics have switched to manipulative name calling, outright lies and even thinly veiled racism. McCain calls Obama an elitist but, as is often the case, he’s the true elitist: White, Rich and Protestant.
Obama may not be the perfect candidate but I think he’s pretty honest for a politician and at least he seems to have a degree of integrity. I generall like Biden and he is certainly fully knowledgeable in foreign affairs. I do think his campaign is not aggressive enough toward McCain/Palin.
If I was hiring the president and vice-president based on their educational backgrounds the choice would be even more clear:
Obama - B.A. Political Science from Columbia University, J.D. of Law (magna cum laude) from Harvard Law School
Biden - B.A. History, B.A. Political Science from University of Delware, J.D. of Law from Syracuse University College of Law
McCain - Graduated from the United States Naval Academy
Palin - B.S. Communication-Journalism from University of Idaho (after attending five different colleges)
Educationally they come out of the wash as Obama/Biden representing Diplomacy, Community and Order while McCain/Palin come out at Marketing and War.
So if having a good education makes you an elitist then everyone should want to be one.
The Blind, the Clueless, and the Mentally Disturbed vote McCain/Palin
Sep 9 at 10:10am by Jagwire X
Palin's True Nature?
I can’t help myself - I have to say it. Anyone, anyone at all, who votes for McCain/Palin is either blind to the truth, utterly clueless when it comes to their claims or mentally disturbed and living in a universe where supernatural entities exist.
The two of them are out and out liars. Neither is a maverick. How can McCain be a maverick and about change and reform when he’s been a Washington insider for more than 20 years? He certainly doesn’t represent the everyman and everywoman - only those who can afford multiple houses. Even his choice for running mate isn’t a maverick concept - the democrats already did that 24 years ago. Palin a maverick? Hardly she bellies up to the pork barrel bar just like any other self-serving politician does.
The best we could hope for if they are elected is four more years of the same. In all likelihood it would be worse - much worse - for everyone. Oh, the evangelical armegeddonists would be happy. I could only hope that China would tank the dollar at that point - not something I really want to see happen but better than letting the end-timers have their wet dream become a reality.
If McCain/Palin are elected the chances of Palin assuming the mantle of president are unfortunately too high what with McCain being as old as he is he is liable to expire while in office. Do you really want someone with so little regard for others, so inexperienced (yes, far more inexperienced than Barack Obama), so extreme in her religious views to be president?
Anyone swayed by the insubstantial drivel McCain and Palin spout is a sucker. And I’ll gladly argue with any McCain/Palin supporters who think I’m full of it. And yes, if you support McCain/Palin I do think I’m smarter and wiser than you because only the ignorant would fall for their bull shit.
GOP Convention Spin (a.k.a. GOP Bull Elephant Shit)
Sep 4 at 10:10pm by Jagwire X
Palin Comes Out of Nowhere
Here are some nice untruths and outright lies that that GOP is trying to fool people with. Sarah Palin is ambitious to be sure and I certainly am glad to see that this years nominees are a partially a change from the past but I think she is a poor choice and in all likelihood will besmirch the good name of Michael Palin.
Joe Lieberman (who really should stop claiming to be a Independent Democrat at this point) and his former Senate colleague Fred Thompson both made misleading claims about Obama in their prime time GOP convention speeches on Tuesday. We’ve heard two of them before – many times.
- Lieberman said Obama hadn’t “reached across party lines” to accomplish “anything significant,” though Obama has teamed with GOP Sens. Tom Coburn and Richard Lugar to pass laws enhancing government transparency and curtailing the proliferation of nuclear and conventional weapons.
- Thompson repeated misleading claims about Obama’s tax program, saying it would bring “one of the largest tax increases in American history.” But as increases go, Obama’s package is hardly a history-maker. It would raise taxes for families with incomes above $250,000. Most people would see a cut.
- Lieberman also accused Obama of “voting to cut off funding for our American troops on the battlefield.” But Obama’s only vote against a war-funding bill came after Bush vetoed a version of the bill Obama had supported – and McCain urged the veto.
Sarah Palin’s much-awaited speech at the Republican National Convention on Wednesday night may have shown she could play the role of attack dog, but it also showed her to be short on facts when it came to touting her own record and going after Obama’s.
Rudy Giuliani, who introduced her, to be as factually challenged as he sometimes was back when he was in the race. But Mike Huckabee may have laid the biggest egg of all.
- Palin may have said “Thanks, but no thanks” on the Bridge to Nowhere, though not until Congress had pretty much killed it already. But that was a sharp turnaround from the position she took during her gubernatorial campaign, and the town where she was mayor received lots of earmarks during her tenure.
- Palin’s accusation that Obama hasn’t authored “a single major law or even a reform” in the U.S. Senate or the Illinois Senate is simply not a fair assessment. Obama has helped push through major ethics reforms in both bodies, for example.
- The Alaska governor avoided some of McCain’s false claims about Obama’s tax program – but her attacks still failed to give the whole story.
- Giuliani distorted the time line and substance of Obama’s statements about the conflict between Russia and Georgia. In fact, there was much less difference between his statements and those of McCain than Giuliani would have had us believe.
- Giuliani also said McCain had been a fighter pilot. Actually, McCain’s plane was the A-4 Skyhawk, a small bomber. It was the only plane he trained in or flew in combat, according to McCain’s own memoir.
- Finally, Huckabee told conventioneers and TV viewers that Palin got more votes when she ran for mayor of Wasilla than Biden did running for president. Not even close. The tally: Biden, 79,754, despite withdrawing from the race after the Iowa caucuses. Palin, 909 in her 1999 race, 651 in 1996.
Here is some bonus fact checking:
McCain’s campaign launched a TV ad touting his running mate, Palin, and offering a comparison to Obama. Some of its claims are off the mark:
- It says Obama “gave big oil billions in subsidies and giveaways,” citing his votes for a 2005 energy bill. But the bill slightly raised taxes on the oil industry overall.
- The ad plucked a positive blurb about Palin from an Associated Press article that, in fact, was very much a mixed review. The AP said she “brings an ethical shadow to the [Republican] ticket,” for example.
- The ad says Obama is the “most liberal” Senator. But the National Journal rated him the 16th most liberal in his first year and the 10th most liberal in his second. It rated his votes “most liberal” only in 2007, when he was busy campaigning and missed one-third of the votes on which the rating is based.
And there you have it - the GOP in all it’s unsightly glory.
RECENT COMMENTS