Subtly recycling the “destruct” Palin strategy in light of her undeniable successes
July 22, 2010
by Valentina
|The opinions expressed herein are those of the author, and not necessarily those of The New Agenda.
At first Glance, John Nichols article in The Nation, “ After She Shakes Up Another Primary, It’s Time for a Sarah Palin Rethink” seems like an innocuous recognition of Palin successes, and even more, the title suggests a that there has been a reconsideration of previously held pre-conceptions and judgments about her. But don’t be fooled.
Not recognizing Palin’s successes at this point is highly stupid. This piece is the start of a strategy, “even though she has successes [duhh], remember, she is still stupid”.
Nichols piece is highly charged and full of coded words, and while it tends to recognize the obvious, at the same time reminds and brings up all the lies and insults about Palin:
Examples:
-”Palin’s bumbling attempt at a vice presidential campaign that became fodder for international parody” -What? The race ended up pretty close considering the meltdown and anti-Bush sentiment. Palin shook up the race for McCain. Besides, thanks to whom did the parody start? Liberals were so afraid of her, they were certain McCain Palin could win and thus resorted to the worst anti/liberal misogynist strategies (even worst than with Hillary, which is an appalling standard), taking on children an all. Had the media been a little less complicit in this, I agree with them (the “afraid” liberals), McCain Palin could have pulled it off.
- “where she tried to explain that, because she was “not a quitter,” she was quitting mid-term as governor” Again, taking speech out of context is only unacceptable when it’s about a democrat (and I am not happy the way the WH treated Shirley Sherrod -they didn’t even allow her to give her version of events, when they have protected through thick and thin Geithner and Summers from serious and stupid mistakes to serious misogynist statements that have impact on many women and girls current possibilities in the workplace, and in the girls future).
Palin explained perfectly well why she quit to prevent a freeze in the state government, and would rather sacrifice her personal position to allow another person to advance the interests of the Alaskan people. If they wanted it expressed in APA style to appeal only to the faux, self appointed intellectuals, that is their problem.
-”a Palin autobiography that should have been cross-marketed in the spirits aisle as “a fine whine.” What can I say… no argument (let alone any sound evidence to support argument), nor a balanced view –another point of view? just one more of the ad hominem attacks.
-”After Palin’s political crack-up in 2008,” – again, in spite of the misogynism and classism, she did a great job.
-”and as someone who has reported on her ethically challenged tenure as Alaska’s governor” -everybody knows these have been politically motivated
He pointed out a couple of important things (which again, are the obvious)
1- That Palin is shaking up the good old boy establishment in the Rep. Party
2.-The parallel with Reagan. However, this comparison, can also be taken as pointing to the strategy that was used unsuccessfully to defeat Reagan, but has been successful with women. Ridicule and minimize. This is the first (or one of the first) major pieces to set strategy in light of Palin’s successes: to take her seriously as a contender –since her successes can’t be denied any longer (as her successes as Major of Wasilla, and Gov. of Alaska were denied/obscured since they were not in the national stage), but -don’t forget she can be destroyed as it was the case in the past, with distortions and personal insults/attacks.
This strategy is just more of the same: misogynism. I hope the American people are not up to this any longer. I have no problem with debating the issues, with sound evidence, and avoiding personal, gender-specific attacks. We, and particularly at TNA, will not allow this to happen without denouncing it and making the public aware of it. I invite everyone to do the same. We want and need quality leadership, and this can only be gained when there is a leveled Plainfield for everyone to compete. As we see, the leveled plain field will not be given to us; we have to build it by denouncing misogynism.
New video just up! About Sarah’s successful endorsements:
http://syd4.blogspot.com/2010/.....woman.html
Enjoy!
My thoughts about this article exactly!
The author is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Just another good ol’ boy who can see the handwriting on the wall…. and can’t stand it!
Thanks for breaking it down.
This is an excellent blog post and I agree with the writer’s basic premise–that an acknowledgement of Palin’s success was only admitted so Nichols could go on to say, “Yeah but…” Then as the writer points out, he offers the same tired lines.
I do take issue with the statement that the liberal misogyny was worse in regards to Palin than what Hillary experienced. Furthermore, what went on with Hillary was such a fundamental betrayal being that it was perpetrated by Democrats and she has been and still is a loyal Democrat. This isn’t really the time for an oppression sweepstakes, though.
The main point is exactly what the writer expressed in the last two paragraphs. First of all, the same tactics are being used towards female politicians–minimize and ridicule. Secondly, it is misogyny, pure and simple. Wrapping it up in a package with insincere flattery does not change that fact.
This country is really, really afraid of female power.
Apparently we also have a really hard time portraying women as anything else but creatures in need of knocking down a peg or two. Certainly Palin, but also people like Lindsay Lohan that the media loves to throw stones at. The message is unrelenting, “look at this uppity woman who got her comeuppance. She’s a failure. Let’s put her in the stocks and throw tomatoes at her.”
“Palin’s bumbling attempt at a vice presidential campaign that became fodder for international parody”
Lemme translate that from mansplain-ese for you all:
“We attacked her savagely, subjecting her to forms of sexual humiliation borne of our own hatred and resentment for all things vagina-related, because it was fun … and SHE is the laughingstock! It’s all HER fault for MAKING us want to abuse and humiliate her!”
An excellent blog post but it loses its credibility with its awful grammar and misused words.
It is a level playing field.
Aside from missing apostrophes and a level Plainfield, great points.
Sarah is far from stupid, she represents this mom to a fault, and I would be proud to cast my vote for her.
John Nichols sure knows his liberal Democrat catechism by heart. Of course rote repetition of elitist misogynist myth hardly prepares one to serve The People, half of whom are women. But that’s the Democrats problem not mine. They make themselves irrelevant.
Yes , yet another gentleman who doth protest too much .. The criteria for success can apply to everyone BUT Sarah.
I do not think a good comparison can be made between what Hillary was subjected to and what Sarah has endured . It is like quantifying pain , much of it is subjective , but we all agree that the pain/misogyny must be stopped.
Leave your Response Want an avatar? Get a gravatar!
Community Room
February 6, 2012 at 4:25 pm
January 30, 2012 at 2:36 pm
January 26, 2012 at 4:38 pm
January 23, 2012 at 1:04 pm
January 15, 2012 at 11:37 am
January 9, 2012 at 6:36 pm
January 7, 2012 at 10:10 pm
January 5, 2012 at 9:31 am
BUILD your NETWORK
Our Network of College Women
Protecting our Teenage Girls
We’re in the Media »
Click to see our latest stories in the media
More Stories »Recent Comments
The Latest from our Blog
Archives
Pioneer Mentors
Blogroll
Find us Online
Subscribe Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS)
The New Agenda is a 501(c)(4) organization dedicated to improving the lives of women and girls by bringing about systemic change in the media, at the workplace, at school and at home. More...