My Photo

« Happy Fourth Everyone | Main | Good News »

July 05, 2009

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515c2369e2011571c2fd99970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Like A Grizzly With Cubs, If By "Grizzly" You Mean "Quitter", And By "Cubs" You Mean "Kids You Can't Be Bothered With":

» The Idiot Horse That Keeps On Giving from Prose Before Hos
Look America, almost Vice President Palin is talking again: Palin said there was a difference between the White House and what she had experienced in Alaska. If she were in the White House, she said, the department of law would protect he... [Read More]

Comments

Sarah Palin doing something about the foster kids in her state would require her to give a sh*t about someone other than herself, so you see the problem.

With regard to foster kids, I tend think, even if Palin stayed governor, her philosophy would get in the way of changing the system.

I'm not sure that's fair! If I care about governing (in the sense that I want my constituents to be governed well), but I come to realize that I'm no good at it, don't I pretty much have to resign?

I don't know, maybe this gives Palin too much credit. But things have gone so badly for Palin, and it's been so clearly demonstrated to her that she lacks both the intellectual sophistication for policy and the savvy for dealing with people whose scope extends Wasilla, or who are not predisposed to be charitable to her, that I honestly think this is a natural conclusion even for her to draw. I mean, I'd be surprised if she didn't have other, more sinister reasons to resign--I'm sure the case was pretty overdetermined. But if the above is the case, why not be sympathetic? She looks to me like a frustrated, confused, harried woman who's only slowly starting to face facts.

(I wonder how much better off we'd have been had Bush been so honest with himself, and us.)

I've been all over the back forty trying to figure out Palin's motivation for resigning: media pressure? looming scandal? preparing for a run at the presidency? family and/or health problems? And then I remembered Occum's Razor: the simplest answer that fits all the facts is most often the correct one. Eureka!

A book deal (was it really for 11 million, or did somebody just make that up?), speaking fees, guest appearances and/or maybe a regular gig on Fox would keep her in the spotlight without the downside of actually having to do any of the hard lifting that goes along with governing. Her reasons for resigning were nonsensical, but this was because it's hard to figure out a lofty way to say: Up yours, Alaskans, I'm gonna take the money and run.

But to do that, you'd have to actually care about governing. Sarah Palin The contemporary Republican party plainly does not.

Fixed that for you. If there's one thing that drives me up the wall about the Republican party as a whole, it's the lack of people who take governing seriously. The party lacks any positive agenda, which is the first step in taking an active role in shaping policy. All they seem to do is to oppose whatever the Democrats want, no matter how sensible it is. It's a deeply unserious approach to governing, and it's now the core of the Republican agenda.

Palin has an antiquated beauty queen mentality. She hasn't demonstrated 1) a desire to do anything difficult, 2) any positive initiative or constructive/meaningful ideas, 3) a desire or ability to solve conflicts or forge relationships. She only appears to be prolific at speaking, waving, winking, and inciting with the objective of obtaining attention and adulation from ignorant, mindless, immature, unquestioning, or self-serving hordes who wouldn't otherwise give the time of day to a less physically attractive woman with a comparable skillset.

(I wonder how much better off we'd have been had Bush been so honest with himself, and us.)

Six years of Dick Cheney as President does not strike me as a recipe for being better off.

Six years of Dick Cheney as President does not strike me as a recipe for being better off.

You overlook Cheney's major virtue - his deep personal unpopularity. He wouldn't have won in 2004.

You overlook Cheney's major virtue - his deep personal unpopularity. He wouldn't have won in 2004.

I'm not so sure. Don't overestimate George W. Bush's own popularity by the fall of 2004....or John Kerry's, for that matter.

I'm not sure that's fair! If I care about governing (in the sense that I want my constituents to be governed well), but I come to realize that I'm no good at it, don't I pretty much have to resign?

Sure, but if you came to that realization, don't you think you'd say something about it? The kind of serious person who would resign because they thought it was in the best interests of her constituents would also think it was important to explain her reasoning. Instead, we got a bunch of vague non-explanations. Besides, the one thing that I got from what she said is that she has an interest in continuing to serve in some capacity, which seems like the last thing that somebody who was willing to acknowledge her own incompetence would do.

But to do that, you'd have to actually care about governing. The contemporary Republican party plainly does not.

I agree with you there, Roger. Why take governing seriously when you think it ought to be small enough to drown in a bathtub?

Perhaps she concluded she could do more good as a community organizer.

There is a truly great article by Thomas Frank in, of all places, the WSJ that criticizes just the sort of thinking Molly and Roger (at 6:44) refers to. It's worth reading in it's entirety -- and is short -- but the money quote is:

"On the other hand, government fails constantly when conservatives run it because making it work would be, for many of those conservatives, to traduce the very laws of nature. Besides, as we can now see, bungling Katrina recovery or Pentagon procurement pays conservatives huge dividends. It gives them potent ammunition to use when the liberals have returned and are proposing another one of their grand schemes to reform health care.

"This is the perverse incentive that is slowly remaking the GOP into the Snafu Party. And in those commercials and those proclamations we should also discern a warning: That even if Democrats manage to set up a solid health-care program, conservatives will do their best, once they have regained power, to drop it down the same chute they did the Federal Emergency Management Agency."

He also quotes, approvingly, the P.J. O'Rourke line:
"Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work, and then they get elected and prove it."

I have no idea who Thomas Frank is, but he definitely is a surprise, given the venue he appears in.

You're over thinking it Hilzoy and are trying to ascribe altruistic motives to a sociopath.

Palin crucifies herself, blames it (however, illogically) on "librhuls" and has an entire media machine and cadre of useful, authoritarian idiots follow her in lockstep.

She's a figurehead for a large chunk of America that feels aggrieved at some undefined thing. They don't know exactly what it is, other than it was caused by all them damned poor people (poor whites are excluded because affirmative action made them poor) and, of course, dah gays.

If her groupies didn't drop her when she couldn't answer a basic question such as, "What magazines do you read?", do you really think they're going to notice a nonsensical resignation speech?

Now that I'm done with own nonsensical rant, I promise to never comment again after raiding my homebrew stash.

"I have no idea who Thomas Frank is"

The famous author of What's The Matter With Kansas? and a ton of other liberal journalism.

"If her groupies didn't drop her when she couldn't answer a basic question such as, "What magazines do you read?", do you really think they're going to notice a nonsensical resignation speech?"

In point of fact, there's been a huge steady drumbeat of former supporters announcing they're dropping their support of her, ever since the Couric interview, and a very large number of former supporters throwing up their hands at this latest move. It helps to actually observe, rather than generalize from theory instead of facts.

This isn't to say that there isn't a core who will stick with her, but the list of conservative writers and politicians who have given up on her just in the last week is very very long, let alone those in the last six months.

I have no idea who Thomas Frank is, but he definitely is a surprise, given the venue he appears in.

Thomas Frank is the author of What's The Matter With Kansas, a seminal examination of the backlash culture. When it comes to Palin's brand of politics, Frank knows whereof he speaks.

I was astonished to see him on TV recently, credited as a columnist for the WSJ. I suppose he is to the WSJ what David Brooks is to the NYT.

As for the line about Republicans believing government doesn't work and doing their best to prove it when elected, I think it was Al Franken who first gave it currency, if not invented it. At least, it was on Franken's old Air America radio show that I first heard it.

Franken in, Palin out. Whew. The election of 2008 is finally over!

--TP

Thanks, Gary, but don't know how he wound up writing for the WSJ -- and, sadly, so much of my reading is on the net that if I pick up something with 'print on paper' it's usually a detective story, not non-fiction.

Besides, after long experience, I've learned that there are only two things I can't be trusted with, and one is a library card. (The other? Don't ask me to hold a bag of marijuana for you and expect I'll be able not to sample it -- often enough that I may return an empty bag.) And since my budget for buying books might allow me to buy one hardcover a year at full price -- if I didn't buy any other reading material, sadly I haven't read Frank's book. Fortunately, over the year I have acquired a lot of non-fiction for my library -- mostly when the Brooklyn Library had a book sale at all the branches or from 'earlier times.'

don't know how [Frank] wound up writing for the WSJ

I wondered that myself (more because I do know him!). Maybe he was cheaper than the alternatives. Doesn't answer the question of why the WSJ thought they needed a voice from the Left at all, especially someone who is not a squishy 'centrist' but really from the actual (non-communist) Left. Kudos to them anyway.

"If her groupies didn't drop her when...do you really think they're going to notice a nonsensical resignation speech?"


In point of fact, there's been a huge steady drumbeat of former supporters announcing they're dropping their support of her...It helps to actually observe, rather than generalize from theory instead of facts.

Aren't you being a little harsh Gary? 'Groupies' and 'hard core supporters' are roughly synonymous. That's obviously who he meant, and I agree with him. If her hard-cores hadn't dropped her by now, it's hard to see how this latest stunt will make any difference to most of them. Some, maybe, but...they're called 'hard core' for a reason!

johnnyb: But they -- and she -- just don't matter, unless you see her leading a third party ticket, which would only help the Republicans. She is forever going to be "Bailin' Palin" as the NY DAILY NEWS called her. And any Republican primary opponent is going to crucify her with that.

This, of course, assumes that she does have any political aspirations left, but I'm one of those who see her trying to avoid the Big House, not going for the White House. (And i think she will be as unsuccessful in the one as she would have been in the other.)

Oops, that should have been 'help the Democrats.' Sowwy, it's been a long day.

Thank you, Hilzoy, for posting reasons why Sarah Palin shouldn't have resigned that aren't related to the arc of her political career.

I do give Palin credit for deepening my understanding of how some of history's great tragedies transpired.

johnnyb: But they -- and she -- just don't matter, unless you see her leading a third party ticket, which would only help the Republicans.

Of course they matter. They are the largest part of what's left of the GOP base (their splitting off would *hurt* the GOP in the short term). Palin doesn't have to run for office to be influential. And I frankly wouldn't count her out forever as a candidate. She's young, and people forget. It's appalling, but there you go.

FWIW, the WSJ has always published columns by token lefties. Alexander Cockburn used to appear fairly regularly on its op-ed page.

Based on little other than her "higher calling" language I think Sarah sees her future as something of a televangelist, revivalist or circuit preacher. With a gospel of God, Guns, and Guttin' Government, she'll be anointing disciples of the true faith, with Saint Ronnie at her side.

Who need to be queen if you can be king maker, and guardian of the true faith?

Actually, king maker and High Priestess, guardian of the true faith.

This isn't to say that there isn't a core who will stick with her, but the list of conservative writers and politicians who have given up on her just in the last week is very very long, let alone those in the last six months.

Very true vis-a-vis the establishment/pundit class, but less so amongst the 20% of America that is batsh*t crazy and utterly convinced that America would be a better place if the CSA had won the Civil War.

This is a group that reads Harry Turtledove and thinks, "If only..."

OT: Is anybody else having problems posting comments using Firefox?

I for one am sad. The sufferings of the state of Alaska were more than compensated for by the flailing high-wire act that was Sarah Palin trying to speak her native langauge. As soon as the sentence started you knew there would be a fall, but until she stopped to breath you had no idea where that sentence was going to land.

Palin might have stepped down as governor, but it will probably take a year or two for her to be phazed out of comedians' routines

The reasons of Palin resignation are controversial. What could be the real cause of her decision? Vote on the most possible one - http://www.votetheday.com/america/palin-resignation-424/

OT: Is anybody else having problems posting comments using Firefox?

OT: Yes, sporadically. The Post/Preview buttons grey out and can't be clicked. The blog owners have been vaguely talking about moving to different blogging software for a couple of years now, but they never do, so we just have to put up with the various eccentricities and awfulness of Typepad.

I use Firefox and for me it's working fine. I seem to recall it doesn't always play nice with other connections though. Having recently changed my ISP, let's see if it does work after all.

"I use Firefox and for me it's working fine."

A week ago I described the problem Jes refers to, but it mysteriously went away, for me, a few days ago, after lasting about a week, as mysteriously as it had arrived. For that week (or so) I had to use IE instead.

Just another mystery of Typepad, I guess.

Also, fixing a broken foster care program would require "throwing" (as cons like to say) money at it, ie raising taxes. Not gonna happen. Also.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Whatnot


  • visitors since 3/2/2004

August 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            
Blog powered by Typepad

QuantCast