Notes for Sarah Palin

Michael Ramirez has a cartoon on a subject that has people buzzing.

On this issue, I guess I’m out of step. I was not bothered by the notes written in Palin’s palm. To me, it is part of her originality, like the beehive hair-do she wore when first she gleamed upon our sight. Whether we like it or not,—and I’ve said repeatedly that I am annoyed by the entire Palin phenomenon and think it’s bad for conservatism and wish she would go away—the reality is that Palin is going to continue to upset our normal expectations. For example, virtually everyone, including me, thought that her resignation as governor meant the end of her possible national political career. But it has meant the exact opposite. So we cannot evaluate Palin or make predictions about her political prospects based on the usual assumptions that we would apply to other politicians. We should not think that because she writes notes in her palm she is automatically going to be laughed out of the room. For good or bad, she is an original, and makes her own rules.

- end of initial entry -

Alan M. writes:

My first reaction to hearing and seeing the coverage of this note-taking in the hand story was … so? What can possibly be the import of this relative to everything else going on in the world? Is she quirky? Yes. But this isn’t indicative of anything but quirkiness.

These critics live in the world of the surface—People/US/TMZ—while those who can see past that live in the world of the soul.

Is she ideal presidential material—probably not. Is she an ideal conservative in terms of her ability to defend and articulate a traditional worldview completely—clearly not. Does her soul speak to the soul of the real USA—absolutely.

The people of the surface can’t understand her and they fear her because she speaks to the hole in their being. And “it hurts us” (to quote Gollum).

She has a decent grasp of the one Ring of the aspiring soul, and the left, while despising the requirements for holding that Ring (aspiring to truth, virtue, honesty), desperately want its power. As a result, they become ugly and twisted.

Richard Hoste writes:

I’m surprised you don’t think her writing what she did on her hand was a big deal. It’s not that she needed notes but what they were. You’ve talked about her being a cliche machine. She needed to write out the only three or four things she ever talks about. It wasn’t as if she needed reminding about the deficit growth rate in 2009 versus the deficit growth rate in 2008. Also, did you know the Tea Party questions were pre-screened? This deserves to be a big deal.

You’re right she’s an original. I think this stems from her unusual courage. She really likes to stick it to the liberals. But her dislike of them doesn’t come from any deep philosophical disagreement she has with them (as you’ve talked about she’s into amnesty and feminism). It’s simply that she feels that they’ve picked on her and that she has insecurity about her own knowledge and intelligence.

LA replies:

I’m sorry, but I think the idea of criticizing and second guessing public speakers for the precise nature of the notes they use during a speech is ridiculous. At the same time, she opened herself up to this by putting the notes on her hand where they would be seen and photographed. But substantively I don’t think it’s worth discussing.

“Also, did you know the Tea Party questions were pre-screened? This deserves to be a big deal.”

Do you mean the questions the host asked her during the Q&A after her speech? Yes, I had the thought they were known in advance, as her answers came too quickly and readily.

Richard Hoste replies:

Yes, and she still needed those simple notes! And I don’t think you’ve even touched on the hypocrisy of her making fun of Obama for using the teleprompter.

LA replies:

This is pure triviality and pettiness. As I said the other day: there’s no equivalence between having a few notes as reminders of the main points one wants to cover, and having a fully written text supplied by a teleprompter everywhere one goes.

Do you seriously believe that if politician A criticizes politician B for using a teleprompter every time he opens his mouth, therefore it’s hypocritical for politician A to have a few notes? Do you not see the difference?

That would be like saying that if A criticizes B for getting drunk, and if A has a glass of wine, therefore A is hypocritical.

LA writes:

David Broder says that Palin is at the top of her game and a force to be reckoned with, and that writing notes in her palm is not going to stop her.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at February 10, 2010 06:40 PM | Send