posted December 08, 2009 02:47 PM         

Writing about Sarah Palin in Newsweek last month, I pointed out the crude way in which she tried to Teflon-ize herself when allegations of weird political extremism were made against her. Thus, she had once gone to a Pat Buchanan rally wearing a pro-Buchanan button, but only because she thought it was the polite thing to do. She and her husband had both attended meetings of the Alaskan Independence Party—he as a member—but its name, she later tried to claim, only meant "independent." (The AIP is a straightforward secessionist party.) She didn't disbelieve all the evidence for evolution, only some of it. She hadn't exactly said that God was on our side in Iraq, only that God and the United States were on the same side. She says that she left Hawaii Pacific College after only one year because the climate was too sunny for an Alaskan*; her father (whom she considers practically infallible) tells her most recent biographers that she quit because of the preponderance of Asian and Pacific islanders: "They were a minority type thing and it wasn't glamorous. So she came home." And so on. As I tried to summarize the repeated tactic:

So there it is: anti-Washington except that she thirsts for it, and close enough (and also far enough away to be "deniable") to the paranoid fringe element who darkly suggest that our president is a Kenyan communist.

Last week, the new darling of the right did her best to vindicate me. She appeared on the radio show of a certain Rusty Humphries, another steaming and hearty slice of good-old U.S. prime, and was asked whether she would make an issue of President Barack Obama's birth certificate. Her response: "I think the public rightfully is still making it an issue. I think it's a fair question." That was on Thursday, Dec. 3. On Friday, she had published a second "thought" on her Facebook page, reassuring all and sundry that: "At no point have I asked the president to produce his birth certificate, or suggested that he was not born in the United States."

Well, exactly. Of course she hasn't. She just thinks it's a good idea for others to do that, in their "rightful" way, since, after all, it is "a fair question."

Could anything be more cowardly and contemptible? Alexander Pope came up with a few lines about this sort of second-hand, third-rate innuendo-mongering:

Yet let me flap this bug with gilded wings,
This painted child of dirt that stinks and stings:
Whose buzz the witty and the fair annoys
Yet wit ne'er tastes and beauty ne'er enjoys.
So well-bred spaniels civilly delight
In mumbling of the game they dare not bite.

I think I can guess why Palin moved so quickly to soften her raw-meat appeal to Rusty's crowd. On Saturday night, she was due to put on a black dress and be a featured guest at the Gridiron Club dinner in Washington, D.C. It was time to don the fake finery of wit and beauty again. (I do hope this isn't why the press, which gives this annual gala, went so utterly soft on her "birther" garbage over the course of last weekend.) The person who has been introducing Palin into the more exalted social and political circles of the capital, and who has already arranged her appearance at the Alfalfa Club, is Fred Malek. Two things about Malek are worth bearing in mind.

The first is that he was an important member of the Nixon administration, a senior figure on the Republican National Committee, and the campaign manager for the re-election of George H.W. Bush in 1992. With his Carlyle Group and other corporate connections and his mansion in suburban McLean, Va.,* Malek is almost the prototypical "establishment" Washington insider and consiglieri Republican, against whom Palin's adoring book-tour crowds, in their pathetic dreams, imagine her to be a crusader. But her preposterous book Going Rogue is larded with praise for the wise support and advice of this leathery old Beltway bandit. Populism? Hah! Unless, that is, you count Jew-baiting as a form of populism, which I suppose in a way it is. (Bryan, that other foe of Darwin, was also a fan of the Klan.)

Because the second thing to note about Malek is that he was the man who drew up a list of Jews to be fired from the civil service under the Nixon administration. I am surprised that so many people have allowed themselves to forget this—and that Palin has never been asked a single question about it. In the early 1970s, Nixon, whose White House tapes show consistent evidence of anti-Semitic paranoia, gave orders that the Bureau of Labor Statistics be purged of what he called a "Jewish cabal." The job of drawing up the list was given to Malek, whose information led to what was called the "reassignment" of some officials within the Labor Department. Malek later tried to give a weaselly excuse for his conduct, but was caught by my Slate colleague Timothy Noah.

It beats me why such a disgusting character is still received in polite circles, except that now at least he's back doing the sort of task to which he is best-suited. He has found an unscrupulous and uncultured political neophyte who will happily act as a megaphone for any kind of libel and insinuation—Obama's "palling around with terrorists" was, I suppose, the money shot of the last campaign—and then later revise and extend her remarks. Nasty work if you can get it. Malek, now so near old age, must be pinching himself at his good fortune.

posted December 09, 2009 07:54 AM         

I never bothered to research the Palin background, so it was also interesting to read that she quit after a year in Hawaii. The reasons that he gave do not surprise.

I also think that Kat makes a fine point. Palin is used as a tool. Is she smart enough to keep a step ahead of those who use her?

posted December 09, 2009 05:23 PM         

The comment made on the morning news today was "it looks like it will be a close race in the 2012 election." WTF???

Honestly, I do not understand why we are cutting Obama off at the knees. He has only been in office for 11 months. We gave Bush 8 YEARS to continue to eff things up before proclaiming his presidency as anything close to a failure...

posted December 09, 2009 11:42 PM         

as of now obama's administration has "kept us safe" 3 months longer than bush's and considering that he was handed a nightmare of an agenda, it is WAY too early to write him off.

posted December 13, 2009 11:38 AM         

I actually enjoy most of Hitchins writings...keeping well in mind that Hitchins is a life long Trotskyite, i.e., a communist.

In this particular instance Hitchins makes no effort to back up any of his allegations against Sarah Palin so his allegations are flapping bare-assed in the breeze.

What's even more hysterical is that anti-war leftists here are unaware Hitchins backed Bush in the Iraq war to remove Saddam Hussein.

But, back to Hitchins. He's probably not entirely happy that Sarah Palin's book has been and remains at the top of the "best seller" lists while almost no one reads the tomes he cranks out.

Certainly, there is a chasm between Sarah Palin and communists like Hitchins, O'Bomber and the rest of communist revolutionaries and it's a chasm in thought and purpose Palin isn't going to jump...by choice.

Now, we find that after spending enormous sums of money attempting to destroy Sarah Palin and her family with lying cheap shot baloney reporting; Sarah Palin trails O'Bomber by a single point. What dismal failures leftists really are.

While the press was whitewashing every word and deed of the Marxist Socialist O'Bomber or attempting to hide the fact he's a lying empty suit held up only by the hot air exiting from his lower orifice; they were attempting to destroy Palin...and Palin now trails O'Bomber by a single point by those expressing an opinion in how they view O'Bomber and Palin...i.e., "Favorability Ratings".

One here suggested...in typical misogamist fashion that Palin should stay home and take care of her Down's Syndrome baby. The test of Misogamy IS...would the same person have said..say John Edwards should drop out the race and stay home to take care of his cancer stricken wife. But, I don't remember acoustic making any such suggestion about John Edwards. Some here might remember John Edwards..."Father of the Year"...while his wife was fighting cancer and he was having an affair. Nice, very nice.

Another here...one who is not at all careful in what they choose to post accused Palin of "being indicted" in Alaska.

Let me say this again.

Leftists are scared shitttless of Sarah Palin. She's everything they are not and never will be and she's authentic while leftists are mere posers. Further, Palin represents a major threat to leftist plans and schemes.

She was at the forefront of O'BomberCare hitting a brick wall...and she did that with only 2 words..."Death Panel".

posted December 14, 2009 02:41 PM         

quote:

---

One here suggested...in typical misogamist fashion that Palin should stay home and take care of her Down's Syndrome baby. The test of Misogamy IS...would the same person have said..say John Edwards should drop out the race and stay home to take care of his cancer stricken wife. But, I don't remember acoustic making any such suggestion about John Edwards. Some here might remember John Edwards..."Father of the Year"...while his wife was fighting cancer and he was having an affair. Nice, very nice.

---

That's no test of a misogynist. In fact, your nonsense completely ignores the definition of a misogynist.

Further, taking care of a Down's Syndrome child is not equal to taking care of a middle-aged cancer patient. There's a rather stark lack of equivalency there.

posted December 14, 2009 03:53 PM         

Of course a man staying home...and not running for public office to take care of a cancer stricken wife is comparable to a woman staying home..and not running to take care of a Down Syndrome baby.

Only in the leftist land of misogyny are they not comparable.

There was nothing to backup about Hitchins babblings acoustic. He offered no proof of his allegations which could be researched; just bare-assed allegations flapping in the breeze.

posted December 14, 2009 04:51 PM         

Only in the leftist land of misogyny are they not comparable.
--------------------------------------------
actually in most people's books the care and nurture of a child is quite different from holding the hand of a grownup who is being taken care of and can have you on the end of the phone any time ... VERY different.

the way palin talks about her heroic decision to have this child is pathetic. a child she has obviously passed on to others for most of his care. a child who, as countless other parents will testify, is so much more a gift than a burden (as long as the parents can afford the care, which is more expensive in most cases than your average child). yes, in earlier eras "mongolism" was looked down on and scared people, but there is SO MUCH evidence that these kids are special in a lot of GOOD ways that it is hardly a life-or-death decision, as is the choice made by some mothers who know they will NOT be able to cope with, or maybe even survive the delivery of, a SEVERELY damaged foetus.

i don't care if she raises her kids or not. but spare us the holier-than-thou attitude about your courage in this instance and about the difficult decisions other mothers have had to make! my point? she is a hypocrite, a blatantly transparent one.

AND A QUITTER. do you really think she will stay the course if she by some chance should get elected? or will she quit - right after she has granted alaska its independence?

posted December 14, 2009 05:05 PM         

quote:

---

You're on record here as being a misogynist acoustic and there's no way to deny it.

---

Sure there is: I deny it.

Not only so, but I'm not on record here being a misogynist, and you have no means of proving it. You can spout an OPINION that I'm a misogynist, because I think (as most Conservatives do) that parents should only have children they can attend to, but you don't have nearly enough to make a case for my being misogynistic. That's a ridiculous and indefensible statement that you wouldn't be able to muster any audience to believe.

quote:

---

Of course a man staying home...and not running for public office to take care of a cancer stricken wife is comparable to a woman staying home..and not running to take care of a Down Syndrome baby.

Only in the leftist land of misogyny are they not comparable.

---