I read a hilarious column about Sarah Palin in The Huffington Post on Sunday. The timing was ideal, as I hadn’t had a really good fit of laughter since reading Michael Gross’s Vanity Fair Palin piece. Or since listening to Vice President Joe Biden talk about how Iraq “could be one of the great achievements of this administration”—you know, of the administration led by a President who opposed the troop surge.
Bottom line: I was in need of a hearty chuckle. Enter Earl Ofari Hutchinson’s “Time to Rethink Palin.”
Hutchinson begins with this: “From the moment that Republican presidential candidate John McCain plopped her on his ticket, the supreme article of political faith from all pundits, much of the press, most Democrats, and the GOP establishment has been that Sarah Palin is a laughingstock, a side-show diversion, an ignoramus on the issues, a gossip and celebrity starved media creation, and, of course, a closet race-tinged crowd baiter.”
Wow, that’s a mouthful, Hutchinson. Palin’s Iowa speech gotcha down? All that talk of lame-stream media, GOP unity, and respecting the will of the people giving you a belly ache?
Hutchinson admits to Palin’s endorsement victories, as well as to “a flip-flop in some polls that now show more people than not say that she should run, and more than a few say that she should win.”
However, he quickly follows up by referring to her “motherly, family-values, fundamentalist pitch” and “political ineptness, naiveté.”
Fundamentalist pitch? How so? Inept and naïve in what respect?
Hutchinson leaves out the details. Perhaps he believes that if vague, empty rhetoric could land a man in the White House in 2008, it can keep a woman out in 2012.
Hutchinson accuses Palin of having exploited the issue of race and Obama during the 2008 campaign, of having “trotted out the GOP’s old reliable playbook of racially tinged code words, phrases, and digs at Obama, ‘paling around with terrorists,’ and ‘This is not a man who sees America as you see America and as I see America.’”
Pardon me if I don’t spot the racism.
He persists with typical left-wing race games—yawn—insisting that Palin was the ideal “media savvy and manipulative, galvanizing figurehead” to rile up those who “just simply could not stomach the idea of a black man in the White House.”
Hutchinson seemingly hasn’t pondered that it was Obama’s voting record—not the color of his skin—which so many Americans couldn’t stomach.
He finishes up by hypothesizing that Palin’s talk of GOP unity is “aimed at doing one thing, and that’s to bring her in from the fringe cold and establish her as a worthy, even credible, presidential candidate in 2012.… This horrific possibility is more than enough cause to rethink Palin.”
That darn Sarah, up to no good again. Packing arenas left and right, thanking the vets, talking Constitution this and restore that, calling out the GOP establishment when need be… Oh, the horror.
As we gear up for the 2010 and 2012 elections, keep your eye on the Left’s talking points on Palin. They’ve unsuccessfully played the dumb hick from Alaska card. It just doesn’t work when you’re dealing with a smart, witty, business-minded woman whose media appearances are getting sharper by the day. And they know it.
The alternative? Much like other strong constitutional conservatives, Palin will be portrayed as—in the words of Hutchinson—“a political force, threat, and danger.”
And on that point, Hutchinson and I agree.
No matter what path she chooses to follow, Sarah Palin will be a political force for conservatism, a threat to Washington’s business as usual, and a danger to the big-government, tax-and-spend agenda of America’s Left.
Political force, threat, and danger, indeed.
Sign up to the Human Events newsletter