Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Sarah Palin is Over-Exposed—to Her Detriment…Let Warren Buffet Contribute a Billion to the National Debt Fund and Then Shut Up!

Bad News on Sarah Palin: She’s Unserious; Engrossed Only in Family’s Celebrity-Hood…Let Warren Buffett Kick in to the National Debt—Then Shut Up.
                                      Sarah Palin.
     Republicans wondering if Sarah Palin will run for president should relax.  She will but her quest for celebrity-hood for self and family will do her in.  Frivolous stunts such as the hyped “Sarah Palin’s Alaska” may make her big bucks and accelerate her speaking fees but they are not in keeping with a serious search for the presidency.   Her speeches show lack of gravitas although they stir up the grassroots (which is good). 
      Three points.
      First. When she completed her vice presidential run everybody who wished her well advised her to go back home and bone up on the issues.  What she did instead is go home and plunge into a greater search for celebrity-hood. 
      Second.  Bristol is a great liability.   Not so much that she became an unwed mother but that like her own mother she became enthralled with striving to be a media star.  The worst…very worst…is her competing in the Dancing with Stars extravaganza where she is attired seductively in tights and black net stockings,   shoving her hips out suggestively as she dances to the hippie song “My mother wants me to COME!” as the Palins laugh and  applaud from the front row.
          Third, stepping down from the Alaska governorship may  have stepped up her net worth but didn’t help her with people who view governing as serious business.
                          Stop Whining Buffett and Kick In.
      Every month or so we’re treated to a feature story quoting Warren Buffett who says he’s not taxed enough.   It’s part of his p. r. campaign that endeavors to make him a generous, warm-hearted average guy…you know—who lives in his old family house in Omaha, who drinks coffee with his billionaire attorney good old Charlie Munger in a soda shop and who still drives his old 1987 Oldsmobile. 
      He’s supported Barack Obama and a host of liberal causes.  Recently he has spoken out declaring the rich should pay more taxes.  All a tiresome ploy generated by the p.r. industry. 
       When John D. Rockefeller, Sr. was listed as the richest man in the world he was despised by many class-warriors as a tight-fisted old plunderer.   He hired the founder of modern public relations, Edward Bernays to improve his image.   Bernays told him to give dimes to kids in public…dimes then being what an ice cream soda cost.   That didn’t work so Bernays had him launch a broad-based foundation, giving to good causes such as black colleges.  
       His son John D., Jr. rushed into far more giving such as funding the start-up of the University of Chicago.  His children did  all these things and turned to public policy to-boot…David, Nelson (liberal governor of New York), Winthrop (governor of West Virginia).  The next generation gave us Sen. Jay (D-West Va.) than whom there are few more liberal.
        My suggestion…why doesn’t he kick in to ease the national debt…and finance such unnecessary federal programs as the Peace Corps with his own money?  Then….do us all a favor…and shut up.


  1. No, Tom, Sarah Palin’s Alaska is not a “reality show,” and cheering for one of her five children is not a “ frivolous stunt.” She is a “bore” only to you, and it is “clear” that she will seek the Presidency. She may well announce her candidacy on the Gipper’s 100th birthday. We need a presidential candidate with Reagan’s ideology and popularity. Sarah Palin is that unapologetic Conservative candidate. There is no other.

  2. I would argue Mr. Roeser that Ms. Palin is crafty like an arctic fox. Unlike His Obaminence, a man manufactured by the Academy, sheathed in mirrors to reflect back the delusionists' dreams and fantasies, Ms. Palin has done nothing but simply present herself, her family, her values, her idiosyncracies, her entire biography before the American people. Why should she disappear from the national conversation? McCain can continue to do his thing on the floor of the Senate but age keeps him out of the race; but Palin believed something about how to lead this country when she was tapped for VP. It may be unfortunate that a good many Americans form their general opinions and politics through mechanisms of our popular culture, but if that's the engine, then crank up the RPMs. If she gets paid handsomely while exploiting the most efficient platforms to reach the American people, then good for her. Her product sells. In 12 months time, when we must all heave our attention to 2012, there will be very little about Sarah Palin that we don't know. Some will argue that we know too much, but I would wager that may be the deciding factor for many Americans. We know what we get when we vote for the mirror that reflects the lies we tell ourselves - a liar selling dreams. Palin represents the truth of who we are; she's real people, to the extent that that is possible for a "pol." Her values and politics are in plain site. That's a touchstone worth keeping "on the air."

  3. Winthrop Rockefeller was governor of Arkansas, not West Virginia. There's a big difference, though both are "Southern".

    WV was Union-loyal in the Civil War, and was fully contested by Republicans throughout the late 1800s and early 1900s. There have been many Republican governors of WV, including one stretch of 8 out of 9 (1896-1932); 11 elected Senators, including several elected by the Republican-controlled legislature before 1913.

    Arkansas was Confederate, and became Deep South/Jim Crow Southern during and after Reconstruction. Since Reconstruction, there has only been one Republican Senator elected from Arkansas until this year; and no Republican governor till Rockefeller in 1966. Even today the Arkansas legislature is overwhelmingly Democrat.

    As to Jay Rockefeller, he's a liberal, but not a maximal one, at least according to National Journal. For 2009, NJ ranked him as the 26th most liberal Senator, with a composite L rating of 76.5. By comparison, Durbin was 85 (9th), and Burris was 88 (1st).