I am not a big fan of Gertrude Stein. I make Oakland my home, and despite Gertrude's famous pithy and (in my opinion) inaccurate phrase about it, I think there is plenty of there here. Even so, I can think of no other description that encapsulates the (lack of) substance and the (non-existent) intellectualism of Sarah Palin.
Lately it seems that Americans have either forgotten the qualities that a good leader should have or they are simply incapable of discerning true leadership from the pack of half-witted entertainers and right-wing hacks and poseurs who pass themselves off as leaders of their parties: they are an embarrassment even to good ol' sleazy politicians, who, disingenuous as they were, actually attempted to muster some degree of knowledge of the issues, rather than Tweet and pontificate their way around the annoying obstacle course of facts.
I am constantly amazed by the puerile political rhetoric that spews from the Alaskan's mouth -- either straight and (very) narrow party line memo fodder, or negative potshots at opponents with predictable, contrived, and sometimes unabashedly plagiarized one-liners. And there is no better camouflage for shallowness than modern day communication tools like Twitter and Facebook that elevate bloviation above understanding. But despite having the benefit of revising and rewriting those 140 characters to achieve punchy, righteouser-than-thou perfection, Ms. Palin still manages to sound effete, erring grammatically, inventing words, and comparing herself to the Bard.
I used to think Reagan was one of those politicians who could teleprompt a decent speech, even though one could tell that there was very little substance behind those beady eyes. Still, the avuncular façade and HAL-like tenor earned him the moniker of "the great communicator" by his party. As the liberal cliché goes, he got the role of his lifetime playing the president of the United States, a starring role in a dark American tale (he was an informant for McCarthy and friends and he also used to be a Democrat). Had he played such a role in his Hollywood days, he would have risked a panning by critics -- as an actor, Bonzo's bedtime came none too soon. But as a politician, at least he could string together grammatically coherent sentences and pulled out a handful of memorable one-liners, e.g. "Well, there you go again..." or "Government is not the solution..."
Sarah Palin has a similar preoccupation with pithy one-liners, and frequently mentions, copies, quotes, and plagiarizes Reagan, but she is in a league of her own when it comes to substance-free ranting and inane musings, having not made a single significant contribution of policy, idea, or statement or speech of historical importance or lasting inspiration -- at a time when this country needs such concrete contributions more than almost any time in its history. Yet her admirers adhere to her like flies on you-know-what. And she is making a mint on those flies since throwing in the towel as governor and (literally) cashing in on their devotion in her new role as the disembodied digital voice of conservative disgruntlement. The amount of media Ms. Palin gets on Fox and other venues for the all-talk, (k)no(w)-nothing fraud that she is simply astounding.
Increasingly bombarded by media of all sorts, whether it be two hundred television channels, movies, games, social networks, texting, or YouTubing, the electorate is finding it difficult to keep its eyes on the facts when those facts blend into a tidal wave of fiction, opinion, myth, slander, and noise. This has increased ignorance in an electorate that has decided it is too busy to scrutinize candidates in depth, leaving it more receptive, by virtue of the simple mathematics of the time involved, to sound bites, jibes, one-liners, patrimonies, and pithy quotes.
Palin has seized upon the short attention span of the electorate, and has honed in on this weakness with her social media approach. There was a joke going around a while back which suggested that YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook were getting together with a new name. While I was musing over this joke, it suddenly struck me. Sarah Palin, this new breed of alpha female charlatan politician who hides behind her digital drapes, is exactly as the joke suggests: a TwitFace politician. What she lacks in tangible meatiness, she makes up for in intangibles that appeal to short attention span tea partiers who judge a book by its cover, and evangelicals who are pining for the last century.
She keeps coyly evading the issue of running for the top office while never openly denying the rumor. I believe the slyly crafted appearance of making a presidential run is a ruse to bilk her sycophant devotees out of some serious pelt. I don't think this piper (ironically, her infamous pageant talent) is about to lead rats to the river to drown -- far from it: she needs them to keep running her money-making treadmill while she retains her mystique and feminine appeal. Because if she were to lose the election (a very likely scenario), this elaborate Alaskan sand castle is going to get swept out to Russia once the populous gets a whiff of how big a share of their caviar she has been packing away.
So despite how little I think of her, I cannot discount her appeal to the voters. While the percentages are low among those coveted independents, overall they are high enough to be disconcerting. She may be gaining a reputation as a king and queen maker, but I still don't think America as a whole is quite ready to coronate her. But take nothing for granted: we should be furtive and heed Plato's famous words, "Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber."