Sarah Palin: Going Rove

If you will be kind enough to indulge me, I would like to propose a toast: Here's to Sarah Palin; may she never - EVER - go away.
`
I am going to go out on a limb here: No woman since Eleanor Roosevelt has done more to further the cause of progressive politics in the United States of America than has our Sarah. Don'cha just love her? I sure do!
`
A woman in Texas by the name of Stephanie Garcia has a blog called, Lady Steele, Modern Super Hero. Yesterday, in a posting aptly titled "Going Stupid", she offered her readers five different variations on the definition of the word "rogue" - courtesy of the good people at Webster's Dictionary:

1. Vagrant, tramp

2. A dishonest or worthless person: scoundrel

3. A mischievous person: scamp

4. A horse inclined to shirk or misbehave

5. An individual exhibiting a chance and usually inferior biological variation

This certainly begs the question: did she or any of the geniuses who surround her have the wit to even do a cursory look into into the definition of that word? And she wants to be president. Is this a great country, or what?

The lady is at it again.I have spent an unhealthy amount of time in the last fifteen months thinking about Sarah Palin. Is she for real? Does she actually believe the nonsense she spouts on a daily basis? Is she insane or merely dumber than dog shit? Her latest contribution to America's shattered political conversation is her memoir, Going Rogue. The fact checkers who were given advanced copies of the book a couple of days before its publication seem to be unanimous in their opinion that it is drenched in distortions and baldfaced lies. She has picked up the fallen torch of Josef Goebbels and Karl Rove: The bigger and more outrageous the lie, the better it may be utilized to further the cause of one's idiotic political agenda. She has learned more-than-a-few lessons from the masters of distortion.

For the record: I have not read Going Rogue, nor do I have any intention of doing so. I have enough political non-fiction to keep up with to waste any of my time on fiction. That is the reason I never read Gore Vidal's historical novel on Abraham Lincoln. What's the point when there are so many great biographies? Besides, it's been quoted and dissected enough in the last twenty-four hours - by Liberals and Conservatives alike - that I'm able to draw some reasonable conclusions.

One such conclusion that is unavoidable is the woman's jaw-dropping shallowness. When telling the story of how she was confronted at one point with news reports that she and her husband Todd were going to divorce, one would think (indeed one would hope) that she would offer for the reader's contemplation a heartfelt description of her abiding love for her husband; how their union could not be tossed aside like some disposable camera - that she and Todd took their wedding vows seriously. No, there was none of that....

"Dang, I thought. Divorce Todd? Have you seen Todd???"

TRANSLATION: If Todd gains fifty pounds, he's toast.

Thirteen years into their marriage, Eleanor Roosevelt was confronted with her husband's affair with her social secretary (and distant relative of mine - I come from a long line of home wreckers) Lucy Paige Mercer. After contemplating divorce, it was decided that they would continue their union. Years later, she confided to her friend, Joesph Lash, the reasons for saving their marriage. They were many and complicated. This, I can assure you, was not one of those reasons:

"Dang, I thought. Divorce Franklin? Have you seen Franklin???"

Ah, substance!

The book offers all sorts of lame explanations as to why the Republicans got their heads handed to them at the polls a year ago - and conveniently avoids the unavoidable: the choice of this idiotic woman to be "one heartbeat away from the presidency" will go down in history as the most profound political blunder of the era. The very fact that she was perceived as a viable, competent candidate is further proof (as if further proof is really necessary at this late point) that the Republican National Committee has been overtaken by maniacs. Did they actually believe that she was up to the task? You bet'cha!

"What do you read?"

That is not really much of a "Got'cha" question, is it? Obviously you would be able to answer it in a heartbeat: "Well, among other things I read 'The Rant' by Tom Degan." (And don't you dare deny that you read it. You're reading it now, GOTCHA!) Ask me the question and I would be able to give you a fairly long list without batting an eye: Time, Newsweek, Rolling Stone, Vanity Fair, The Nation....I typed that out without a moment's hesitation. And those are just some of the publications I read. So why is poor Katie Couric being condemned by the diva of the Klondike for making such an "unfair" inquiry?

I think that the more relevant question would be this: how come the Governor of Alaska and nominee for so high an office could not answer so basic and simple a question without the benefit of notes and Que Cards?

"What do you read?"

The fact that she was unable to improvise an answer is quite revealing. I mean, who the hell hasn't heard of Time or Newsweek? She couldn't even come up with "The National Review" - the Bible of the right wing! Even Mad Magazine would have been appropriate under the circumstances. If it weren't so funny it just might be a tad disturbing.

The most interesting and intriguing thing about all of this is the total absence from the book's pages of the name, Levi Johnston, Sarah's none-too-bright, former/future son-in-law and the father of her grandson (whom he happily admits was named after the rock band, Van Halen, and his favorite hockey equipment company - genius). He says that his obviously ghost-written and devastating portrait of the Palins in last month's Vanity Fair was only the tip of the proverbial iceberg. This is one kid she really should avoid pissing off. Better to omit him from the text entirely.

It is a given that Sarah Palin will not be going away any time soon. Does she have a shot at the nomination in 2012? Unfortunately the answer to that question is: probably not. Oh! But what a gift that would be! The final nail in the coffin of the right wing as a viable political force in this country. But I believe in miracles, and I'm going to pray that the Republican base shrinks between now and then to such a horrifying degree that the nomination is hers for the asking.

Wouldn't that be a wonderful thing? Can you even imagine?

Tom Degan
tomdegan@frontiernet.net

SUGGESTED READING:

Eleanor and Franklin
by Joseph Lash

It was also made into a two-part, television movie in 1975 starring Jane Alexander and Edward Hermann in the title roles. It is available on DVD.

AFTERTHOUGHT:

The geniuses at Google Ad Sense have decided that since this is a piece on Sarah Palin, they should advertise her book at the top of the page. Don't waste your money.