Paul A. Ibbetson
Palms, knuckles, and fingertips: a rich assessment of Palin hate
By Paul A. Ibbetson
Oh, it is indeed a hard time to be a liberal. The storm clouds of destiny are so close one can feel the humidity of the humiliation that is about to rain down on the liberal left. The thunder, of course, is the American people who have had enough of uncontrolled spending and the quickstep to socialistic left with which Barack Obama and his political supporting cast has taken this country with an arrogant indifference to opposition by the American people. So, as is the case in a free country, our system will be used to wash away these destructive forces and the nation will begin to heal itself and hopefully, be wiser for the experience.
I have written about Palin Hate many times and have been observing its evolution as liberals attempt to come to terms with their upcoming ideological defeats in 2010 and 2012. This documentation has been a dirty business with many twists and turns and as always, with each writing, a little more is learned about both Palin and her attackers. The latest attack comes from liberal New York Times columnist Frank Rich. For the most part Rich blindly stabs his trident at Palin like most of the frothing left that knows they hate the former governor of Alaska for some reason or another but fail to make a coherent argument. To continue a documentation of the evolution of Palin Hate, I will give you an assessment of Rich's most overt thrusts at the Palin camp.
First, Rich does what all liberals do when they see red. He does what liberals accuse conservatives of doing; he bashes women. Out of the gate and in defiance of every feminist who ever voted democrat, Rich frames Palin as the evil, maniacal plotting female. In fact, when talking about Sarah Palin and the incident in which she wrote crib notes on her hand for a speech and was later made fun of by White House court jester Robert Gibbs, Rich takes pity on giggling Gibbs who he sees as a helpless pawn in Palin's elaborate plan to gain backlash support from the American people. In fact, Rich eludes that Palin's only quality of note may be her plotting nature when he says, "you had to wonder if Palin, who is nothing if not cunning, had sprung a trap." All I can say to Frank Rich on that component of his Palin attack is that he pushed the point home very aggressively, "women, you just can't trust them," I'm sure the feminists would all be proud.
At this point, Rich's attack echoes the usual subliminal and overt liberal talking points of the left which include intolerance for financial success, anti-capitalistic spew, guilt by association, bathroom yardstick talk of who has the longest "conservatism," perpetuating the one-dimensional view of the Tea Party movement, Americans being brainless cattle, and finally the always popular liberal slap at Christianity.
The attacks by Frank Rich on Sarah Palin anger a majority in this nation. He probably does more to promote Palin to the public stage than his cohort, the press secretary, in that he shines even more light on the desperation of the modern liberal today with his multiple-layered attacks. It is important to remember that Frank Rich is playing the best cards that he has against Sarah Palin which when placed on the table appear to depict that Palin is a tricky financially successful woman who believes in God and has hordes of Tea Party followers. This is the best that a New York Times columnist can do after examining everything from the palms, knuckles, and fingertips of the Palin crib note incident.
In the end it is hard not to take at least some pity on Rich who is reflecting not the death of real journalism but the death throes of a liberal ideology that has been exposed and is being rejected by the American people. Palin, as well, should not be elevated to some position of the divine but simply as a person who has a message that rings true with the majority of the nation, a majority which is now about to bring a long-needed cleansing rain to this country.
© Paul A. Ibbetson
February 18, 2010
Oh, it is indeed a hard time to be a liberal. The storm clouds of destiny are so close one can feel the humidity of the humiliation that is about to rain down on the liberal left. The thunder, of course, is the American people who have had enough of uncontrolled spending and the quickstep to socialistic left with which Barack Obama and his political supporting cast has taken this country with an arrogant indifference to opposition by the American people. So, as is the case in a free country, our system will be used to wash away these destructive forces and the nation will begin to heal itself and hopefully, be wiser for the experience.
I have written about Palin Hate many times and have been observing its evolution as liberals attempt to come to terms with their upcoming ideological defeats in 2010 and 2012. This documentation has been a dirty business with many twists and turns and as always, with each writing, a little more is learned about both Palin and her attackers. The latest attack comes from liberal New York Times columnist Frank Rich. For the most part Rich blindly stabs his trident at Palin like most of the frothing left that knows they hate the former governor of Alaska for some reason or another but fail to make a coherent argument. To continue a documentation of the evolution of Palin Hate, I will give you an assessment of Rich's most overt thrusts at the Palin camp.
First, Rich does what all liberals do when they see red. He does what liberals accuse conservatives of doing; he bashes women. Out of the gate and in defiance of every feminist who ever voted democrat, Rich frames Palin as the evil, maniacal plotting female. In fact, when talking about Sarah Palin and the incident in which she wrote crib notes on her hand for a speech and was later made fun of by White House court jester Robert Gibbs, Rich takes pity on giggling Gibbs who he sees as a helpless pawn in Palin's elaborate plan to gain backlash support from the American people. In fact, Rich eludes that Palin's only quality of note may be her plotting nature when he says, "you had to wonder if Palin, who is nothing if not cunning, had sprung a trap." All I can say to Frank Rich on that component of his Palin attack is that he pushed the point home very aggressively, "women, you just can't trust them," I'm sure the feminists would all be proud.
At this point, Rich's attack echoes the usual subliminal and overt liberal talking points of the left which include intolerance for financial success, anti-capitalistic spew, guilt by association, bathroom yardstick talk of who has the longest "conservatism," perpetuating the one-dimensional view of the Tea Party movement, Americans being brainless cattle, and finally the always popular liberal slap at Christianity.
The attacks by Frank Rich on Sarah Palin anger a majority in this nation. He probably does more to promote Palin to the public stage than his cohort, the press secretary, in that he shines even more light on the desperation of the modern liberal today with his multiple-layered attacks. It is important to remember that Frank Rich is playing the best cards that he has against Sarah Palin which when placed on the table appear to depict that Palin is a tricky financially successful woman who believes in God and has hordes of Tea Party followers. This is the best that a New York Times columnist can do after examining everything from the palms, knuckles, and fingertips of the Palin crib note incident.
In the end it is hard not to take at least some pity on Rich who is reflecting not the death of real journalism but the death throes of a liberal ideology that has been exposed and is being rejected by the American people. Palin, as well, should not be elevated to some position of the divine but simply as a person who has a message that rings true with the majority of the nation, a majority which is now about to bring a long-needed cleansing rain to this country.
© Paul A. Ibbetson
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
