An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

Palin Channels Pat Nixon

Across a divide of decades, Sarah Palin is openly fueling the class-based resentment that motivated the Nixons in the 1960s but could only be expressed back then in coded terms like “the silent majority.”

In her interview with Brian Williams this week, Palin evoked memories of what Pat Nixon let slip publicly only once in 1968 in an interview with Gloria Steinem, whose status as one of “The Beautiful People” triggered a monologue of aggrieved self-pity.

Asked to describe members of the elite she rails against on the campaign trail, Palin answered, “Oh, I guess just people who think that they’re better than anyone else. John McCain and I are so committed to serving every American. Hard-working, middle-class Americans…So anyone who thinks that they are–I guess–better than anyone else, that’s my definition of elitism.

“So it’s not education?” Williams pressed. “It’s not income-based? A state of mind? It’s not geography?”

“Anyone who thinks that they’re better than someone else,” Palin repeated firmly.

This echoes what happened when Steinem asked Pat Nixon to define herself and opened a floodgate of resentment that sounded like “a long accusation”:

Read the rest of this entry.

  • JSpencer
    The more I learn about Gov Palin, the more I hear her speak, reinterpret questions during interviews, the more I hear her open up about her "worldview" (which is a generous definition), the more I hear about her odd religious views, her quite uninformed ideas about science, the more that is revealed about what she really knows and doesn't know... then the more I worry about not just her, but the people (and thier motives) who put her into this position in the first place.

    Once her definition of "elitist" is deconstructed and distilled, the easier it is to see how an essential part of the profile includes those who possess too much knowledge, or who believe in too much examination. To this extent she is a standard-bearer for lower expectations, and consequently her appeal (beyond the cynical folks who put her up to this) is stronger among those who have a more limited and perhaps troubled understanding of the modern world.

    This sort of dynamic may play well to a certain provincial demographic, but on a national and world stage it starts falling apart fairly quickly. The question America needs to be asking is whether it wants to be (and be considered by others) on the forefront of progress, or lagging somewhere back in the pack. GIven our history of leadership, accomplishment, innovation, and creative problem solving we should be striving for the former, not settling for the latter.
  • ThinkingOnMyOwnTwoFeet
    I think Sarah does want to strive for "accomplishment, innovation, and creative problem solving." She's a reformer with desperately needed common sense, and she's a reformer who's not afraid to take on her own party if need be to fight for those common sense policies.

    I could care less what her definition of elitism is - the fact is she wants to fight for hard-working Americans and wants to be fair to them.
  • jchem
    TOMOTF: I believe all 4 of the candidates "want to fight for hard-working Americans and want to be fair to them". The problem with going with the "elitists are bad" meme is that its simply wedge politics, creating an us vs them mentality. In other words, its divisive. Call me crazy, but I think the American public is pretty well tired and worn out with divisive politics.

    I will admit that I have my reservations on whether or not an Obama administration can bring the country together. I would like to see him appoint some Repubs to his cabinet, and at this point, I get the impression that he would. And he isn't out there constantly demonizing certain segments of the population. Its been an ugly campaign from both sides. But I think its safe to say that McCain/Palin seem to be telling us why we shouldn't vote for Obama/Biden as opposed to why we should vote for McCain/Palin. Certainly, Obama and Biden have travelled this road as well, but at the same time they are both actually telling us what they plan on doing.
  • ThinkingOnMyOwnTwoFeet
    You make some really great points. McCain/Palin have said what they're going to do though. For one, they're not going to raise taxes on small business owners with employees.

    98% of the small business owners that employ people make over 250k, which means they'll be taxed higher under Obama and will probably have to let people go, bringing up unemployment and hurting the economy further. The numbers of people that work for small businesses is staggering. This is just one example of why I'm for McCain, but I think it's a really important one.
  • JSpencer
    TOMOTF : "She's [Palin] a reformer with desperately needed common sense"

    Common sense? As in taking part in a ritual to ward off witchcraft? As in believing the world is 6000 years old? As in believing that if a girl is raped and becomes pregnant she should be required by law to take the pregnancy to term? I could continue, but suffice to say that while calling her a reformer is very generous, suggesting she would be a champion of common sense requires a major suspension of disbelief.
  • ThinkingOnMyOwnTwoFeet
    She may not "reform" for the things you would like, but she's a reformer nonetheless. That's a fact that can't be disputed. Also, you may think that those who follow religion have no common sense, but I can assure you that those that do follow religion think the same thoughts about the folks that don't. I think in this case, we should definitely agree to disagree, as there is probably little you and I would agree on concerning these issues. :)
  • Rudi
    98% of the small business owners that employ people make over 250k, which means they'll be taxed higher under Obama and will probably have to let people go, bringing up unemployment and hurting the economy further.


    Please include citation for your assertion that 98% of SBO carry such a burden.
  • 1VirginiaHarris1
    I believe that my generation of women was the first to come of age with most of us believing that the world would be fair to us.

    But when I realized that I didn't know how my freedom happened I set out on a journey of discovery and I am now strengthened by the inspiration of countless suffragettes.
    Can you even imagine being a woman and NOT being able to vote?

    Thanks to the suffragettes, America has women voters and wide range of women candidates, and we are a better country for it!

    Women have voices and choices! Just like men.

    But few people know ALL of the suffering that our suffragettes had to go through, and what life was REALLY like for women.

    Now you can subscribe FREE to my exciting e-mail series that goes behind the scenes in the lives of eight of the world's most famous women to reveal the shocking and sometimes heartbreaking truth of HOW women won the vote.

    Thrilling, dramatic, sequential short story e-mail episodes have readers from all over the world raving about the original historical series, "The Privilege of Voting."

    Read this FREE e-mail series on your coffeebreaks and fall in love with these amazing women!

    Subscribe free at

    www.CoffeebreakReaders.com/subscribe.html
  • AsherJ
    @JSpencer

    "Common sense? As in taking part in a ritual to ward off witchcraft? As in believing the world is 6000 years old?"

    Or believing that a kid with an IQ of 85 can comprehend anything beyond simple arithmetic or basic declaratory statements. Or believing that criminality, which is heavily influenced by genetic anti-social personality disorders, is a result of poverty. Etc, etc, etc.

    Both parties contain roughly equal parts of intellectually preposterous beliefs about the world.

    I have nothing but utter disdain for Sarah Paliln, and the notion that she is some champion of common sense is risible. But the exact same can be said for Joe Biden, e.g. his destructive Violence Against Women Act.
  • ThinkingOnMyOwnTwoFeet
    Rudi,
    I wish I had a citation for you, but I heard it on TalkRadio. I did a quick internet search, however, and did find this very informative governtment study done on how many people in the U.S. are employed by small businesses: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf99322/text.htm. The percentage is very high, and it only makes sense that there must be a large percentage of small businesses making over 250K a year if that many people are employed by small businesses. I've heard it argued that by even employing "one" person, a business making under 250K would take a loss. Obviously, there is a huge percentage of small businesses earning over 250K. Obama's tax plan seems so unfair to me in this area, so if I'm perhaps not understanding the full picture, I would love to hear it..... :)
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Enxit Group, LLC