FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Palinoscopy

Sarah Palin may have rallied the red-staters, but she’s taken over the minds of blue-staters.

Everywhere I turn in New York, she’s governing people’s conversations. A writer told me she obsessively watches the Katie Couric interviews and Saturday Night Live parodies. She finds herself trying to do the Palin accent in the shower.

A violinist woke up screaming, “But I hate Sarah Palin!” She had been bitten on the face by mosquitoes as she slept, and in her dream the itch had become Republican indoctrination.

It’s not just the people I know. Liberals everywhere are bombarding each other’s inboxes with clips of Palin being interviewed and impersonated, shooting rifles and playing flute in a beauty contest.

There’s the attorney and mother of three who wrote to Salon, “I am constantly distracted from my work by my need to continually update myself on the latest … ridicule of her. In my hatred for her, I have begun to hate myself.”

More than 70 million people watched the vice-presidential debate, 50 percent more than watched each presidential debate. The Tina Fey parody of Palin interviewed by Katie Couric got more than 10 million clicks on the Internet.

What is it about Sarah Palin that is simultaneously so disturbing and mesmerizing?

If you ask people why they’re so preoccupied with her, you get some version of, “she’s horrible.” But what does that mean?

It’s not that she’s an idiot. Bush is an idiot, and we flip off the TV when he comes on.

It’s not that she’s evil. Cheney is evil, and we turn away.

It’s not that she’s the red-state “Other.” Huckabee’s the Other, and we don’t send each other clips of his sweaty-lipped interviews.

I have racked my brain to try to boil the enigma down to one quality that makes Palin so disturbing to blue-staters, and I couldn’t. Character is an intricate thing, but as a starting point I made a list of nine factors that make Palin unsettling, with each being a sine qua non of that experience. That is, if you took one of them away, blue-staters would find some relief. For example, she would be pretty disturbing if she were simply right-wing and empty, but this level of obsession requires something more.

1. Mendacity. If she were a straight-shooter, instead of showing the signs of being a pathological bullshitter, her demeanor and politics would not be so upsetting. Thought experiment: “You know what, Katie, I just haven’t had time recently to keep up with the news like I should.” Vaguely disturbing but not shocking. Most politicians lie, but not compulsively. Hillary said, “Fake it till you make it,” and Palin is certainly trying.

2. Insularity. It’s not that she comes from a red state. So did Ross Perot, and people found his folksy expressions endearing. It’s that she has shown herself to be utterly oblivious to other parts of the world and the politics of her own nation.

3. Superficiality. It’s not just that she’s nervous during interviews or on national television. She was just as empty in her state debates.

4. Over self-estimation. A cardinal sin for blue-staters, who value intelligence and education. That doesn’t mean blue-staters are smart, but since they value intelligence they usually know their place in the hierarchy. They know that when they’re being stupid, it’s time to shut up. This woman keeps barreling on, shamelessly. She sees herself as tough and pretty, and she values those traits more than intelligence.

5. Right-wing. If Obama had picked some guy off the street to be his running mate, but the guy was liberal, we might laugh at his roughness but would not feel the same fear.

6. Suddenness. She came out of nowhere. In year three of the Palin presidency, we will no longer be sending each other clips, and Tina Fey will long have given up on doing her.

7. Believer. She has the same possessed aura as my old boss at a Christian company in Alabama who used to sing “Joy to the World” by Three Dog Night at eight in the morning while employees were made to watch, holding hands. There is something mesmerizing about this glow. You want to believe like she does, and that freaks you out.

8. Feminine. As opposed to the epicene Hillary. I should add attractive and motherly, too, as subfactors. Several people have told me they see traces of their mothers in Palin, when their mothers are on shaky ground but still want to make their point and come across as strong. This bothers them because they want to move beyond their mothers.

9. Power. And of course none of this would matter if she weren’t so close to becoming our president. If she were our bartender in Wasilla, we’d find her a hoot.

There are several of these that combine to make a soup of eeriness. The believer and mother qualities, for example, are things that draw us to her, while simultaneously we are repelled by traits such as insularity and emptiness, and we’re even more disgusted than if we hadn’t been drawn to her at all.

I considered adding meanness to make it an even ten. But while I think that’s an important factor behind the loathing of Sarah Palin, my guess is that it’s not crucial. Even without her sneering attacks, she would be firmly under the skin of almost all blue-staters. Just look at the Palin impersonations that have resonated so deeply with people (not just Fey’s, but the other very popular ones on Youtube). None of them uses her meanness. The other qualities are enough.

On the night of the VP debates, New York had a carnival atmosphere. Every bar in town was hosting a debate party, it seemed, and people were skipping down the sidewalk to the show.

Walking to a Greenwich Village bar, I felt a weird mix of anticipation and queasiness, as if I was if going to the village square to watch a flogging. It was hard to believe our political discourse had fallen so low.

Others told me they felt the same thing. For a ballet dancer, it was like how she felt as a girl going to watch her friends pop their zits. A little excited, a little disgusted.

Of course we got exactly the unmasking we wanted, only the people kept chanting that the empress had clothes. The first Ohio undecided voter I saw interviewed called Palin “real.” New York Times columnist David Brooks would later call Palin “smart.”

We thought we were going to witness a national zit-popping that night. Biden was going to administer the lance that would finally let flow all our country’s nasty sebaceous fluid. Except it didn’t pop.

No, on closer inspection it wasn’t a zit at all. It wasn’t even a boil that could be lanced. It was a melanoma. It was the outer-most marking of a deeply ailing nation. There was three weeks left to carve it off, but even that would be no cure for the malignancy.

BRENDAN COONEY is an anthropologist living in New York City. He can be reached at: itmighthavehappened@yahoo.com

 

Your Ad Here
 

 

 

 

More articles by:
April 25, 2018
Stanley L. Cohen
Selective Outrage
Dan Kovalik
The Empire Turns Its Sights on Nicaragua – Again!
Joseph Essertier
The Abductees of Japan and Korea
Ramzy Baroud
The Ghost of Herut: Einstein on Israel, 70 Years Ago
W. T. Whitney
Imprisoned FARC Leader Faces Extradition: Still No Peace in Colombia
Manuel E. Yepe
Washington’s Attack on Syria Was a Mockery of the World
John White
My Silent Pain for Toronto and the World
Dean Baker
Bad Projections: the Federal Reserve, the IMF and Unemployment
David Schultz
Why Donald Trump Should Not be Allowed to Pardon Michael Cohen, His Friends, or Family Members
Mel Gurtov
Will Abe Shinzo “Make Japan Great Again”?
Binoy Kampmark
Enoch Powell: Blood Speeches and Anniversaries
Frank Scott
Weapons and Walls
April 24, 2018
Carl Boggs
Russia and the War Party
William A. Cohn
Carnage Unleashed: the Pentagon and the AUMF
Nathan Kalman-Lamb
The Racist Culture of Canadian Hockey
María Julia Bertomeu
On Angers, Disgusts and Nauseas
Nick Pemberton
How To Buy A Seat In Congress 101
Ron Jacobs
Resisting the Military-Now More Than Ever
Paul Bentley
A Velvet Revolution Turns Bloody? Ten Dead in Toronto
Sonali Kolhatkar
The Left, Syria and Fake News
Manuel E. Yepe
The Confirmation of Democracy in Cuba
Peter Montgomery
Christian Nationalism: Good for Politicians, Bad for America and the World
Ted Rall
Bad Drones
Jill Richardson
The Latest Attack on Food Stamps
Andrew Stewart
What Kind of Unionism is This?
Ellen Brown
Fox in the Hen House: Why Interest Rates Are Rising
April 23, 2018
Patrick Cockburn
In Middle East Wars It Pays to be Skeptical
Thomas Knapp
Just When You Thought “Russiagate” Couldn’t Get Any Sillier …
Gregory Barrett
The Moral Mask
Robert Hunziker
Chemical Madness!
David Swanson
Senator Tim Kaine’s Brief Run-In With the Law
Dave Lindorff
Starbucks Has a Racism Problem
Uri Avnery
The Great Day
Nyla Ali Khan
Girls Reduced to Being Repositories of Communal and Religious Identities in Kashmir
Ted Rall
Stop Letting Trump Distract You From Your Wants and Needs
Steve Klinger
The Cautionary Tale of Donald J. Trump
Kevin Zeese - Margaret Flowers
Conflict Over the Future of the Planet
Cesar Chelala
Gideon Levy: A Voice of Sanity from Israel
Weekend Edition
April 20, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Ruling Class Operatives Say the Darndest Things: On Devils Known and Not
Conn Hallinan
The Great Game Comes to Syria
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Mother of War
Andrew Levine
“How Come?” Questions
Doug Noble
A Tale of Two Atrocities: Douma and Gaza
Kenneth Surin
The Blight of Ukania
Howard Lisnoff
How James Comey Became the Strange New Hero of the Liberals
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail