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:

January 17, 2019
Stan Cox
That Green Growth at the Heart of the Green New Deal? It’s Malignant
David Schultz
Trump vs the Constitution: Why He Cannot Invoke the Emergencies Act to Build a Wall
Paul Cochrane
Europe’s Strategic Humanitarian Aid: Yemen vs. Syria
Tom Clifford
China: An Ancient Country, Getting Older
Greg Grandin
How Not to Build a “Great, Great Wall”
Ted Rall
Our Pointless, Very American Culture of Shame
John G. Russell
Just Another Brick in the Wall of Lies
Glenn Sacks
LA Teachers Strike: Black Smoke Pouring Out of LAUSD Headquarters
Patrick Walker
Referendum 2020: A Green New Deal vs. Racist, Classist Climate Genocide
Kevin Zeese - Margaret Flowers
Uniting for a Green New Deal
Matt Johnson
The Wall Already Exists — In Our Hearts and Minds
Jesse Jackson
Trump’s Flailing will get More Desperate and More Dangerous
Andrew Stewart
The Green New Deal Must be Centered on African American and Indigenous Workers to Differentiate Itself From the Democratic Party: Part Three
January 16, 2019
Patrick Bond
Jim Yong Kim’s Mixed Messages to the World Bank and the World
John Grant
Joe Biden, Crime Fighter from Hell
Alvaro Huerta
Brief History Notes on Mexican Immigration to the U.S.
Kenneth Surin
A Great Speaker of the UK’s House of Commons
Elizabeth Henderson
Why Sustainable Agriculture Should Support a Green New Deal
Binoy Kampmark
Trump, Bolton and the Syrian Confusion
Jeff Mackler
Trump’s Syria Exit Tweet Provokes Washington Panic
Barbara Nimri Aziz
How Long Can Nepal Blame Others for Its Woes?
Glenn Sacks
LA Teachers’ Strike: When Just One Man Says, “No”
Cesar Chelala
Violence Against Women: A Pandemic No Longer Hidden
Kim C. Domenico
To Make a Vineyard of the Curse: Fate, Fatalism and Freedom
Dave Lindorff
Criminalizing BDS Trashes Free Speech & Association
Thomas Knapp
Now More Than Ever, It’s Clear the FBI Must Go
Binoy Kampmark
Dances of Disinformation: The Partisan Politics of the Integrity Initiative
Andrew Stewart
The Green New Deal Must be Centered on African American and Indigenous Workers to Differentiate Itself From the Democratic Party: Part Two
Edward Curtin
A Gentrified Little Town Goes to Pot
January 15, 2019
Patrick Cockburn
Refugees Are in the English Channel Because of Western Interventions in the Middle East
Howard Lisnoff
The Faux Political System by the Numbers
Lawrence Davidson
Amos Oz and the Real Israel
John W. Whitehead
Beware the Emergency State
John Laforge
Loudmouths against Nuclear Lawlessness
Myles Hoenig
Labor in the Age of Trump
Jeff Cohen
Mainstream Media Bias on 2020 Democratic Race Already in High Gear
Dean Baker
Will Paying for Kidneys Reduce the Transplant Wait List?
George Ochenski
Trump’s Wall and the Montana Senate’s Theater of the Absurd
Binoy Kampmark
Dances of Disinformation: the Partisan Politics of the Integrity Initiative
Glenn Sacks
On the Picket Lines: Los Angeles Teachers Go On Strike for First Time in 30 Years
Jonah Raskin
Love in a Cold War Climate
Andrew Stewart
The Green New Deal Must be Centered on African American and Indigenous Workers to Differentiate Itself From the Democratic Party
January 14, 2019
Kenn Orphan
The Tears of Justin Trudeau
Julia Stein
California Needs a 10-Year Green New Deal
Dean Baker
Declining Birth Rates: Is the US in Danger of Running Out of People?
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail