Wednesday, July 01, 2009

Todd Purdum on Sarah Palin

There is a new article by Todd Purdum in Vanity Fair concerning Sarah Palin and the 2008 Presidential Election. This article is an interesting text as it reveals very little that we did not know before and takes a few, deep and dark swipes against Sarah Palin that seem to be unfair against her and that come from a source (Purdum) who is unqualified to make these claims.

With so little new information, and what new information in the article does not seem too relevant, I have too questions: first, why should anyone other than political junkies read the piece? Second, even after reading the piece and reading the terrible slams on Palin (postpartum? seriously? what are your qualifications to diagnose this?) why cannot I not, even in good conscience, defend Palin? After everything she said and did during the campaign, I feel as if I should not even mention that the postpartum claim is outlandish because Palin deserves almost every unsubstantiated claim against her for ever unsubstantiated claim she delivered.

Update: Watch this video.

It is discourse like this, with not so subtle references to Obama as a terrorist and Obama as King Kong (no racial implications here, none whatsoever), and Palin as a national, and erotic, savior (notice the kinky, right-wing military and sex fethish with the erect missiles in relation to Palin in a military uniform-- starbursts indeed) that makes me believe everyday the network news should run the Thanksgiving footage of Palin being interviewed as turkeys were slaughtered. That is the correct metaphor for discussing what would happen to the US if Palin ever achieved national office.


harrogate said...

You are at the heart, it seems to Harrogate, of the difficulty. Palin's mean-spiritedness. "Real Virginians" indeed.

Harrogate too had, and has, a difficult time doing the right thing and defending her against unfair attacks. But your post is so right on. Intellectual honesty and civil dialogue demand nothing less.

And plus, as you note, there is SOOOO much valid ground of attack, it seems Rhetorically lazy to come at her in the way that Purdum does.

harrogate said...


What the hell is up with that SarahPac Ad? Even coming from her it is stunning.

Oxymoron said...

I thought that first video was probably put together by some YouTuber. I never would have guessed that it comes from "the ONLY political action committee authorized by Sarah Palin." OMFG, indeed.

Oxymoron said...

In addition to the erect missiles: at :39, we get the image of a long rigid structure penetrating from behind the opening of a vessel that is clearly labeled Alaska (AK).

Cue funky bass line.

solon said...

Interesting, Palin still possesses the ability to make me sad. Her PAC took the ad down. Maybe she lacks the balls necessary to keep the ad up. If that is the case, then she'll never be able to shoot the plane down.


I think it is funny that intellectual honesty means that we should not defend Palin. In a way it is true since the defense of Palin leads to intellectual dishonesty. Even if the Purdum article is bad, defending her seems worse.


It does indeed seem strange that since Obama is president, threats to the US will sodomize Alaska. But, when you fear the gays the most, then you know what the real threats are...

Good eye my friend. Good eye.