Sarah Palin - The politically correctedness has gotta out now....

Well, you have seen how Bageant describes how the mess developed, Al? Lots of folks came in from the farm, began work in industry, got blindsided by globalization, don't read or follow the news that isn't prepared for them by talk radio, etc.

Bageant says it's a matter of upgrading educational opportunity, but has no idea how that could be brought about (not that I can find it in Deer Hunting, anyway). And they are not going to rush out to support an African-American pres.  Bageant does suggest a lot of things to cut their aggravation with elitist, liberal, wealthy, Wall St. goings on. And I guess the picture here on babble itself is one of folks who are, to say the least, rather leery of even reading about Bageant's "redneck" culture - his description. Which makes me despair of the great "out there" coming to terms with the huge "underclass" that is certainly only going to build in importance as the economy continues to shed jobs and hope.

Do you think those innately conservative folks are going to seek anything but a populist route out of their misery?  I've tried to stir interest in construction of a rational approach to it, but just wind up proposing putting economy and society on a wartime footing, with all of its constrictions, but with the objective of bringing about an end to the need for growth, and the complete redefining of what it means to be a functioning, producing, consuming human being on Earth. Sort of a return to 1941, with other outcomes in mind. And really level the social playing field again. That's about as optimistic as I can get, and shows my underlying authoritarian tendencies.

Well, anyway, Al, you asked.  ;)

I found it enlightening and entertaining, but rather maddening due to the absence of prescription, Michael. I'd really like to know how that mind retreats from the popular understanding of the meaning of scientific developments and the impacts of the larger world on our own. Is it fear that turns it away from access to learning so very muich more from the IT world? Today's hillbilly has no excuse.

I'm looking forward to the new book now in the works. I'll bet Palin appears.

George Victor wrote:

And among the folks of Winchester, Virginia, the supporters of Palin,As Joe Bageant explains it in Deer Hunting with Jesus:

I had a gf in Winchester - the birthplace of Patsy Cline - and used to visit often. Beautiful place, although also quite a contrast between the well-to-do and the less well off.

Barack Obama has today become Sarah Palin's greatest weapon.

Quote:

The wave of goodwill that blessed his historic election, the very aspirations the Nobel nod rewarded, all of that has now subsided as scepticism and disillusionment have settled in, the greying president now down in his job approval ratings and bruised by almost a year of political battles. The messy deliberative process on Afghanistan, punctuated by a flurry of leaks and counterleaks, showed hesitation and second-guessing at a defining moment of his presidency, tarnishing the image built during the campaign of a White House fully in control of its message

Thanks for the Truthdig link, Michael.  Bageant is almost as concerned as Hedges, about the prospects for change. I wonder why, however, getting too close to that culture - and Sarah - always slides over to Obama, hereabouts?  Too painful?  Too difficult a target?  I sometimes think that the precursor to a fascist eruption, anywhere, must look a bit like this.  Fear of discussing the real world as developing social rality?  Leaders as easy targets. All faith is somehow reposed in leadership taking us out of the mess by some magic formula that discounts the real life situation of a people under the gun?

Quote:

I wonder why, however, getting too close to that culture - and Sarah - always slides over to Obama, hereabouts?  Too painful?  Too difficult a target?

Your sentence lacks a subject (who or what slides over to Obama?), which makes it a little difficult to interpret, but if I read you correctly, you're wondering why Obama's name pops up in discussions about Palin.

How about this? The clever sophisticated liberals who inflicted Obama on the world are no more politically sophisticated than Palin supporters. In a sense, they're worse, since Palin appears to take a stand on an issue here and there, while Obama with his nebluous "hope and change" is the American Hologram personified.

I'll try again, Al.

"I wonder why, however, DISCUSSION getting too close to that culture - and Sarah - always slides over to Obama, hereabouts?  Too painful?  Too difficult a target?"

If you are truly happier with the prospect of the dingbat as pres., that's your - and the folks in the hills - prerogative. As we see from North Report's latest report, she's right into another vital question - the president's birthplace.

Quote:

If you are truly happier with the prospect of the dingbat as pres

It isn't a question of being happier with a dingbat as president, it's that Obama is proving himself to be rather similar in deed to a dingbat.

Don't you want someone better than EITHER of those two?

Sarah Palin has a "Gee, thanks Dad!" moment:

Palin's Father: She Left Hawaii Because Asians Made Her Uncomfortable

arborman wrote:

Anyone who tries to begin explaining or talking about solutions runs into the inevitable complexities of the issues, and gets bogged down.  Not to mention derided as weak and indecisive etc.

Nice to see you around here again, arborman!

I have no use for Obama - none - neither his actions as president, nor his offensive words and promises while he was campaigning.

What I don't understand about your post is this:

Why is it simpler and more decisive to say and do the wrong things rather than the right things?

Why would you think U.S. voters have an easier time understanding, "We'll chase the scumbag terrorists into Pakistan!!!!!!!!" than "We ain't gonna study war no more"? Is the latter more complex - less "decisive"? Why did Obama need to condemn his spiritual mentor and leave his church when his pastor told the truth about racism and the Middle East? Why is it easier to sell "Israel is heaven" to U.S. voters than, "We will hold Israel to account?"

What's complicated about this: "There will be single-payer health care from Jan. 1 on, and it will cost the U.S. far less than it does now?" How many voters are so in love with the status quo that such a catchphrase won't appeal to them? Of course, they never once heard it from Obama, so we'll never know.

Why do the "simplistic icons and catchphrases" which are so essential that "anyone who doesn't use them doesn't win" have to be the icons and catchphrases of white supremacy, homophobia, imperialism, aggression, and unbridled capitalism?

Neither Obama nor McCain nor Palin seeks approval of the voters as first priority. They seek approval of those who run the economy and who manufacture public opinion. If you're saying that that's the way it is, then there is indeed [b]no difference[/b] between Palin and Obama. As some babblers here have said, you can't blame Obama for being totally unable to do one single significant progressive thing so far as president. He's only one person, after all.

At bottom, what is reflected in these excuses - in these tired attempts to find differences between Bush and Obama, for example - is a profound belief that the people of the U.S. are all Sara Palins at heart. Even when they prove otherwise - by voting for the chimera that is Obama - no one listens to their plea for change.

A very rational, logical and well-thought-out conclusion, arborman.

But what about the folks who devotedly follow the less-than-rational, illogical input of Obama's chief antagonists?  Doesn't THE quesion become: How do we rational political activists ensure that they do NOT come near that bloody button?  Beyond continuing our support for Obama by default.

Easy as hell to toss brickbats at the pres. for his failure to somehow, magically lead Congress and the people out of the wilderness, right?  But there is no political meaning to such morally pure flights of fancy.  This is what we've got to work with. Let's not aid the enemy. I believe we're on the cusp of ALL coming to realize that radical action will be needed to extricate not just Americans but all of humanity from the pathalogical condition that materialist cultures have allowed to develop through ignorance and greed. The passge of time is making it obvious in Canada that even the super-smooth, manipulative Conservative "economist"  doesn't have the answer. Religion has become the crutch for these people, everywhere.

There just might be time left to bring it off when a collectivist answer comes to be seen as the only solution for a crowded, increasingly polluted and resource-poor planet. At least, one hopes that there will be a subject to measure the sanity of a nation - and political thought - post Palin.

arborman wrote:

So no - I don't like either of them.  But they are wrong for different reasons - pretending otherwise is to be in denial.  From where I sit, as a non-American, I mostly just want the least batshit crazy person possible to be close to the nuclear button.  And Obama beats Palin hands down on that particular scale.  

Thanks for the very thoughtful post, arborman - did I mention it's good to see you around here?

I was nodding my head for the most part until I reached your conclusion (above).

Harry S Truman pushed the nuclear button. Ronald Reagan never did. Which one struck you as more batshit crazy?

John F. Kennedy organized the Bay of Pigs, threatened nuclear war over the missile crisis, and together with LBJ escalated the Vietnam war to proportions unknown since WWII. Even G.W. Bush couldn't rival those feats in Iraq and Afghanistan - and he actually tried harder to manufacture an excuse. Were JFK and LBJ more "batshit crazy" than GWB?

Jimmy Carter invaded Iran (in a Peter Sellers kind of way, but still...). Every Republican since then has threatened - but no more. Would you be really that shocked if Barack Obama announced an attack on Iran (say) next month - given the right pretext? I wouldn't.

So you see, even when you set the bar as low as: "Who is more likely to unleash a nuclear holocaust?" - I think I'll need lots more convincing evidence before I can pick between Obama and Palin. History needs to be our guide.

John McWho? Sarah Palin gets caught wearing blacked out cap from her VP campaign.

Thanks for the book idea, Michael. Looks like a great primer on the monstrous mental workings of frightened, terribly dangerous people appealing to others by offering a Jesus crutch. 

Just heard Martin Selegman doing his positive psychology thing in audience with the Dalai Llama. Would love to see the reaction of Sarah's folks exposed to such super-rational ideas. Another Buddhist philosopher told his audience that the "basics" of his belief depend on the assumption that such introspection is possible only after the necessities of food, clothing and shelter are assured - and this suggests a stable political/working environment... among the things threatened or missing in the lives of increasingly marginalized, angry people joining a political movement.

Speaking of which, how are you coming on Deer Hunting With Jesus? I think that understanding the Palin phenom starts among those folks.

Please try not to buy books from amazon or any other chain.

Support independent bookstores.

Thank you.

Sandy47 wrote:

Mr. Bageant's tome - in paperback - is a mere $11.51CAD at Amazon.ca

[link deleted by moderator. They don't need the free advertising.]

To the nameless and faceless "moderator" quoted above:

There was nothing untoward in what I posted, which makes your editing seem a tad aggressive, to put it nicely. If you had a problem, perhaps a better way of handling the situation would have been to let your thoughts be known rather than leaping in with both storm trooper boots on. Gosh, who knows? I might have even seen the error of my ways.

Maysie wrote:

Hi Sandy,

We have a habit of not linking to large corporations here on babble. It's related to being alternative media. I didn't mean to imply you had done something untoward.

I also have a particular hatred of large bookstore chains. How's about I'll leave my storm trooper boots off next time okay? But you can't take away my Ewok ears though.

Hey Maysie. I've been hanging around Babble for quite a while now, and it never dawned on me there was any such policy. Now, I know, and will act accordingly in future.

Nice ears, BTW...

al-Qa'bong wrote:

It's not a policy, it's like Maysie said, a habit.

 

"Storm trooper boots" eh? I'll have to forget I ever heard that one.

Maysie explained the forum's position gently and adequately, but the fact of the matter is, when posts are edited by a third party to reflect and enforce said "habit", it is no longer simply that, and the line is crossed into policy. Nevertheless, as I said before, I am now fully informed and happy to acquiesce.

Perhaps it should have been, The Princess (not Prince) and the Bag of Frozen Peas.  The difference is fundamental (for Freud, and other discerning readers).   Edit.:  It's the PACKAGE of frozen peas, not bag. And it's put out by Scholastic so not readily available elsewhere.

And I hope you enjoy Deer Hunters, Sandy.

deleted

deleted