Last week Sarah Palin sat down with Oprah as part of her media blitz. I, along with millions of others, tuned in and listened with rapt attention. My conclusion? This is a very dangerous woman with the power to twist truth and the vanity to think that she is doing it for the good of others and not for herself. She is shrewd, narcissistic and is into myth making as much as Hitler was.
Like Hitler she is a larger than life figure who weaves flattering national fantasies that bear very little resemblance to reality. She has charisma and speaking ability and she launches a powerful appeal to those who feel angry, fearful, and misunderstood, using paranoia and half truths to make her case.
I could almost see the torch light parades forming as I watched her romance the TV camera and Oprah's audience. She painted herself as the underdog and innocent victim--a role many Americans identify with, especially those who have lost homes, jobs, and health insurance or who never had much to begin with. They see her as their champion and her simplistic notions and twisted truths as an answer.
Palin vs. Hitler
Hitler rose to power in a period when Germans felt frightened and taken adantage of-- when economic conditions were terrible and the Weimar Republic was just not working. When people feel threatened and powerless, they are ripe for exploitation and that is what I see Sarah Palin in the process of doing. She is exploiting people for her own ego gratification and I don't think it is a mere political career that she wants. I think she is looking for more-- much more.
I see in her the megalomania of the true narcissist. America today has much in common with Germany in the 1930's. People are disenchanted with their leaders and are looking for answers. There was a world wide financial crisis then too. The notion of American exceptionalism that Palin embraces so heartily echos Hitler's notion of the master race and the special role of the German people. I can hear those American militias in the heartland now, cleaning their weapons and talking about the evils of socialism, Obama, Liberals and gun control. Scary, very divisive stuff.
We are part of a world community that cannot afford to let nationalism, isolationism, xenophobia and ignorance triumph. Let us hope that " Going Rogue" is not Palin's " Mein Kampf"
24 comments:
What's your opinion of Barack Obama, his book tours, the adoration of his base and the millions he has made from selling the books?
Do you have a post on this topic, expressing concern about the "larger than life" messianic figure..the one we've been all "waiting for"?
I didn't think so!
There's a good reading for you, since you like the fascism narrative, it's called "Liberal Fascism", check it out!
A great piece but ya had to pick the Oprah clip that makes her seem *almost* normal. She is NOT. She is a narcissist and all the other things you so eloquently listed. A truly scary woman who couldn't care less about anyone but herself and the power McCain's campaign handed her on a silver platter.
But I'm surprised you didn't mention that the impressive sale numbers include blocks of hundreds of copies purchased by right wing companies and organizations to be *given away* at their events and conventions.
And FYI, Wal-Mart has *already* marked it down to $4.95 - a "hot" book that's only been out less than a week.
Those who really want to *read* it, which curiously most of those standing in line for hours for the Michigan book signing had NOT, simply wait for it to show up on the shelves of your local Goodwill.
Interesting ploy re the lowering of the book price. I don't trust this women either Roberta. Politically I think she's uneducated, ignorant even, and subsequently is a loose canon.
George--My opinion is that Barack Obama is a whole different kettle of fish from Sarah Palin.
He wrote his first book years before he ran for President and not as a promotional tool for a political career. He was in Harvard Law School at the time.....and,unlike Palin, he actually wrote the book himself and did not use a ghostwriter.
Palin did this book as a tool to increase her celebrity, justify her own bad behavior during last year's campaign and most of all to make money. Her attacks on Katie Couric and various others will backfire on her in the end, but they are truly tasteless and indicative of her narcissism.
I bet you are one of those people whom Sarah is pandering to. I feel sorry for you Georgie porgie-- you probably think calling Obama a socialist and waving placards of him in whiteface or with a little Hitler moustache are just fine.
Well, if you are gonna dish it out you bretter learn to take it. Sarah Palin doesn't give a damn about you and your problems. It's all about her, which you will find out if you stick around long enough
Jama-- I wanted to give a fair look at the interview and I think that particular clip shows Palin's narcissism and insincerity very well.
Julie-- I don't know how seriously she will be taken politically in the long run, but she os certainly capable of stirring up the pot. She is the one who invented the " death panel" stuff. Her ability to manipulate truth and create fiction is very dangerous.
Man, Pink, I thought I was angry!
Can't disagree with you and commend your spunk in coming right out and calling a megalomaniac by her proper name.
For George, the difference between Obama and Palin boils down to the reactions of the people who believe in them. Most liberals are born skeptics - they want to believe in a leader but they're quick to abandon ship if that leader clearly is off course. Conservatives tend to take the fundamentalist view, which means once you've won their loyalty, they're going to stick by you no matter what. La Palin is going to have to implode on live TV to convince her fans that she's just another shallow, opportunistic spotlight seeker who has some very frightening, narrow views of the world.
I chatted with a friend who told me America's being seen as the "mad village" by the rest of the world, and they're all a bit worried about us. Palin's continued success (with whom? who ARE the people who like her, anyway?) is just a symptom of a bigger paranoia and societal illness.
She scares me because if anyone's listening to her, that's a bad sign about who we are.
Hi Susan-- yup Palin gets my inner bitch going, I guess. She really does scare me. I'm hoping all those people lining up to buy books are not actually taking her seriously as a politician-- Actually, I hope that before 2012 she will dance off into the sunset with Fox News.
I totally agree with your pithy observation that if anyone is listening to her, it does not say good things about who we are as a people.
Great article and I can't agree with you more.
Nocomme, f you think Sarah Palin is a "perfectly nice woman" I'd hate to see who you would call a bi***. Packrat did not make light of Hitler, but just explained how he got into power. You don't need to resort to name calling. I only see one imbecile here and it isn't the author of this article.
I'm sure you can handle the haters :)
nocomme1-- It is angry and ignorant people like you that Palin appeals to You just proved my point Thank you.
You are the one who is insulting and you have definitely made an ass of yourself.
Thank you Susan(UW) for explaining the gist of the post to nocomme1, who is obviously seriously intellectually challenged.
"You don't need to resort to name calling. I only see one imbecile here and it isn't the author of this article.
I'm sure you can handle the haters :)"
She wrote an entire article comparing Sarah Palin to Hitler and you're upset by MY name-calling, eh? And then you call ME an imbecile and a "hater", to boot.
You people are priceless; clueless and priceless.
Hey what do you think about the way Obama has now created the highest unemployment rate for young Black men since the Depression http://mystateline.com/content/fulltext/?cid=118261? Just curious.
nocomme1-- If you wish to leave a comment actually making some sort of point about why you think my comparison of Palin to Hitler is incorrect, please do-- but your vicious, "ad hominum" attacks will not be tolerated and will be deleted.
As I said before, you prove my point. Thanks for showing the world the sort of person who approves of Sarah Palin.
Well, your entire post is an ad hominem attack on Palin, of course. To compare the popular former governor of Alaska, whose entire philosphy, while outside your narrow ability to tolerate, is entirely in the mainstream, to one of history's most evil murderers amounts to nothing more than willful ignorance and hate speech.
Like most liberals you don't think based on principle. You have situational principles. Hate speech is defined by people with your philosphy as merely disagreeing with you. You, on the other hand, are free to make the most noxious, factually challenged comments that you can think of and, by definition - since you say it - it CAN'T be hate speech. In fact it is. This leads you, as I wrote earlier, to personify the very things you claim to be against; intolerance, hatefulness, etc. In short, you are a hypocrite and fraud.
I think that's fairly substantive and, I might add, accurate.
Pink, if I were you I'd block that asshat. The hateful tone of nocomme1 betrays him or herself as a person lacking principles... "situational" or otherwise.
Arguing with such a person is a waste of keystrokes.
How brave you are Anonymous.
If you don't like water someone says you block them. Yep, you are liberal, alright.
I'm not surprised by the venom in this thread, yet I am still disappointed.
Yes, the original post is a tough stand. But she backs it up with argument.
Anyone who likes Palin obviously will disagree. That doesn't automatically make them right.
Time will tell - but the immediate personal attacks and name calling indicate, to me, an emotional reaction and not a rational one.
This isn't a discussion - it's an acid-throwing party. And that makes it completely unproductive.
Comments are for guests on a blogger's page. Guests should have manners.
If the comments are not civil or even attempts at discussion, then they should be on your own blog. Get as angry as you like there.
Sue:
In response to your rather holier-than-thou post (How, exactly did calling me an imbecile and suggesting that Sarah Palin is a bi*** elavate the conversation?) I think you assume that the initial post that started all this, headlined, "Sarah Palin Reminds Me of Hitler" was some reasonable, high-minded bit of writing. Oh, please. Maybe in liberal-land comparing someone to one of history's most bloodthirsty killers is considered rational argumentation, but here in the real world it is considered hateful, malicious, intolerant and just plain stupid. It seems to be you are out on a very shaky limb trying to palm off such nonsense.
I think my responses have been remarkably in keeping with the nature of this tripe. It didn't deserve a restrained response. And yes, it was an emotional response, which doesn't mean that it wasn't also a rational one.
You say that the author backed her slander up with "argument". Her "argument" consisted of a ludicrously broad selection of facts that actually apply better to Barack Obama than they do to Palin: "Hitler rose to power in a period when Germans felt frightened and taken adantage of-- when economic conditions were terrible and the Weimar Republic was just not working. When people feel threatened and powerless, they are ripe for exploitation and that is what I see {Barack Obama] in the process of doing. [He] is exploiting people for [his] own ego gratification and I don't think it is a mere political career that [he] wants. I think [he] is looking for more-- much more.
I see in [him] the megalomania of the true narcissist. America today has much in common with Germany in the 1930's. People are disenchanted with their leaders and are looking for answers. There was a world wide financial crisis then too." Isn't that how Obama got elected?
And as for, "Get as angry as you like there.", I must have missed the headline that God had died and left you in charge.
Spare me the disingenuous sanctimony.
I disagree with your evaluation and don't consider reminding anyone of basic civility disingenuous or sanctimonious. You are welcome to disagree. But nastiness, rudeness and anger bothers me - -always has, always will. If that's holier than thou, okay. I can live with that.
Is that your way of apologizing to me for calling me an "imbecile" and Sarah Palin a bi***? I didn't think so.
Holier. Than. Thou. Attitude.
You've got your Susans confused. You're writing to two people and I said neither one. But I was called holier than thou.
OK nocomme1-- that's enough. I've had it with you. You are rude, disruptive, and out of your mind. Sue and Susan, btw are two different people so stop bashing susan for something she didn't say.
Since you cannot behave yourself I will now be moderating comments on this blog and only registered users may comment. Goodbye.
Since America is still a democracy no thanks to nocommen1, I vote that pinkpackrat permanently delete each and every one of this sleazeball's past comments, all replies to them, and any future comments from him/her/it.
Obviously this person did not come here to participate in a meaningful discussion, but to spread more of the hate and venom that became Ms Palin's trademark on the campaign trail, and for which an overwhelming majority of voters chose NOT to elevate her to the second highest office in the land.
This article is facinating and spot on. I think what nocomme1 is missing in his comparison between the conditions that Obama ran and won under and your critique of Sarah Palin is that Palin is feeding off fear, anti-intellectualism, xenophobia, and ignorance. Obama ran under strained economic conditions and general distrust of government but offered a message of hope and optimism. These were not hallmarks of Hitler's rise to power. I think history will prove that Hitler and Palin have a lot in common including delusional tendencies and a history of intellectual failures that inform their distrust of rational thinkers.
Now that is the most informed, cogent anonymous comment I have ever received-- thank you anon, whoever you are:-)
Just reread comments and am baffled as always by the "double-think" and labeling so many people seem to do now days, (nocomme1 being an example).
People are extremely complex and it is possible to hold strong views on a variety of topics without being inconsistent (or labeled). I am a Christian (but fully believe in freedom of religion and "other sheep") ecofeminist social worker so my beliefs range from slightly "conservative" to more mid-range "liberal". Examples:
-I don't believe in abortion but don't think I have the right to make that choice for someone else.
-I believe in gun ownership (& own a gun) but I don't think everyone is capable of responsible gun ownership or anyone needs an assault weapon.
-I don't want government on any level making my sexual or religious choices-keep out/hands off.
-I believe some things are best handled at the federal level in order to fulfill the role of a "constitutional republic"- protecting the minority from the majority,(especially things involving children or the environment, education and consumer protection-including long overdue protection from the health care industry).
I am in the 75-80% of Americans who consider themselves moderates or independents and we don't think like the people on either the far-right or far-left who have all the media's time.
Yet, invariably, someone like nocomme1 throws out the label "liberal" and lumps everyone who disagrees with him/her into that amorphous group of "other" the media (Big Business/Corporate America) has built for them. Does anyone who throws that word out there even know what it means?
Merriam Webster online:
liberal:
-one who is open-minded or not strict in the observance of orthodox, traditional, or established forms or ways
(terms like "pioneering spirit" "American ingenuity" come to mind)
conservative:
-tending or disposed to maintain existing views, conditions, or institutions
2010 elections are 2 weeks away. From reading John Dean's "Broken Government", I personally believe this election may determine the fate of our nation.
JFK said, "And the only basic issue in the 1960 campaign is whether our government will fall in a conservative rut and die there, or whether we will move ahead in the liberal spirit of daring, of breaking new ground.."and "Their pledge is a pledge to the status quo — and today there can be no status quo."
I love JFK's explanation of a "Liberal" (September 14, 1960)
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/presidents/35_kennedy/psources/ps_nyliberal.html
I am sick of political rhetoric and of people like Sarah Palin (the queen of political rhetoric)! ("Sarah Doesn't Speak For Me!") Did anyone else want to slap her when she said at the Tea Party Convention,"How is that hopey changey thing workin for ya?"?!
(How could it work with the right blocking everything including court appointees!)
Maybe she reads a different Bible because mine is full of hopey changey things! And she must be following a different Jesus because the One I follow said "blessed are the peacemakers", "love your enemy", "turn the other cheek" and "men will have to give account on the day of judgment for every careless word" (twitter, post on Facebook, book) "they have spoken". I wouldn't want to be the one who carelessly threw out words like "death panels"!
Amen!! Katydid has one down to earth and sane grandma. Thank you for sharing all that. I consider myself liberal and usually vote Democratic, but not always. As you say, people are complex. I am thinking that the real battle in America these days is not between Democrats and Republicans or even liberals and conservatives. The real battle is between the moderates in both parties and the extremists at either end.
Post a Comment