“We might start by asking Sarah Palin to leave the room. I’ve got nothing against her. She’s a remarkable political talent. But there are no “death panels” in the Democratic health-care bills, and to say that there are is to debase the debate.
We also have to tell the defenders of the notorious Section 1233 of H.R. 3200 that it is not quite as benign as they pretend. To offer government reimbursement to any doctor who gives end-of-life counseling — whether or not the patient asked for it — is to create an incentive for such a chat.”
From CK’s article today. I like CK and usually agree with much of his reasoning. However, I’m growing tired of “triangulation” as an argument and political tool. The inability to get messy and get involved in the fracas is what makes “elites” like Peggy, KP, CBuck, and sometimes CK ineffective when it comes to actually moving people. Nuance is opiate for the elites but emotion based on reasoned intellect gets people motivated and will be the only thing that slays this dragon.
Sarah Palin’s “death-panel” f/b post may well become the turning point of this fight. CK’s attempt to triangulate and nuance the argument it to death, so to speak, can’t change that point.
Posted by: The Hammer at August 21, 2009 11:36 AM
Here was my response:
I am beginning to believe that the elites — Noonan, Parker, Buckley, Krauthammer, etc — are simply jealous of Sarah Palin. Jealous that an average citizen, without their Ivy League bonafides, has been able to rise to such political success — Mayor, energy industry, Governor — and connect in a way with the American people that these elites have never been able to do. So, instead of treating her as an equal, as she truly has earned through her actions and success, they all still look down upon her as some sort of peon, unworthy of being treated on the same level as their elitist selves.
And the more these elitists attack Sarah Palin, the more people take it as an attack on all average Americans. Considering Sarah Palin broke the mold of what it takes to be successful in politics — she was just some average working mom who got fed up with corruption in politics in her children’s school, so she ran for PTA, then got fed up with the corruption in her city, so ran for Mayor, then got went into the energy industry to make a difference and resigned when she realized she was being used and not given the power to make the difference she wanted, then got fed up with corruption in her State and took on her own political Party and ran for Governor to clean up the State… and succeeded in all those endeavors — ie, don’t need the Ivy League pedigree and all the inside connections and corruption, etc, many Americans see themselves in Sarah Palin. If Barack Obama represented the opportunity for Blacks to rise to success in politics, Sarah Palin represents the opportunity for an average American fed up with politics and wanting to make a difference to rise to success in politics.
I think she tears down the ideology of these elistists that only they can become powerful in politics and only they are worthy to discuss such ideas and policies and ideologies in America. She pisses them off, because she makes them realize that we really don’t need these elitists anymore to explain things to us peons. We can research and understand it on our own.
Thus, the smackdown of Sarah Palin basically represents the elitist smackdown of the rise of average Americans. Elitists know that if average Americans realize that they can figure things out on their own and don’t need to go to elitists to have everything explained to them, then they are deemed irrelevant.
It’s similar to the mass media’s smackdown of the blogosphere, when they were rightfully worried that the rise of the blogosphere — citizen journalism — would make them irrelevant.
Posted by: Michael in MI at August 21, 2009 11:56 AM