Fear and Loathing in Wasilla, via the laptop screen…
(Or, Palin; A quasi-liveblog)
Oh, but this woman terrifies me:
Sarah Palin gave her first TV interview yesterday. And listen to the language: within the first two minutes, she and McCain are, “on a mission.” That just before a mention of the war. A mission. Where have we heard that before? Missions come from higher powers, and they exist in precious few numbers for the most powerful executive duo on the planet. The electorate would be one, but they’ve not yet granted anyone their support.
Which rather leaves one candidate for Palin’s big boss. I’ll let you guess.
Much of the interview waffles on. Who honestly cares whether Palin thought for an hour or a night before accepting the nomination? But what content there was interested me. She came off spectacularly poorly on foreign policy; faced with a question on whether governing a state close to Russia really qualified as foreign policy experience, Palin just ducked the question and tried to carry on her previous point. She didn’t even try to answer. Surely that just won’t do in a candidacy which tries to attack Obama on the very same point?
The specifics, meanwhile, simply frighten. She pledges to work with foreign nations, for the benefit of all; and next she feels war with Russia might, “perhaps,” be necessary if the Russians prove uncooperative. That’s little more than a desire to control international affairs wrapped in the clothing of diplomatic language. So, on Georgia, business would be as usual - if not worse. On Iraq; the same again. They play that, “Task from God,” clip, and she essentially agrees with herself in less vitriolic terms. She feels nations have a right to, “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happinness” - and yet supports Georgia’s right to re-annexe South Ossetia. The Bush Doctrine? Sounds good to her; it just needs better execution. All that went wrong can be put down to, “blunders,” rather than any inherent weakness in the theory.
That sounds rather like the past eight years, doesn’t it? And it rather undermines the other current running through Palin’s script; that she and McCain are candidates of change. What becomes increasingly clear is that Obama won the war of words early on in the campaign. Palin presents herself as a woman who hopes to, “reform,” the, “system,” and bring government, “back on the side of the people.” Someone rather like Obama, in fact. How well that’ll go down given Palin’s repeated overtures to social conservatives and the overt similarities between McCain and Bush’s foreign policies remains to be seen. But it does show the way for Obama; he must present voters a clear choice between himself and McCain, on substantive policy issues. Only by that contrast will the McSame meme take hold, and the cooption of change as a message be stopped.
The pipeline clip, where Palin shows the interviewer an energy project initiated under her, is perhaps the most intelligent element of the interview - on her part. What do you do if you’re accused of inexperience? Show everyone what you’ve done. It isn’t stated, but the very fact that Palin invited the camera crew to Fairbanks indicates that she wants people to know that she is capable of managing major projects. Every second they spend walking around that pipe - and that’s a good three minutes or so - acts, for her, as a rebuke to critics. Never mind that she effectively makes a complete U-turn in that segment, and advocates tearing up a nature reserve for more oil. People remember what they see as much as what they hear - and what they see (Palin hopes) is evidence of competence.
The undertones, meanwhile, seem vaguely conventional. She’s proud of her son for his, “strong, independent,” decision to go to Iraq; a dogwhistle to Republicans, that she has a family and believes in Iraq. God features more than a little; however much she denies that she thinks she knows the word of God, the repeated mention of a, “task,” or a, “mission,” clearly implies she feels some higher being wants a Republican presidency. All that mention of the constitution and Lincoln, meanwhile, her desire to bring the right of, “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” to the world serves a similar purpose. It attempts to provide a noble narrative for McCain’s campaign; that of the Founding Fathers, and their ideals.
Does the interview tell us anything about McCain/Palin? Certainly. McCain appears to have had a long term purpose in his selection of Palin; as a direct answer to Obama. Throughout the interview, Palin attempted to coopt Obama’s message of change, without any deviation from Republican party line. She talked a lot about the need for new tactics; but at the same time, she resolutely clung to the Bush Doctrine and dropped conservative buzzwords like the bombs she’d see piling on Tehran. So, the intent looks to be dress McCain’s message of complete policy inertia in the fluffy mask of change which Obama made so popular. And Palin is the young, photogenic face which McCain hopes that message will become convincing.
Perhaps that wolf in sheeps’ clothing pitbull in lipstick metaphor was more approriate than Palin realised.