Newsweek's Profile of Sarah Palin

Newsweek has a five page online article examining Sarah Palin's life and career. I haven't read the whole thing yet, but this paragraph on the front page caught my attention and gets it quite right in my view:

A reformer, she faces allegations of exerting improper influence in city and state government. A self-styled regular Red State gal, she is relentlessly driven, a politician of epic ambition who is running against a Washington establishment that, if elected, she will inevitably join, and even rule over.

The election is six weeks away. For those of you who are tired of discussion of Sarah Palin, while we will continue to write about other matters during this period, the election will be the focus. It's that important to our country. Keep in mind there are more than 20 posts a day on TalkLeft. You can either use an rss feeder to spot the non-election coverage and not have to scroll through the election posts or return after the election.

< Palin a Turn-Off to Many Working Class Women | On Palin's Executive Skills >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    I have to say (5.00 / 4) (#10)
    by athyrio on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 01:48:33 PM EST
    Jeralyn, that your attitude of late has been very insulting even at one point saying something about McCains ability to raise his arms from the torture (implying maybe it wasn't so) and as a disabled person that was highly insulting to me...I have tried time and again to read and post here but lately you are not at all the same blogger as before...You are full of hatred and venum and that isn't pleasant to see...Your personal attacks on Palin are beyond the pale IMO...you may delete this or not, but it is my humble opinion...

    Did you know (1.00 / 1) (#12)
    by glanton on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 01:52:35 PM EST
    that McCain was a POW?

    Yes, I knew that. (5.00 / 3) (#14)
    by tootired on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 02:01:17 PM EST
    I also know that Obama's mother was from Kansas, single, and needed food stamps. It's time for both candidates to move on. I bet the first one who does gets some more voters on his side.

    I wish they would move on too (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 02:03:36 PM EST
    I am so tired of both those themes, I disliked both from the beginning. Neither define what they will do for the country.

    Sorry (none / 0) (#17)
    by glanton on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 02:06:12 PM EST
    Not equivalents when you look at their convention acceptance speeches.  McCain made his POW experience the central narrative of his speech because it's part of what makes him so dang patriotic.  From there leading into his FIGHT climax.  Obama spent the opening lines of his speech on his background (only in America, &c.), but at least he moved out of it and spent  the vast bulk of the speech on his issues and picking apart their bid for Bush III.

    That said, I agree that the Kansas/Mom thing is overplayed, as is the fact that Biden is from Scranton.  But none of this remotely touches the status of the POW romance.  How many times have his spoksepeople attacked his critics, saying, that comment is offensive and McCain is a POW?


    Sorry to hear that athyrio (none / 0) (#13)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 01:59:07 PM EST
    I think my blogging has not changed, the recipients of my criticism have changed, as we have moved from the primaries to the general election. There is no venom in my posting, just my views. I point out hypocrisy when I see it.

    For those that only began reading this site during the primaries, they may not see that. I have always criticized Republicans, their views and their specious arguments.

    My observation of McCain carried no disparagement of his disability. Any more than my reference to Eagleton was a reflection on mental illness.


    Perhaps Jeralyn (5.00 / 2) (#16)
    by athyrio on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 02:04:32 PM EST
    you aren't really seeing yourself as clearly as others are at this point as you appear to be in a total panic about Palin....She has only the significance that you assign her...BTD is correct IMO and you should listen to him, as you are only assisting the McCain camp at this point IMO...

    Sounds a bit new agey... (none / 0) (#21)
    by jerry on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 02:24:36 PM EST
    She has only the significance that you assign her

    If she becomes VP and does a halfway decent job, she could easily become President.  If she does a quarter way decent job, she'll actually have influence for even longer as one of the heads of the establishment.


    and if the dog hadn't stopped to (5.00 / 0) (#23)
    by athyrio on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 02:30:03 PM EST
    go potty (being polite here) the turtle wouldn't have won...I thought the topic was winning in November and not Palin's wouldbe future...How you handle Palin and her significance at this juncture is the important thing IMO, not her future in the party wayyyyyyyyyyyyyy down the road...Fixating on Palin ain't getting it done period!!!!!

    that's wht teh fairer... (none / 0) (#39)
    by Salo on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 04:00:59 PM EST
    ...political class always do. They patted themselves on the back whn they got Quayle as "No Kennedy." Rhetorical brilliance signfying nowt.

    we understand how you feel (none / 0) (#24)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 02:38:17 PM EST
    Obviously, I disagree. Quite strongly. I believe exposing Palin on her record, lack of record, position on issues and conduct in office that relate to her governance is critical. As is anything that shows she would allow inappropriate parties or personal beliefs to influence her decision-making.

    Everyone is free to take their own approach. This is mine.


    Jeralyn this is your blog and I respect the rules (none / 0) (#40)
    by Angel on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 04:07:49 PM EST
    even though I may disagree with your analysis and topics of conversation from time to time.  Same with BTD.  That said, I have mixed feelings about the Palin coverage.  Democrats ignore her at their peril, but on the flip side they shouldn't go overboard on the coverage.  Where's the line between the two?  I don't know and I'm not sure anyone else does either.  I'll just keep my personal policy of skipping past the stuff I don't want to read and move on to the things that interest me.  Thanks for providing the forum.

    While true (none / 0) (#41)
    by Radix on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 04:28:39 PM EST
    It would perhaps be more beneficial to challenge Palins bona fides in the context of Chalenging McCains judgement in choosing her, ala the Economists most recent article on Palin.

    I've been doing that in almost every post (none / 0) (#42)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 04:31:08 PM EST
    and I agree, that's important, but by itself, I don't think is enough. People have to know why it shows his bad judgment.

    TChris also makes that point a lot.


    True, my only thought would (none / 0) (#46)
    by Radix on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:47:53 PM EST
    be, not almost all posts or write ups, but all of them. Perhaps you could cut and paste a standard McCain dig, such as, "And this is the next best person to run the country, in John McCain's judgment." Just a thought.

    A wee bit excessive... (5.00 / 0) (#27)
    by lentinel on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 03:04:29 PM EST
    It should be obvious to everyone that any of these folks if elected will join the Washington establishment. Biden and McCain are already there. Obama wants it so much he can taste it.

    But to say that Palin will not only join it but "even rule over it" seems emotionally unbalanced on behalf of the writer.

    no emotion there at all (none / 0) (#30)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 03:08:47 PM EST
    it's a truism. The vice president has enormous power over Washington. We just lived through 8 years of it. And if something happens to McCain, she would be the President.

    Rule (5.00 / 0) (#34)
    by lentinel on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 03:18:56 PM EST
    Todays v.p. has enormous power because Bush is nothing. Cheney has been pulling the strings from the beginning.
    I doubt the same would be true of McCain or Obama. The v.p. will go back to the traditional role of supporting the president, casting the occasional tie vote, and presiding at supermarket openings and attending funerals.

    The emotion part, for me at least, is that the writer did not say what you did - that Palin might someday become president. The writer said that she would "rule over" the Washington establishment. To me, that evokes an image of the evil queen. They don't use that type of jargon for McCain or Obama - that one of them will "rule" over the Washington establishment. Rather, the writer says that they would join it.


    Biden (4.00 / 0) (#29)
    by WS on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 03:06:19 PM EST
    Biden is the odd man out in this race. I'm really ambivalent over whether he should start criticizing Palin and/or McCain (with a catchy quote akin to noun verb and 9/11)to get back into the news cycle or if the statesman thing he's doing is working for voters.  Is there a time and place for him to do that like in the VP debate?

    Biden has to do something because he seemed to have just disappeared while Palin made a splash.  

    Everybody knows Biden (none / 0) (#31)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 03:10:39 PM EST
    I think he can wait to the debate. The Washington Post reports Lieberman is advising Palin on foreign policy to prepare for the debate against Biden. Pretty funny.

    She'll burn out, her 15 minutes are almost up. There's not enough substance behind her to sustain the interest.


    Polls (none / 0) (#33)
    by WS on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 03:17:27 PM EST
    Polls coming down would help in ending her 15 minutes.  The Repubs keep saying she's a game changer, rallying the base, and all that but if the polls go back to a slight O lead after the convention bounce like I think it will, hopefully the Palin buzz will wear off.  

    All she needs is 6 weeks... (none / 0) (#37)
    by TomStewart on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 03:25:29 PM EST
    What I saw of Biden on MTP (none / 0) (#32)
    by nycstray on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 03:14:40 PM EST
    seemed good. Even, clear, reasoned. I didn't see Obama's interview on another channel, but the reviews here weren't good. I kinda think he should stick to statesman interviews over Obama and keep his current aggressiveness on the stump. If he gets too attacky, he may turn folks off. Undecideds will prob go for "safe". Biden looks safe right now and keeps that option in play. If he turns off voters, McCain may end up being the only "safe choice".

    I saw both interviews (none / 0) (#38)
    by shoephone on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 03:31:10 PM EST
    Biden did quite well. Obama was terrible.

    Biden just needs to quit worrying about being home every weekend from now until November 4th and fight like the tiger he is against McCain and Palin both (and yes, the broader media will be covering her endlessly), while Obama focuses like a laser on McCain and the disaster a McCain presidency would be. But Obama had better get a shot in the arm -- and quick -- from someone who knows how to do it or he is going to disappear into the ether.

    What I saw of him on ABC this morning gave me great pause.


    Goodness.. (none / 0) (#45)
    by Radiowalla on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 05:46:13 PM EST
    I had exactly the opposite reaction!
    I thought Biden missed a lot of opportunities to define the differences between the candidates and I was very impressed with how Obama handled his questions.  

    yawn...this has all been gone over time (3.40 / 5) (#1)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 01:29:50 PM EST
    and again...doesn't seem like there is anything new to use against her.  Maybe the dems need to take a new approach to get obama's numbers up.

    nor is there anything new in your comment (none / 0) (#2)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 01:33:21 PM EST
    except another slam at Obama. If you are bored by what I write about, please scroll on by.

    I am just pointing out that obama needs to (5.00 / 6) (#3)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 01:38:22 PM EST
    get his numbers up...it is not a slam.  And I was saying the Newsweek article is just another version of what was talked about all last week.  You may not care, but your tone is certainly pushing alot of people away...it's sad to see.

    I do care (none / 0) (#6)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 01:43:38 PM EST
    which is why I point it out. I'm trying to maintain a level of discourse here. When I see a comment that starts with "Yawn" it's a turnoff to me and other readers. It's dismissive and insulting.

    Your first point began with

    doesn't seem like there is anything new to use against her.

    Your secondary point was about Obama's numbers.


    I can only do so much with the facts (none / 0) (#11)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 01:51:41 PM EST
    at hand...

    Well, if you dan;t have nanything to contribute (1.00 / 1) (#28)
    by TomStewart on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 03:05:51 PM EST
    don't bother to 'contribute'. That seems to be a 'fact at hand.'

    You know, (none / 0) (#35)
    by TomStewart on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 03:22:38 PM EST
    I swear I corrected the spelling of that post in preview...

    Surprisingly (5.00 / 3) (#9)
    by fercryinoutloud on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 01:47:54 PM EST
    the quote you provided about Palin is actually flattering to much of the country. Did you realize that when you posted it?

    A self-styled regular..gal, ...relentlessly driven, ...running against a Washington establishment.

    Looks like Newsweek is crowning her the new Obama in that paragraph.


    Only if you (2.00 / 0) (#36)
    by TomStewart on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 03:23:49 PM EST
    leave out the rest of it, which you did. Those '...' mean something.

    "Self-styled" (none / 0) (#43)
    by alsace on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 04:35:01 PM EST
    means the authority for the description is herself.  I'm not one of the many lawyers here, but I think there's a name for that other than "flattering."

    It will be interesting (2.00 / 1) (#7)
    by glanton on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 01:46:29 PM EST
    To see the charges of sexism at the term "epic ambition."  But yet, how else would you describe it, when their campaign has abandoned issues altogether.  What else is it but a grab for power for its sake.  

    The term "epic ambition" applies equally well, if not moreso, to McCain, the one who is after all running the anti-issue campaign.  But the media wonn't dare do it to him.  Not because of sexism.  But because they can't go back on the stale argument they've been selling, that he's a "Maverick" and that he is "strong on national security issues."  These labels suggest issue substance and independence of thought, and in doing so, they lie.  But that is the lie the media is stuck with re McCain.    

    I think we will eventually see (2.00 / 0) (#26)
    by lilburro on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 03:00:45 PM EST
    a Sarah Palin backlash.  (Hopefully) the more she lies about Obama, and the more nasty things she says about Obama/Biden, the more people will view her as a hypocritical Christian Right politician.  Obama just needs to keep going while people get a read on her and how scary her ideas truly are.

    The media outlets (none / 0) (#5)
    by txpolitico67 on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 01:42:52 PM EST
    should wait to do these kind of stories on Palin (heard they were doing something like this on Fox's Greta whatever her name is show) about her life, politics and the like.

    This woman doesn't seem to have any kind of inclination to speak directly to the press.  THAT in itself should be sounding off bells and whistles to anyone following the election.  If she's such a bada55 as the right proclaims, let her face the press head-on.

    I think she's hiding something, something that could be pretty damaging to the GOP ticket.  If the GOP wants an 'October surprise', I say let the DNC go for it.  If Obama can get the guts to do this, I just may vote for him after all.

    Time to call a bullshi*er a bullshi*er.  

    Well (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by nell on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 04:52:28 PM EST
    According to Halperin, ABC has snagged their first interview with Palin set to be taped and aired this week, so I don't think she is that scared of the press.

    She'll join and rule the establishment (none / 0) (#18)
    by jerry on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 02:09:41 PM EST
    In that sense, Jeralyn, you're absolutely right to be concerned about her.  If they win in November, we'll probably see Palin around for 16 years, nominating Supreme Court Justices, setting policy.

    I expect to see more of Sarah Palin (5.00 / 0) (#22)
    by vj on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 02:26:50 PM EST
    Whether the McCain/Palin ticket wins or not.  She appears to be the future of the republican party.

    Please do not repost articles in full (none / 0) (#25)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 02:39:51 PM EST
    I just deleted a comment reprinting in full an article by Deepak Chopra. Comments are for your views and short quotes from other works, with attribution via a link in html format.

    Copyright laws and bandwidth issues do not allow for reprinting articles that appear elsewhere.