Last night on MSNBC Chris Matthews was pretty brutal to Palin and Pat Buchanan was nearly orgasmic over her. The difference was that Matthews pointed to actual things she said and mistakes she made, while Buchanan was simply lost in his own infatuation saying things like "she mopped the floor with him," which the American people did not agree with according to the polls. Buchanan judged the debate not on amount of information offered to the American people, nor on actually answering the questions, but on Palin's ability to attack, distract, punch and be a general bitch.
(Note: Could Bill Maher offer a "new rule" that after a speech or debate no pundit is allowed to say "he (or she) hit it out of the park?" Buchanan said that too, which is absurd. Either that or we need to make the baseball metaphor more honest. Palin hit a number of foul balls, and a few singles, but she always tried to steal home and was tagged out. Then Biden won the game.)
This morning, CNN interveiwed Palin supporters who watched the debate and they all loved her performance. That's partly because, I can only assume, they were expecting her to look totally clueless and she at least didn't seem like that to these voters, who themselves are totally clueless.
It amazes me how in the past three elections (including this one) the Republicans nominate at least one candidate who is dumber than dirt, totally unqualified for the job, and the media and the Republicans play this "Emperor has no clothes" game, pretending the candidate is knowledgable or skilled enough to be a leader. We all know Bush was not qualified and every American who is not indepenedtly wealthy is now suffering in one way or another as a result . Yet everyone who voted for Bush shielded their brains from reality and pretended he had a brain and a heart.
Now we're going through it again and it is simply disgusting. It's amazing how they catagorize their opponents to distract from their utter lack of integrity and qualifications. If they are up against someone young and relatively new on the scene like Obama (though he has had 12 years of legislative experience which they simply dismiss) who is also enormously capable and intelligent, they dismiss him as inexperienced. If they come up against someone with experience, like Biden, they dismiss him as a "Washington Insider." They completely ignore the fact that one of them has no experience and the other is a Washington Insider. Kind of like Bush ignoring his own cowardice, bordering on treason, during the Vietnam War, and then accusing the war hero Kerry of being a coward. The boldness of the dishonesty is mind-boggling.
One wonders what the biographers will write some twenty years from now, when it is safe to speak truthfully about these morons.
Frank J. Ranelli, a diarist at Daily Kos is making a first stab at what history might say. Here's a piece of his assessment:
In fact, Palin did exactly what she has been trained to do – deliver an uncritical, contemptuous attack of belligerent mockery. Authoritarian people do not think; they act. And they act on instinct and emotion alone. They are always loose with facts but stridently persuasive. They are charming, disarming, almost irresistible, yet completely ethically bankrupt and amoral. She did not understand a single obfuscating, sometimes-mangled answer she gave during the debate, but it did not matter. The base of the party, Joe Six-Pack, loved it.
The problem here is they (authoritarians) are masters at using base intellect, not intelligence, to appeal to people’s pathos. (Many barbaric dictators through out history have used this same tactic with stunning and ghastly success.) In essence, they are scheming, devious and capable of anything in order to subvert the will of other people in order to achieve their own objectives.
Scientific studies have conclusively proven that hardliner conservatives suffer a "cognitive dissonance"; they grapple with nuance, struggle with vagaries, and reject abstract thinking. They are visceral, not cerebral. They are ill-suited for and not capable of collegial deliberation. Further, most are highly intolerant people when someone does not share their narrow paradigm window view of the world.Last night’s put-on was a recital for Palin – it was not a debate. It was absent any lucidity, clearly forced, though a highly successful presentation of chides, condescension and hollow talking points. Palin was even rude and impertinent toward the moderator and Joe Biden, but this is standard operating procedure for an authoritarian person. Assuredly, it was much to the sheer jubilation of the conservative, irascible base.
Have you ever watched Bill O’Reilly shout down a guest, ridicule him or her, or use a sneering outrage of indignation to intimidate the person being ostensibly interviewed? Last night you saw a subdued version of Bill O’Reilly in a skirt with lipstick. The visage changes, but the persona and intrinsic need to dominate by fear is omnipresent. Someone must always be blamed (liberals, gays, intellectuals, minorities, etc.) and they (authoritarians) are never at fault – compromise, tolerance, and humility are not an option.The purpose is to play always to basal fears, ignorance, and prejudices; it is never to sensibly discuss or achieve anything other than to eliminate a perceived threat (liberals, gays, intellectuals, minorities, etc.) – it is Orwellian in every way and driven by pure appeals to the audience's emotions.
