From Borking to Palinizing

What is it about Sarah Palin that whips liberals into a frenzy?

Several months ago, the incessant flogging of Sarah Palin by legions of pundits, comics, talking heads, and entertainment celebrities (seemingly the true arbiters of liberals’ core values—and not coincidentally an important source of financial support) set me to wondering: what exactly is it about this woman that gives rise to such intense condemnation and vilification?

The answer wasn’t immediately clear, as there appeared little explanation for the overwhelming fusillade of criticism and ridicule seemingly beyond any reasonable semblance of proportionality—directed at a two-term mayor of the bustling megalopolis of Wasilla, Alaska (population 6300) and half-term governor of the most sparsely-populated state in the nation; it defied logic especially for this rabid spittle-spraying vitriol to be hurled at a failed vice-presidential candidate from a race many believe was never even a serious contest.

Then it dawned on me.

They’re scared to death of this woman.

The diminutive former governor who currently holds no political office poses a threat never before seen: a woman with strong conservative credentials who appeals to a broad base.

Conservatives (Republican and otherwise) have produced a few credible female figures, but none considered capable of pursuing serious political aims on the national stage—and the non-conservative female vote has long been seen as lying within the exclusive domain of Democrats. To be sure, established groups claiming to advance women’s causes remain pretty solidly in the liberal camp; however, that politically moderate segment of the female population not well-represented by such groups has long been considered almost an afterthought, grudgingly tolerated for the sake of securing their votes—but generally shunted aside afterward for their having embraced traditional beliefs not espoused by “enlightened” women (e.g., “stay-at-home moms,” conservative Christians, and the all-important pro-life voters).

These women now have in their midst a viable champion—and one who happens to appeal to an extensive array of male voters, as well.

And that’s what scares the liberal left; they see their bank of female voters as being at risk—and a very ripe target, indeed. To a party that has carefully positioned itself to capture female voters, this is a clear threat; many women who have reluctantly gone along with the Democrats’ platforms as “the next best thing” now see a more welcoming face toward the other end of the spectrum—in political territory more to their liking. Moreover, Palin has demonstrated the ability to also draw significant numbers of moderate-to-conservative male voters (gotta like a woman who’s comfortable with guns, deer eyeballs and fish guts) at a time when an increasingly leftist government has sent them reeling. Where others see flaws, some have clearly taken a liking to her—warts and all. Her feisty nature resonates well with the independent-minded. She seems like a “real person” sort, with family issues that the mainstream can relate to. She carries a message of fiscal conservatism (she even slashed her own pay by 10% while mayor of Wasilla) at a time when drunken sailors have taken hold of the nation’s purse-strings, and her solid pro-life stance garners immediate support among a large voting block. And she’s clearly loath to back down from a fight.

In a decidedly politically-incorrect moment, I’ll submit that many blacks voted for Barack Obama for no other reason than because he presented himself as having emerged from their ranks as the first serious black candidate for the White House—one of their own (though nothing could be further from the truth). Many saw him as the fruition of a long-standing dream: a black candidate who shows that things have finally changed. Similarly, many women long for a female candidate to likewise validate them—and might be expected to vote accordingly. It has long been widely presumed that both groups would likely be eventually represented by a Democrat (and Obama proved one-half of this presumption—while Hillary Clinton earnestly sought to prove the other); the GOP has been generally perceived as being too resistant to change to permit such barrier-breaking.

In an unprecedented onslaught, one assailant after another has taken an endless series of cheap shots at Palin. Ironically, they seem to have accomplished only three things: they’ve taken a relatively obscure political figure virtually unknown outside Alaska little more than a year ago and made her a household name, they’ve probably boosted her popularity by practically making her into a martyr (we still prefer fair play in this country—and recoil from the sort of character assassination we’ve observed), and they’ve revealed many so-called “women’s rights” advocates to be infinitely hypocritical by virtue of their silence. (One can only imagine the result had a leading liberal female candidate been similarly savaged by the right—and the self-appointed guarantors of women’s rights have clearly established that they defend only the rights of that subgroup of women who embrace the liberal agenda.)

Oh, and they’ve made Palin a lot of money; as of this writing, her recently-released book Going Rogue has already sold more than three million copies—and it seems reasonable to speculate that her book sales might have been fueled by the very sniping campaign that’s been directed against her. (So…maybe there really is justice in the world.)

What are Palin’s future plans? For the moment, she seems content to appear at book-signings (mainly in the heartland—where her support is likely to be strongest) and to stump for other like-minded candidates (where she’s been well-received). There’s been no mention of seeking office of any sort in the future. Yet.

Democrats, however, have not relaxed.