"I think there will be a lot of us who start saying, 'GOP, if you abandon us, well, we have nowhere else to go except to become more independent and not enlisted in one or the other of the private majority parties that rule in our nation"
-- Sarah Paliin (former R-AK, half-term)
There's something about dear Sarah Palin that's so wondrously compelling in a car-crash kind of way.
It's so so hard to know where to begin here. And her quote is just one sentence in a longer Palin Stream-of-Conscious Rant. Henceforce to be known as a Palindrone.
One place to start is to wonder when she says "there will be a lot of us" -- how many is "a lot"" Enough to form an actual political party and win lots of races? Big enough to win anything? Big enough to at least hurt the GOP? Big enough to hopefully qualify just to even get on ballots? Big enough to fill a ballroom? Or a Ford Econoline Cargo van?
Actually, it might be best to start before even that, with the first two words, "I think." Eschewing the obvious joke, you think based on what? And why do you think that? Have you seen real research? Are you thinking -- or guessing? Or hoping? Or just yammering? Did you pull that opinion out some orifice of your body?
It's also worth noting her description of the "private majority parties." First of all, not to nitpick, but you can't have more than one "majority" party. If you're in the majority, then everyone else must, by definition, be in the minority. I do think that I know sort of, kind of what Ms. Palin, the former half-term governor of Alaska, is trying to say. Except that words do matter, and she's so wildly off in her facts that I can't be sure if she knows what she's trying to say. After all, in a January, 2012 Gallup poll here, only 31% of Americans considered themselves Democrats, and a mere 27% considered themselves Republicans. Put together, that's barely a majority. The point is, when Sarah Palin is talking about "majority parties," she's either ignorant of the facts, or trying to flim-flam you.
But also in that phrase is the concept of "private" parties. And that, I have absolutely no idea what she's talking about. Not only are the Democratic Party and GOP as public as you can get, but the whole point is to do almost anything they can to attract as many people as possible. You don't have to do anything to join, even know a secret password. You don't even have to vote to consider yourself a Democrat or Republican. The Democratic Party is legendary for being so disorganized by virtue of having members from all over the political spectrum, from liberal to Blue Dog conservative. And Republicans at least used to be, and now have several moderates. More to the point, if any political party comes close to being "private," it seems to be what Ms. Palin is postulating: a political party with a razor-thin mandate of narrow, far right belief. Given that she's talking about abandonment with the GOP, it's clearly to move even farther to the right, not welcome liberals.
Mostly though, what's so goofily wonderful about this one, simple sentence, is Sarah Palin's heartbreaking sense of hurt at being abandoned by the Republican Party.
This from the women who abandoned the state of Alaska when she resigned as governor halfway through her first term. Think people who voted for her feel abandoned, even to this day?
This from the women whose husband was a member of the America First party (for which she reportedly made convention announcements, though it hasn't been substantiated) -- a party based on abandoning America by having Alaska secede from the union.
To be fair, Sarah Palin probably knows more about abandonment than any politician in the U.S. today, first-hand, so she could considered an expert. It's just from the "stick it to others" side of the equation, not the poor, whining side.
And by the way, what is the cause of her heartbreaking angst with the GOP -- the party which nominated her to be vice-president of the United States? It's the Republican senators who voted for the immigration bill, for which she called the path to citizenship an "absolute betrayal."
But then, how "absolute" is absolute, really? Just like, what really is betrayal? After all, it probably won't surprise you to discover that Ms. Palin is talking out of one of those orifices again. You see, back in 2008, when Sarah Palin was trying to get you to love her and vote for her to be Vice-president of the United States, she did an interview with the Spanish-language TV channel Univision, and was asked if she supported -- "a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants."
And...well, I'm sure you can guess what this empty, duplicitous demagogue answered. She said that she did support it. She said -- "I do because I understand why people would want to be in America. To seek the safety and prosperity, the opportunities, the health that is here. It is so important that yes, people follow the rules so that people can be treated equally and fairly in this country.”
What an absolute betrayal.
Here's the transcript.
But best of all in that interview is the very first question. "Governor, let me ask you about immigration. How many undocumented immigrants are there in Alaska?"
And Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska (at least before resigning), Republican candidate to be vice-president, outspoken expert on undocumented immigration, answered -- "I don't know, I don't know. That's a good question."
It is a good question. It's also a really easy one. Especially if you're governor. I found the answer in four minutes.
According the Pew Research, the number is -- less than 50 in the sample survey. That's not the actual number, but then if you're governor, and haven't resigned yet, it shouldn't take long to crunch those numbers. You can probably do it on your fingers.
Unless you're using them to stick in your ears. Or other orifices.
Robert J. Elisberg is a political commentator, screenwriter, novelist, tech writer and also some other things that I just tend to keep forgetting.
Feedspot Badge of Honor