January 13, 2011

THE LADY IN THE BUBBLE:

Vintage Palin (Jennifer Rubin , 1/12/11, Washington Post)

One supposes she means that she is accused of having blood on her hands (or instigating one who has blood on his hands). Maybe she is just mindlessly parroting talk show and conservative lingo. The term has a specific historic context, as does the term "holocaust," and unless you are Glenn Beck (whom she increasingly resembles), you should steer clear of indiscriminate use of the term.

But once again, the left misses the boat. Many liberals are twittering that this was an intentionally inflammatory remark. For once, I'm with Rep. James Clyburn (D.-S.C.), who, albeit harshly, said this of the video: "She is an attractive person, she is articulate, but I think intellectually she seems not to understand what is going on here."

It is, after all, inconsistent for the left to simultaneously argue she's so devious as to intentionally conjure up images of pogroms and to say she's an intellectual dope, a know-nothing.

It has been reported that that she is exceedingly insulated from experienced voices by a mini-staff in Alaska and her husband. ("Among the D.C. consultants, however, only [Tim] Crawford interacts with Palin on a regular basis.") A case in point is:

Rebecca Mansour who especially personifies the amorphous yet fervid network of Palin World. Mansour said . . . "I majored in English and history and minored in philosophy, but I've never been a Beltway person, so that does confuse people."

And this person is "Palin's primary speechwriter, researcher, online communications coordinator and all-purpose adviser." The sort of person to Google through conservative commentary, flag a catchy phrase, and put out a video that has been widely panned. An experienced Republican operative, not aligned with any campaign says simply, "The video was awful."

Enhanced by Zemanta
Posted by Orrin Judd at January 13, 2011 12:00 AM
blog comments powered by Disqus
« JUST A MATTER OF WHAT KIND OF PARTY WE WANT TO BE: | Main | NOW THAT WOULD BE A SINGULARLY UNEDIFYING EXERCISE: »