Sunday, March 20, 2011

Sarah Failin'?

Latest Newspaper Column- The Pilot

Say it ain't so, Sarah!

A recent story in this newspaper about the Moore County Republican Convention noted that former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney "soared to the top Saturday" in the convention's "straw vote." Receiving only a "sprinkling" of votes were Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie - and Sarah Palin.

Only a "sprinkling" for Caribou Barbie? This seemed ominous to me, as it should to anyone aspiring to commit acts of political humor.

Then it got worse. According to an ABC News/Washington Post poll released last week, St. Sarah of the Snows suffers from slipping favorability ratings. Only 58 percent of "Republicans and Republican-leaning independents" viewed her favorably.

This might not seem too bad, until you remember that right after Honorable John McCain picked the Wasilla Whiner to corral the all important drama-queen and grievance-junkie vote, those same voters had her favorability rating up to a whopping 88 percent. As recently as October, according to a story in the Christian Science Monitor, the Resigning Woman's favorability rating among those voters was 70 percent.

Most tragically, a recent front-page article on Politico.com lined up a veritable Who's Who of conservative pundits - George Will, Charles Krauthammer, Weekly Standard writer Matt Labash and others, to turn and rend the Quitta From Wasilla like a pack of wolves who've just noticed that one of their own has come up limping.

"She's becoming Al Sharpton, Alaska edition," Labash sniped, citing Palin's "frequent appeals to victimhood and group grievance."

Krauthammer piled on: "When populism becomes purely anti-intellectual, it can become unhealthy and destructive."

Asked if the GOP would remain the party of ideas if Palin captures the nomination, Will said: "The answer is emphatically no." (Somebody probably needs to tell Mr. Will: That horse left the barn a while ago.)

So is Palin's star fading in the political firmament? Are all but the most die-hard Palindrones suffering from Palin Fatigue? I sincerely hope not. That would be a disaster.

Why, you may ask, am I so unhappy about this? Don't I loathe Sarah Palin?

Nothing could be further from the truth, actually. I need Sarah Palin. I depend on her. She's an unending source of quality material.

Oh, sure, you've got your B-list wackjobs like Sharron Angle or up-and comers like Michelle "Crazy Eyes" Bachmann. But for a column that just writes itself, all I have to do is wait for Mama Grizzly to open her mouth and let the comedy ore tumble out, ready to be refined into gold.

Not only is a Palin column easy to write, I can always depend on those lovely folks in the Party of Love to whip themselves into a hate-frenzy and put those all important eyeballs on the page. As an experiment, I recently went back through some old columns on this newspaper's website and checked the reactions I got to columns that mentioned the Snowbilly Princess, as measured by comments on the column. The results were illuminating,

One on Jan. 9 entitled "Palin's Latest Weird Tangent" got 152 comments. A Jan. 16 offering called "Violent Talk in the Cross Hairs" mentioned Palin prominently. Result: 77 comments. Jan 23's "Everybody's a Drama Queen" made a passing reference to Palin's "Death Panel" lie and got 43 comments. But look at Jan. 30: "We Have Met the Enemy and He Is Us. " No Palin mention. 17 comments. Even I can do the math, if it's simple enough.

Said comments, by the way, usually include at least one instance of the tired old whine: "Why are you always picking on Sarah Palin?" The answer is: Never let it be said I don't know what the people like when it comes to getting their rage on.

If Sarah Palin slips back into the obscurity from whence she came, I don't know what I'll do. I was depending on her to at least make a run for the GOP nomination. Because if she did - well, it would just be a matter of time.

Palin's the most thin-skinned politician in America. Somewhere along the campaign trail, someone will say something she deems offensive, probably to one of her kids, and the resulting meltdown will be epic. It'll make Charlie Sheen's manic orgy of self-aggrandizement look like a mild case of coffee jitters.

Well, we live in hope.

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

You really love her, don't ya big boy...

Anonymous said...

JD: Too many donuts in the morning, The sugar has gone to your noggin'.

eviljwinter said...

The difference between Sarah and Charlie is that, in brief bouts of sobriety between binges, Chuck realized he was putting on a pretty good circus and started milking it for all its worth.

Whereas Sarah seems to believe everything that comes out of her mouth.

J. E. Medrick said...

I laughed all the way through this.

Thank you <3

Shackled
Cheat

JD Rhoades said...

I laughed all the way through this.

Then my work is done.Thanks!

Fran said...

Oh, and she's far from done yet, I suspect. After all, it's now John McCain's fault she isn't in the White House, which is oodles of comedy right there!

Rae said...

Love it ;-)

PaulR said...

Here's some new material for you. What India Really Thinks About Sarah Palin (http://www.politicususa.com/en/india-really-thinks-palin). There's some other good stuff there, too.

Celine said...

And there's your Party of Love fan club right there in the first 2 comments! Not with the balls (or ovaries) to own their words, of course, but that's no surprise.

JD Rhoades said...

Celine: you should see some of the e-mail I'm getting.

Steve Malley said...

Ooh, let us hope. Her narcissistic petulance is the only thing that saves her from being truly frightening.

These days I look at American politics and can't shake the thought that 'the best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity...'

*shudder*

KateH said...

Oh, but you could start using more idiotic comments from all the other loonies, if she fails you. What about Rand Paul and his going on 20 years now toilet problems?