Sarah Palin: Dead To Them. Deadlier To The Political Conformist.
It was confirmed February 12 that Sarah Palin will speak at the 2014 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). Pundits, left and right, reacted with a collective cringe while writers at ‘Saturday Night Live’ escaped the unemployment line for three more weeks.
As can be expected, Palin’s clichéd colloquialisms will draw the ire from the urbane. Snippets of “drill baby drill,” “lame street media,” and “hopey, changey stuff” will saturate the throng until viewers have lost consciousness. Palin’s befitting message of less government interference and energy independence as foreign policy will be drowned out by inferences to Tina Fey.
For a person charged with being redundant in her messaging, Palin’s critics are redundant even more so. Charged with idiocy; folksiness and fringe, the public is led to believe that Palin‘s appeal is only palatable to far right devotees.
Palin’s attributed flaw is twofold. One, Palin’s blunt, undistinguished manner lacks the curt condescension necessary for all things politic. Two, Palin actually means what she says.
Nothing grates the nerves of leftists more than an inarticulate, scrupulous ideologist. Conservatives with a command of the English language are only commended posthumously.
While we move past Palin‘s perceived redundancies, let us recall that Mr. Obama has coined a few of his own. In fact, Mr. Obama’s redundancies are so notorious that at last check the State of the Union turned into a drinking game. If you catch five clichéd remarks consecutively, you win! It is quite similar to ‘BINGO.’
‘B’ as in “Back from the brink.”
‘I’ as in “ I Inherited.“
‘N’ as in “[I] Never said it would be easy.”
‘G’ as in “Greed on Wall Street.”
‘O’ as in “Our brave men and women.”
Certainly President Obama is eloquent, but his detached redundancies come riddled with subversive consequences. He excels at making the lie sound truthful and subjugation sound respectable.
When the President states that he is going to “fundamentally change America”, we now know that that translates into 47 million Americans on food stamps in 2014 compared to 28 million in 2008.
When he spoke of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act as being “the beginning of what we need to do to create jobs for Americans scrambling in the wake of layoffs; to provide relief for families worried they won’t be able to pay next month’s bills; and to set our economy on a firmer foundation,” he is by no means to be held accountable for the naiveté of the public for thinking that his $840 stimulus package was actually going to go towards helping the 20 million unemployed or those of that number who have simply given up seeking gainful employment.
Conjecture and inference are integral keys to the President’s evasiveness – caveats are inferred, intentions intentionally open-ended; avowals are subject to reinterpretation as needed.
Whereas when Palin calls to hold “those elected to serve this great nation accountable,” she intends to scrutinize official voting records and exact strict oversight over the funding of dubious freedom fighters and serpentine governments.
Palin may be guilty of using warn out phraseology mixed with corny colloquialisms but her departure from ‘political conformity’ to the norm of calculated doublespeak is somewhat refreshing to marred ears worn from five plus years of anesthetized vacillations and subversions.
Rest assured, Palin’s remarks will continue to be met with intolerance – for the simple fact that simplicity is intolerable.
