If you open up The Miscellany News and turn to the Opinions section, it is a good bet that you are bound to find one or more articles that negatively make reference to—if are not entirely devoted to attacking—former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin. In fact, when some on the left have trouble finding topics to write about—despite the global economic instability, massive health care legislation, the continued military effort in the Middle East, increasing deficits and the recent major defeats of the Democratic Party—they seem to resort to further caricaturing of Sarah Palin. As humorous as this might seem, it is anything but a joke.
“Sarah Palin just doesn’t go away. It’s been a slow week, and I wasn’t sure what to write about. I was having a little bit of trouble finding something to get me so angry,” wrote Steve Keller in his column, “Sarah Palin, Tea Partiers lack grasp of reality” (2.11.10). What is it about Sarah Palin that makes her the default topic of choice for those on the left? In particular, why is it that among a group of people who profess to be tolerant, we see such vicious attacks against a human being with whom they just disagree?
What we do not understand, we ridicule. Those ideas we regard as “sick and twisted,” to use Keller’s language, we caricature. As tolerant as those on the left may proclaim to be, it would seem that those with whom they vehemently disagree are not deserving of that tolerance. Why? First, Sarah Palin is an easy political target for the left. She has shown herself to be somewhat un-intellectual in her national speeches against Obama, believes in “backward” family values—her young daughter has a child despite the legality of abortion—not to mention that she supposedly denies the theory of evolution. She is the perfect image of the Bible-hugging, “ignorant,” right-wing zealot whose very existence endangers the well-being of America. Tolerance, decency and courtesy can evidently be abandoned when dealing with such a scourge of society.
Do not mistake me: If the left needs a political target, Sarah Palin, for all those reasons, is a splendid one. When has it ever been okay, even for a comedian, to joke about an 18-year-old single mom—if I give David Letterman the benefit of the doubt as to which daughter he was referring—having sex with a baseball player? Didn’t Don Imus lose his job when he made slurs that were not even as deliberated as Letterman’s was? What then could be the motivation for such a double standard and vile speech?
The truth is that recent events have put many on the left in denial, and that people in denial resort to drastic measures. Democrats have lost governorships in two states and a Senate seat in the very liberal state of Massachusetts. What could be the cause of this? Certainly, it must be everything but universal health care and the other aspects of liberal agenda brought upon by President Obama and the overwhelmingly Democratic Congress. After all, how could anyone be against progress?
The left does not wish to talk about these events objectively because it contradicts much of their deep philosophical underpinnings as a matter of principle. This is why Keller’s default topic amidst the most intense political climate since Sept. 11 is Sarah Palin. The change that occurred with the Democratic overhaul of our government has been followed with sound and significant political defeats for the Democratic Party and its liberal agenda. This is anything but what “progress” is as it is envisioned by liberals. The country seems to be heading in the opposite direction of President Obama and Nancy Pelosi. Hence, progression in time is not coinciding with a promulgation of liberal values. Many on the left cannot comprehend it. Historically, throughout human history, society has always seemed to evolve in the direction of how they envision society—so much so that they built a political philosophy that in many fundamental respects is centered around such a notion. Thus, the left has no choice but to attack Sarah Palin, and to continue attacking her.
Regardless of what might be said, the reasons for attacking her specifically are matters of convenience. As was said near the outset, what we do not understand we ridicule. The left does not understand, and cannot given the philosophical tenets out of which they operate, that America is showing evidence of being headed in the other direction than what their progressive values dictate. To objectively discuss the political climate would be to put a dagger through what they believe as liberals even if it is in many cases sub-conscious. For the left to write about the political defeats of the Democratic Party in the last few months would be, for many of them, to operate outside of their very worldview. Thus, they are led by this lack of understanding to caricature. Do not be mistaken, this is not at all something that happens only at Vassar. It is widespread among liberal media outlets. It is by all means a philosophical issue at the hearts of millions who call themselves progressives.
It seems then, and I submit, that constant caricatures and attacks of Sarah Palin, and the larger Tea Party movement, reveal far more about the deep ideology of their attackers then they do about their targets. I cannot be certain, but I have an inclination that Sarah Palin, for all her supposed stupidity, understands this in some way. Her prevalence in the national discourse is certainly a calculated move on her part. For all the jokes being made about Sarah Palin, one has to wonder who is really getting the last laugh. Apparently, this is one joke many liberals do not get.
—Joe Coniglio ’12
14 comments
Legal - because it's a medical procedure and a personal choice.
Rare - because it's the last option that should be exercised, in most cases (i.e. contraception should be the first option).