Palin, the Prophetess? (Updated) – Part One

Image Credit: Townhall.com reposted at FreeRepublic.com

PALIN, THE PROPHETESS?

Conservatives have been pointing out that Sarah Palin was derided for predicting in 2008 that an Obama presidency might set the stage for a Russian invasion of the Ukraine:

Speaking Tuesday at a rally in a Reno, Nevada, Republican vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin had a little fun with her counterpart on the Democratic ticket, thanking Joe Biden for warning Barack Obama’s supporters to “gird your loins” for an international crisis if the Illinois senator wins.

Palin helpfully offered four scenarios for such a crisis, one of which was this strange one:

After the Russian Army invaded the nation of Georgia, Senator Obama’s reaction was one of indecision and moral equivalence, the kind of response that would only encourage Russia’s Putin to invade Ukraine next.”

On the other hand,  prophecy might have nothing to do with it.

Palin was not just the running-mate of John McCain in the 2008 elections,  she is his close friend.

MCCAIN HELPED PROVOKE THE UKRAINE CRISIS

This is interesting, since Palin is identified with the more conservative base of the Republican party, while McCain is often praised by Democrats, which makes him either a thoughtful moderate or an undependable RINO (Republican in Name Only), depending on where you stand.

The second interesting angle is that John McCain was one of the chief rabble-rousers on the ground in the Ukraine in December 2013:

Senator John McCain on Sunday told thousands of Ukrainian protesters camped on Kiev’s main square that Ukraine’s destiny lay in Europe and that it would make Europe better”

Numbers of observers like this one have shown up the Western media for its black-out of the real Ukraine story.

MCCAIN’S CONNECTION TO THE MAFIA

(Added, June 16, 2014. H/T to Charles Burris, LRC blog for reminding me)

THE STAGE-MANAGEMENT OF HISTORY

Alternative blogs have called attention to the considerable evidence that the Ukraine situation was engineered, an instance of the much-flogged Hegelian Dialectic by which the Western governments and allied corporations draw greater and greater power to themselves:


Thesis (Proposition)

[A problem is created, encouraged, or exacerbated by the powers-that-be]

It is opposed by an

Antithesis (Counter-proposition) 

[This the reaction by the population, victims, or public opinion, to the problem. It demands a solution or a resolution.]

The conflict is resolved by the

Synthesis

[In turn this becomes a new thesis and the basis of the next triad of conflict.]


  1. The  solution is presented as a novel remedy to the population, but it is pre-planned. It is the intended goal of the powers-that-be.
  2. The new problems that lie in the solution are carefully hidden from the public until the next triad is activated. Then they become the basis for further conflict, which demands more solutions.
  3. The succeeding conflicts lead to greater and greater control by the powers-that-be.
  4. This control can be governmental or extra-governmental.

 

PALIN, THE PROPAGANDIST?

Seen in this light, Putin’s annexation of the Ukraine could be an intended consequence of the provocations staged by the CIA, with politicians like McCain, Nuland, and Kerry to lend them clout.

Palin, as a close friend of McCain’s, might have been privy to the plan, or, at least, to parts of it.

And her “prediction” of 2008 could simply be an accidental slip, exposing something she’d heard.

More likely, it’s an intentional leak to the public, with the intention of creating retrospective gravitas for Palin herself, as well as embarrassment for Obama.

One can of course take the speculation even further. Obama himself might have been selected to play this role in the weakening of the American empire…..

Ross Douthat on Sarah Palin

Ross Douthat on what to expect if you’re a female candidate for office:

Male commentators will attack you for parading your children. Female commentators will attack you for not staying home with them. You’ll be sneered at for how you talk and how many colleges you attended. You’ll endure gibes about your “slutty” looks and your “white trash concupiscence,” while a prominent female academic declares that your “greatest hypocrisy” is the “pretense” that you’re a woman. And eight months after the election, the professionals who pressed you into the service of a gimmicky, dreary, idea-free campaign will still be blaming you for their defeat.

All of this had something to do with ordinary partisan politics. But it had everything to do with Palin’s gender and her social class.

Sarah Palin is beloved by millions because her rise suggested, however temporarily, that the old American aphorism about how anyone can grow up to be president might actually be true.

But her unhappy sojourn on the national stage has had a different moral: Don’t even think about it. “

“Me and Mrs. Palin” – Vanity Unfair’s Low-Class Smear Job

The whole piece is posted at Lew Rockwell.

As I said, I’ve never been a fan of Sarah Palin as vice-president. It was apparent to me from the beginning that she was unqualified. But the fault in picking her was not hers but McCain’s. It was an opportunistic and silly choice, given the economic challenges the country was facing, and in my opinion it called into question McCain’s own temperament. But that said, vilifying the woman at every turn is pointless, ugly, and calls into question the motivations of her critics.

To take the example of a non-white woman who I believe is as unqualified and as polarizing, would people talk about Maxine Waters in the same way? I think not. And I hope not.

Then let’s extend the same courtesy to all candidates, regardless of their political affiliation or religion or race or class.

(Note: I’ve criticized attacks on Hillary Clinton on the same grounds on this blog).

Liberals Love to Hate Sarah Palin

Update: This piece is now up as a full-length article at Lew Rockwell.. Reader responses will be below in the Comments, as usual…

In an August 3 piece in Salon magazine, even the usually well-modulated voice of Professor Juan Cole, shot up a few octaves. He compared Sarah Palin to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, and came out in Ahmadinejad’s favor. Now, according to some people, Ahmadinejad stands guilty of anti-Semitism. I don’t know if that’s true or not. But that’s what the establishment media seems to think. So, if the same media thinks Palin is worse than Ahmadinejad, then what it’s saying is that to liberals, being a conservative small-town mother is more dangerous than being anti-Semitic.

Palin and the Iranian president are both dangerous populists, writes Cole. They blame their failures not on their own loose lips (Palin’s stutterings on the Katy Couric show and Ahmadinejad’s alleged anti-Semitism), but on media conspiracies against them.

Of course, there’s no real reason why both things couldn’t be true. Palin could have her short-comings, and she could still be the victim of a hatchet-job by the media. But measured logic is not the style of the Sarah-phobics:

Here’s Cole again on the Irani-Alaskan Axis-of-Medieval:

“Both politicians ‘encourage a political style of exhibitionism, disregard for the facts as understood by the mainstream media, and exaltation of the values of people who feel themselves marginalized by the political system….’

Dear me. Tut-tut. Political exhibitionism, eh? And that wouldn’t be something ever committed by Barack Obama now, would it – he with the near-halo on many a magazine cover, who dubbed himself a voice for people marginalized by the system – or so I recall – in his celebrated Getty- er- pre-election speech on race?

As for “facts as understood by the mainstream media,” since when are facts determined by how journalists understand them? Isn’t that just what some guy called Donald Rumsfeld said not so long ago and got these very same journalists lathered up at his solipsism?

I’m no fan of Sarah Palin.

Anyone who has five children at home and hankers for high office has her priorities confused. If a real feminist was needed on McCain’s team, Todd was the Palin they should have picked. And no, the photogenic governor doesn’t have the experience needed to take on DC. No more than our genial President himself.

But by trashing Sarah Palin in such a rancid, racial, and bigoted way, the media did itself no good, and turned her into an instant symbol of the double-standards practiced by this country’s political elites toward outsiders.

Whatever you think of the moose-hunting mayor, she isn’t an insider, and it was insiders who dragged America through the mud over the last two decades.That makes her – one way or other – a voice for ordinary people, one of us. The persistent trashing of Sarah Palin is a trashing of ordinary Americans.