Lipstick Maverick

In lieu of Sarah Palin's new media blitz in the selling/promotion of her new book “Going Rogue”, I thought I would reflect and backpedal on her portrayal through the lens of the news media. Also, I found her image issue especially troubling based on the negative responses she invoked in class discussion many weeks ago where most regarded her as a joke. So, is this kind of judgment unwarranted? While she makes it a point with Going Rogue to undo the tarnishing done to her political persona through misinformation, (and shed light on her mishandling inside the McCain campaign) I think its prudent to take a look and analyze at how these compromising events unfolded during her time campaigning and forward.

Probably one of the single most devastating blows to Sarah Palin's image was the response, or lack thereof, she had for Katy Couric. In the CBS interview Couric asked Palin specifically what newspapers or publications she got her information from. As we know, Palin answered rather vaguely, “All of them, anyone of 'em that have been in front of me over all these years...” At the time, I too shared in the the wincing sentiment of “that probably wasn't the best answer.” I mean, she could of just made up one for all anyone cared! Yet, after hearing Palin's recount of the interview, I feel differently on the matter. In summary, Palin had been undergoing the interview with Couric for a period of days and from Couric's line of questioning, was under the impression she had some kind of partisan agenda. This does seem to explain why the next half of Palin's response seemed defensive in basically pointing out “Hey, just because I'm in Alaska, doesn't mean I'm not aware of what's going on in the news.” In addition, Palin isn't completely dropping the blame on Couric. In a recent T.V. Interview with Bill O'reilly and Sean Hannity, she admits that it was “her bad” - she blew the question after enduring an irritating few days of intermittent questioning from Couric. Overall, I think one can safely assume now that Sarah Palin does indeed read if it serves to alleviate her dummy portrayal after said interview.

Let us look at another blow to her image: Tina Fey's SNL skits. Comments like “I can see Russia from my House” based on a Gibson interview with the infamous Bush doctrine question (referring to the foreign policy of the Bush administration) were staples that fed her growing stupidity image. Honestly, who could even answer such a vaguely loaded question with specifics? Even if Gibson had kindly indicated to her that it pertained to foreign policy, I highly doubt any answer she would have given would have been the one he was conceivably looking for. This particular clip is a follow up parody to the Vice Presidential debate between Joe Biden and Sarah Palin. After watching the genuine article for myself, I had my reservations about Palin, but I thought overall she did well enough against a seasoned veteran to the political scene, he having some considerable foreign policy background. What did stand out to me however, was the sheer amount of times Biden misspoke or outright lied about information that he presented confidently as truth. And who would have known the difference unless they actually bothered to fact check him? Surely most Americans aren't going to bother with such an endeavor. In fact, he had misspoke about several things, a few being: McCain's tax vote, his own stance on offshore drilling, throwing out imaginary numbers like “John McCain voted against alternative energy 23 times”, denying Barack Obama ever made the sitting down without preconditions comments, and making accusations that McCain was “dead wrong” on Iraq, where they both had voted to authorize the war. There are many more gaffes I could list to reinforce my point but I will spare the reader that bit of fluff and just get to the broader message: It was better that Sarah Palin answered honestly to what she actually knew rather than appearing to have a grander wealth of knowledge, throwing out blatant misinformation like Biden. So, why then does that parody clip clearly choose to pick at Palin, when she technically made far fewer mistakes than Biden? I guess only the Saturday Night Live producers have the answer to that question.

Now that we're on the subject of Biden and gaffes, he sure does make a lot of them whenever in front of a camera. Besides his lack of remembering real numbers, we can more commonly look to the instance when he was unable to adequately express what the website was for Recovery.gov. Another particularly glaring ironic gaffe occurred before he was selected from then Senator Obama's short list. During that time, Biden had shared his opinion that Obama was not ready to be the President. As seen in this clip Joe re-affirms this point during one of the Democratic Primary Debates. My overall point being that whenever Joe Biden had a misstep the response was usually “Oh that's Joe for you” implying that is just in his nature and O.K. However, when Sarah Palin had a gaffe, the news media picked up on it like sharks and played it incessantly over again, magnifying her with this glass clearly tainted with a double standard.

I will not touch specifically on the issues of personal attacks made against her character and family, like questioning the legitimacy of being the birth mother of Trig, her baby with down syndrome, or the scrutiny put on her daughter for having an under-aged pregnancy. I will, however, mention that this tabloidization of her life was far more severe than that of Biden or even former Senator Barack Obama. In my eyes, alarming associations with a former member of the Weather Underground and being a member of a congregation whose preacher's comments mirror black supremacy and hate for America should be far more concerning to the media as opposed to how much the McCain campaign is spending on Palin's attire- which does not in any way reflect her governing ability, experience with energy and oil, and world views as it pertains to foreign policy. Some will argue that these attacks on Palin resulted from liberals and womens rights advocate groups beating her up because they fear a possible prominent female pro choice woman with conservative views. Why were they not instead rallying to her for being an accomplished woman in politics who has time to raise a family and achieve a measure of success in a still male dominated sector?

Bringing this issue to closure, I think we as a society are for too concerned with how people outwardly present themselves, IE, their mannerisms, eloquence of speech, and inspirational value as opposed to focusing on substance. If everyone wasn't so tied up in their pre-conceived notions that Sarah Palin is a dummy based on something like Tina Fay's comedic imitation and actually stopped to Google her background as a mayor and governor, then maybe a more realistic perspective of her image would take hold. If she is such a dummy then why was her book a bestseller before it was even released? Obviously she's shrewd, but on substance rather than image.

Jared Justice