The Polarizing Sarah Palin

October 20, 2008 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (8)

Ross Douthat has a great take on the reaction Sarah Palin elicits in the scribbling class. Douthat's take in brief is that it's possible she's neither a Nixon-Wallace dangerous Neanderthal nor the Second Coming.

Tags:
2008 presidential election,
Republican Party,
Sarah Palin

Reader Comments Read all comments (8)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Obama would move towards socialism? Kids, you've just had 50 percent of your mortgages nationalized, and not by Obama. The treasury will buy shares in banks, courtesy of GB.

For the love of Christ try to focus on the fact that Repubs have doubled the debt in 8 years. I know you don't care about 4000 dead Americans, and you certainly dont care about 1, 200, 000 Iraqis, but a buck is a buck and you cant afford any more invasions.

Nick Kelly of 1:22AM October 21, 2008

THIS WOMAN IS A JOKE AND SHE IS VERY VERY VERY VERY DANGEROUS .SHE IS TRYING TOO SEPRATE THIS COUNTRY AND THIS COUNTRY IS ALREADY SEPRATED. SHE WOULD BE WORST THAT BUSH IF YOU COULD BELEIVE THAT.McCAIN LACK OF JUDGEMENT IS WORST THAT BUSH.MCBUSH AND PALIN VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY, DANGEROUS.

Rannie J. Hammond of AL 7:36PM October 20, 2008

Is the term 'scribbling class' meant to denote the barely functional literacy of the average conservative? I ask only because I really hate blogs which only reference other blogs with cutesy little descriptions. It's true that many posts in favor of conservative causes have spelling, grammar and syntax that would make a fourth grade teacher blanch. But it's inaccurate to lump ALL of Palin's supporters into the category of the functionally illiterate by calling them the 'scribbling class'.

Of course, your take (after reading the excerpt) is that the 'scribbling class' are simply other pundits, endlessly writing about their points of view of the candidates. As a writer, it behooves you to be clearer in who you're referencing when you write curiously misleading descriptions of others. People might jump to the wrong conclusions.

As for the article, all one needs to read is this:

"Either she's the second coming of George Wallace, stewing from the slights she once suffered at the hands of "the more urbane members" of the Wasilla community and determined to have her revenge on uppity elites once and for all, or else she's a true-to-herself conservative heroine who's been unjustly victimized by the class anxieties of undecided voters and (especially) the conservative punditocracy. No more nuanced interpretation is possible."

Skipping the last six words, that's a single 63 word sentence. I like long sentences, but even that one is beyond the pale for me. I'm not sure to which audience Mr. Douthat was writing, but I expect it's to those people whose primary form of entertainment is to read Scientific American. If he's writing it to the average reader, he has to dummy it down a lot more. Observe the immense pomposity of sesquipedalian verbiage...

And as for YOUR "story", two sentences do not a story make. Perhaps if you put a little more effort into it, you'd actually become a decent pundit yourself. Just try to avoid the paragraph-long, overly verbose sentences. They're fun to write, but a bitch to read.

Fatesrider of CA 3:43PM October 20, 2008

Robert Schlesinger

Robert Schlesinger

Robert Schlesinger is managing editor for opinion at U.S. News and World Report, overseeing all opinion editorial content. He is the author of "White House Ghosts: Presidents and Their Speechwriters." E-mail him at rschlesinger@usnews.com. Follow him on Twitter: @rschles.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

An End to the NRA’s Angry Swagger

Polls show that overwhelming majorities of Americans, and even of NRA members, favor universal background checks.

Mary Kate Cary

Washington’s Toxic Stew

President Obama's burgeoning problems affect more than this week’s three scandals.

Latest Videos

advertisement