Conventional collectivist created authority is a deception in consciousness. You are your own Authority!

Sunday, February 6, 2011

Sarah Palin: Who?

Sarah Palin has reportedly filed applications with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to trademark the names "Sarah Palin" and "Bristol Palin."  

Has this lady no shame? Apparently she thinks that just the sight and sound of her name has become a valuable money making device. Maybe she’s right. By all accounts she does make big money now on her name alone, as there’s not much substance beyond that and her all American good looks.

Now she needs a monopoly on “Sarah Palin” so she can remain first and only to cash in. And it’s working for her. Next, she’ll probably try to wrangle space for herself and daughter on Mt. Rushmore. Move over Abraham Lincoln. So far, there appear no limits to Sarah Palin’s arrogance.

Sarah Palin is the latest example of a politician in politics solely for the fame and money. To her everlasting credit, she doesn’t even try to disguise that fact. She’s clearly no diplomat, scholar, or stateswoman. If Sarah Palin has ever entertained an original political thought, the public record doesn’t disclose to us exactly what it is. She does a great job though as a magpie repeating endlessly the talking points of the social conservative religious right. She’s good at preaching to that choir.

Can you imagine George Washington quitting his important high profile job as general of the colonial army during the Revolutionary War so he could make more money with speaking engagements and starring in his own theatrical reality show? Would that have helped him become president?

Sarah Palin wasn’t making enough money as governor of Alaska, and the daily grind of work was way too hard on her. Then all of a sudden she was blessed by the political gods. After her losing stint as Republican vice presidential candidate in 2008, she couldn’t resist the opportunity to capitalize on her new found fame as a rising star in the Republican party. She quit the governor job and has since pursued fame and money to the max. It doesn’t take a genius, however, to figure out that game won’t get your pretty face carved on Mt. Rushmore, much less elected president.

As an ostensible proponent of free markets and limited government, I probably will agree with much of her political spiel, but somehow, in light of everything else about Sarah Palin, it all seems so empty and phony coming from such an unabashed political opportunist.

Sarah Palin might be a momma grizzly alright, but she sure ain’t no Maggie Thatcher.


  1. Since when is seeking better opportunities and more profit something to be looked down on. Ad hominem and shallow.

  2. Maybe so, but would you like her to be president the same as she was governor?

  3. Quote from Timothy J Taylor: "Maybe so, but would you like her to be president the same as she was governor?"

    Name one president that she would be worse than.

    I'm not endorsing her, nor am I a fan. She may not be another Thatcher, but she sure isn't another Obama either.

    I she bailed out of her elected office to make money, that is a plus in my book (she's at least got some capitalist tendencies). If she did it because it was good for her political career, then she's just being a smart politician (the incentive is implied). Attacking her on either case is little more than saying 'I just don't like her', which is hardly a substantive argument.

  4. If she bailed out of her elective office to make money, as you and I both agree she did, she shouldn’t have been in elective office in the first place. If she can do that as governor, why not as president? It just shows us how little she cared about that office and her important obligations to the people of Alaska. Politics should not be a money making opportunity. Politicians are not capitalists, and politics is not capitalism. What bothers me most about Sarah Palin, however, is her lack of originality in political thought.

  5. Quote from Timothy J Taylor: "If she bailed out of her elective office to make money, as you and I both agree she did, she shouldn’t have been in elective office in the first place."

    Why? Are you saying you've never changed jobs when a better opportunity presented itself? The first rule for any employer is, your employees will accept a better offer.

    In a perfect world, perhaps politics wouldn't be about money (perhaps), but to think politicians aren't out to make money, is at best naive, at worst reckless.

    You're right that politics isn't capitalism. Capitalism is based on voluntary agreements. Politics is about violence, the threats to use it and the coercive manipulation of people by it. If you don't recognize that and expect your politicians to know this as well, and use that viiolent power to their own personal advantage, then you are both naive and reckless.

    If somebody is willing to walk away from political power to work in the capitalist arena, then I think that's a good thing. Maybe good enough to let her have another chance in office. She might be less educated than what is preferred, but she at least knows how to make a living outside of politics. That's more than you can say about most politicians.