Archived post

This is an archived post. Please click here to see the latest entries.

« Bonnajoo at Dartmouth | Home | Alumni, Students Fighting for the Vote at Colgate »


Sarah Palin in Burlingame, Calif.

palin-carson.jpgI am freshly returned from a Sarah Palin fundraiser in Burlingame, California. Thank-you to the readers who donated in my name, both the nameless first (who, the campaign insists, is called Joann, and is my wife) and the second. I have stopped in a Palo Alto cafe to tap out an observation or two.

First? A smash, despite the many broadminded protesters outside whose homemade placards decried “Geezer & Gidget.” The original notion for northern California was to have an intimate event in the Woodside, Calif., backyard of a certain technology titan. (Not, regular readers should note, that of my own employer.) But in the event, far, far too many Silicon Valley Republicans wanted to pay $1,000 a plate to hear from Sarah Palin. I received a call last week letting me know that the high-priced event would now be held in a ballroom. And it was going to remain high-priced. Happy tidings. In conversation with various attendees, it unraveled to me that the profusion of California conservatives—who are in truth mostly libertarians—is not new; these are dormant Republican voters activated by either the simple goodness of the Governor of Alaska or the increasing feeling that the vaporous, vacant, “imperfect vessel” Barack Obama is a cipher hiding quite poisonous views.

So what played to this audience? What caused genuine applause? Well, one line, in particular: near the end of her twenty-minute speech, Sarah Palin told the audience that out on the hustings one comment from supporters has dominated, in frequency, all others: tell people about the real Barack Obama. She said this quietly, without drama. But: thunder, hoots, an ovation. It was the one real firework in her stump speech; yet from the cadence of the speech one could tell that it was not intended thus. Audiences know that standing up for one particular line in a political speech is reserved for positive lines—lines that honor someone, or declaim some principle, or express some affirmation, or promise some victory. Rarely are audiences moved to bolt from their chairs over a negative line. (They’re more likely to boo affectedly.) But Mr. Obama’s guile has created considerable resentment—so much, in fact, that even a flat recitation of his positions, with not a drought of oratorical flare, dazzles and refreshes and fires an audience.

Sarah Palin spent some time piquing the newsmedia, and thanks to a zealous tablemate who initiated them the New York Times earned decidedly unaffected boos from the Silicon Valley audience. But you understand that if the newsmedia were doing their job, it would not be enough for a political candidate merely to mention the opinions of her opponent. Some argument would be necessary. Not so, not so with Barack Obama. The free pass he has been given is felt—and felt widely. In the final analysis I suspect this will make the man’s candidacy weaker, not stronger. It leaves him vulnerable, qual piuma al vento, to a late-October truth-squad attack.

There was, otherwise, little new in the stump speech. It was the same one given yesterday in Southern California (photo above) and reported on by the Associated Press, which dribbled into its dispatch some surrogate outrage because Mrs. Palin mentioned Barack Obama’s relationship with a violent left-wing terrorist who once intrigued the bombing of the Pentagon. And portions of Mrs. Palin’s speech today were recycled from the Republican National Convention in St. Paul last month. That, at least, is a letdown: Barack Obama today had a fresh stump speech that made able parry to yesterday’s Palin event in the Los Angeles area. The McCain campaign is utterly unable to work as efficiently as that. But my sense was that few donors got that feeling: the excitation of Sarah Palin overshadowed easily any sense one might otherwise receive that the momentum is shifting away from John McCain.

And why not? The crowd of 25,000 she elicited yesterday is proof that Sarah Palin is attracting new voters. And today was further evidence of her effect: a ballroom flush with self-made men and women who, though accustomed to living the dreary life of a permanent political minority, now feel there’s someone for them, too. They see Sarah Palin as a political Ghostbuster singularly able, by dint of her background, her charm, and her cool, to suss out the spectrous Barack Obama, holding him up for everyone to see. She should, soon.

OH, BY THE BYE: The afternoon netted well in excess of $2 million.

Featured posts

  • May 31, 2009
    Kangaroo Court, Indeed
    In an interview with The Dartmouth, alumni-elected trustee T.J. Rodgers ‘70 explained his reasons for declining to participate in future evaluations of trustees up for “re-election,” namely the “kangaroo court” nature of such discussion in…
  • March 23, 2009
    Post Prop 8 Optimism
    An interesting piece in the Washington Post today about the future direction of gay marriage in California vis-a-vis Prop 8. Dartblog has offered contrasting perspectives on the subject, see here and here, but agreed that…
  • March 20, 2009
    Faculty Politics in the Classroom
    An article from Inside Higher Ed looks at a new study by Neil Gross, a researcher at the University of British Columbia on faculty politics, available here. This study and article raise a number of…
  • March 5, 2009
    Professors, Politics, and Purpose
    An interesting article in Inside HigherEd reporting on survey data that shed interesting light on what university professors believe and how they conceptualize their role. Among some of the more interesting findings, there have been…
  • March 2, 2009
    A Template for College Governance
    With the announcement of Dr. Jim Kim this afternoon, I thought that I would present a template for College governance. The humble points that follow are value-neutral; they do not mandate any specific course of…
  • November 17, 2008
    Reconsidering Prop 8
    Dartblog has been covering and opining on the gay marriage debate, particular in reference to “Prop 8” California’s recent constitutional amendment to ban the practice. Some past thoughts here. I have been mulling the issue…

Dartblog Specials

Subscribe by Email

Enter your email address:

Donate

Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More

Please note

This website reflects the personal opinions of its authors. Any e-mails received may be published along with the full name of the sender. If you wish otherwise, please say so.

All content appearing at Dartblog.com should be presumed copyright 2004-2009 its respective bylined author unless otherwise noted or unless linked to original source.

Advertisement

admin

Calendar

October 2008
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31

Search

Archives

Links