Deconstructing Sarah Palin…Again

I have argued for some months now that the erstwhile Governor of Alaska and candidate for Vice President was beyond relevance, rendering moot any need to comment on her nonsense. I must admit I was wrong; when more than 3.25 million people “like” a short note rehashing conservative talking points on Facebook, Palin’s relevance is evident. In a nation where perhaps two million people have formally asked to be ex-citizens, popular rants by the wife of an Alaska secessionist have real meaning.

It is, after all, the simple notion that many in America have regressed to Sarah Palin’s level that makes her relevant, rather than any improvement in her own feeble and misdirected talents. Formally patriotic citizens who fought the dishonor of flag burning are now all too willing to abuse its code by flying it upside down, before removing some of the stars from its field of blue. The notion is as disgusting, cowardly, and primitive as Sarah Palin proved herself to be during her own national campaign; apparently, it spreads like a virus.

But I digress; it is with Mrs. Palin’s recent comments, motivated by the conservative tempest in a teapot now being brewed around the Libyan Affair, that I direct my post. Before moving forward, it is important to restate one pertinent fact:

There have been 16 major attacks on U.S. embassies or consulates since 1979, including seven under George W. Bush, one under George H.W. Bush, and three under St. Ronnie the Gipper himself (60 people including 17 Americans died in the Beirut embassy bombing which preceded the Marine Barracks bombing by six months). So why is the Libyan attack anything more than a tragic and painful part of American diplomacy?

Now, on to Mrs. Palin’s comments, which will be shown in indented script, and the response of The Rational Middle which will follow in normal font.

First:

“Who is running our country? We’ve got a CIA Director sharing security info with his mistress using an unsecure gmail account.”

President Obama appointed a Republican four-star general to lead the CIA, an appointment which was universally applauded. David Petraeus was given consistently high marks for his performance from both sides of the aisle. No one has found any evidence to suggest that anyone in the White House knew of the Director’s personal problem, and no one connected to any oversight knew of the issue until the FBI agent who stumbled on the situation reported it to Eric Cantor. How is that in any way an indictment of the President (unless Mrs. Palin believes that presidents should be clairvoyant)?

Second:

“We’ve got the delusional Susan Rice blaming the death of an ambassador on a Youtube video.”

Susan Rice went on television to inform citizens what she learned about in unclassified talking points issued by the CIA. Rice is, by the way, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, and not a member of the national security team. And while I am ready to submit video and text proving that Sarah Palin is in fact a superficial diva with a limited intellect, I doubt she can find either to support her claim that Susan Rice (a Phd and former Brookings Fellow) is “delusional”.

Third:

“We’ve got Iran firing on one of our drones a week before the election. We’ve got the White House either ignorant of or covering up all of this. Who is minding the store?”

It is called “harm’s way” for a reason Mrs. Palin, if our assets are close enough to watch, they are close enough to take fire. Under President Obama, our nation has taken a strong posture towards Iran (although you wouldn’t know it to listen to the bombastic morons at Fox News). We have, at a minimum, two carrier battle groups on station around Iran, along with 40,000 troops right across the Persian Gulf from the home of the Mullahs. Drones deployed to snoop on that regime seem a reasonable strategic choice (and one with which I am sure that Israel approves), one would imagine that even Sarah Palin would know that drones can be shot down regardless of who occupies the White House.

Finally:

“Here’s my question for the president: As our nation’s chief executive you claim to be unaware of the most important and tragic situations we’re facing; so, as a former chief executive, I’d like to know how long it takes for your staff to tell you things like: “Sir, your CIA Director is under investigation”?”

What the President is unaware of isn’t made clear by the person who quit on Alaska to avoid ethics charges, unless it is the adultery of the CIA director to which she refers. While personally tragic, the General’s infidelity is hardly of national consequence, and it doesn’t appear that he was reckless enough to compromise our nation in those unsecured gmail messages. One might also assume that the ex-national candidate learned about cover-ups the hard way; it was after all her own botched cover-up (remember Troopergate?) that gave her cause to run from the responsibilities she was elected to execute.

We are in Libya because that nation is newly emerged as a democracy; a democracy in whose birth our nation played a role. Our role in Libya’s rejection of its own barbaric dictator cost us 1/800 the money that the farcical and tragic Iraq War did and, until the Benghazi attacks, no lives. Those that did give their lives in Libya on that tragic night knew that they were in harm’s way, and believed in their mission. Tragically, for people like Sarah Palin, their mission is now no more than a political opportunity, a chance to regain relevance and recapture a chair on the gravy-train. Show a little shame Sarah Palin, and crawl back under that rock.

 

The Rational Middle is listening…