Newsweek: Palin Too Common, Too Stupid to be Vice President, She’s ‘Dangerous’
Posted on October 9, 2008
-By Warner Todd Huston
Newsweek’s Jon Meacham thinks that Governor Sarah Palin is too much a commoner and too stupid to be allowed to become vice president of the United States of America and apparently his employer agrees with him. The October 13 cover of Newsweek features a close up photo of the Governor with the headline “She’s One of the Folks (And that’s the problem),” and Meacham writes the accompanying cover story. Be clear about what this means: This is a direct attack on Mr. and Mrs. America. We are all too stupid to be president in the elite opinion of Jon Meacham and Newsweek magazine.
Meacham finds Palin to be incurious, unprepared, and even finds it “dangerous” if she were to become our vice president but he offers us nothing but his opinion to judge by. And it’s all because she doesn’t measure up to his personal standards. Sadly for Meacham’s elitism, however, Palin easily satisfies the standards that the Founding Fathers set as criteria for stepping into the highest office in the land. Curiously, Meacham does not once mention the actual Constitutional requirements to run for office in his entire sarcastic attack on Sarah Palin. Like most of his ilk, the Constitution seems meaningless minutia to him.
To be sure, there is an argument raging among the iliterati concerning who should be allowed to be president or vice president and it all centers on the experience issue. Whether a long resume of government positions makes one “qualified” for president or not has taken center stage, especially since Governor Sarah Palin was chosen for his VP candidate by John McCain. Hypocritically, this “experience” issue didn’t bother these same members of the chattering classes when Barack Obama announced his quest for the White House with his less than 200 days in federal service now behind him. But now these same worriers find themselves suddenly concerned.
Before we begin, we need to find out the true qualifications for president of the United States as we see in the U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 1:
No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
That’s it. The Founders wanted no test, no requirements but these so as not to restrict the people in their choice. They, unlike someone like Jon Meacham it turns out, trusted the American people.
Early in the piece, Meacham sets up the argument in favor of Palin, yet even as he does he attacks.
A key argument for Palin, in essence, is this: Washington and Wall Street are serving their own interests rather than those of the broad whole of the country, and the moment requires a vice president who will, Cincinnatus-like, help a new president come to the rescue. The problem with the argument is that Cincinnatus knew things. Palin sometimes seems an odd combination of Chauncey Gardiner from “Being There” and Marge from “Fargo.”
This is but one of the many slams that elitist Meacham engages in here. Not to belittle the selfless life of Cincinnatus, but to merely assume that he “knew things” and that this assumption somehow speaks against Palin hardly passes the smell test. In fact, the figure of a Cincinnatus does, indeed, seem to elicit a comparison with Sarah Palin. But Meacham does not elaborate on the “things” Cincinnatus “knew” and why it is that Palin doesn’t measure up. He assumes that a mere dropping of an ancient Roman name will be enough to convince that he’s on to something.
To elaborate for the uninitiated, Cincinnatus is known as the Roman dictator that left his small farm to lead Rome to victory in a short war and then, in a perfect example of public virtue, resigned his dictatorship and returned to his plow. He is known for simplicity of life, virtue in duty, and fairness in leadership. He is not, however, known as some great philosopher King. He was just a dutiful, humble citizen that knew how best to get the job done. Why is Cincinnatus so much different than a Sarah Palin? In any case, Meacham doesn’t bother to say, leaving the charge hang there unexplained.
The crux of Meacham’s argument is in favor of elitism of a sorts, though he claims it is not one of station.
Is this an elitist point of view? Perhaps, though it seems only reasonable and patriotic to hold candidates for high office to high standards. Elitism in this sense is not about educational or class credentials, not about where you went to school or whether you use “summer” as a verb. It is, rather, about the pursuit of excellence no matter where you started out in life. Jackson, Lincoln, Truman, Eisenhower, Jonson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan and Clinton were born to ordinary families, but they spent their lives doing extraordinary things, demonstrating an interest in, and a curiosity about, the world around them. This is much less evident in Palin’s case.
Meacham argues that the past presidents he mentions were so obviously more qualified by their “pursuit of excellence” and that Palin has no such history. But, for many of those he mentions, we only know of these pursuits in retrospect. At the time they ran, several of those Meacham mentions were just as blank a slate to the public as he claims Palin to be to us now. Lincoln, Truman, Eisenhower, Johnson and Ford were all thought to be either extremely common of intellect or not well educated by most people when they achieved office. In fact, in Andrew Jackson’s case, he was quite uneducated to which any look at his writings can quickly attest (Spelling and punctuation was unknown to him it is obvious). That they all turned out later to have been misunderestimated is the stuff of history, but using these folks as arguments to prove Palin’s unfitness for office is rather shaky grounds.
Meacham even attacks Palin for presenting herself as one of us.
Even devoted Republicans doubt whether the Sarah Six-Pack case is the best one to make. After the vice presidential debate, a senior figure in the party, who asked not to be named because he was telling the truth, told me that Palin should talk less about being “just-folks” and more about being governor of a large state.
I love how Meacham asserts that this unnamed source was “telling the truth.” Telling whose truth is the question that remains unanswered.
William F. Buckley, Jr. once famously quipped that he’d “rather entrust the government of the United States to the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory than to the faculty of Harvard University.” This remark, albeit a humorous one, holds the germ of true American principle at its heart and it is a principle that Meacham is arguing against. For his part, Thomas Jefferson agreed with Buckley’s intent that the common American was suited for any office in the land, a notion that the Meacham’s of the world seem to be arguing against.
Jefferson once said, that “whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government; whenever things get so far wrong as to attract their notice, they may be relied on to set them to rights.” The election of a Sarah Six-Pack like Sarah Palin can easily be considered a corrective action by the American people tired of being ridden by those imagining themselves “born booted and spurred” to dictate the terms of our lives from on high.
The main problem with Meacham’s position is that it would tend to create a permanent political class from which we would draw our leaders. This is a concept quite outside of what the Founders wanted.
Then Meacham conjures up the death of McCain as so many are wont to do.
… it is only prudent to ask whether she is in fact someone who should be president of the United States in the event of disaster. She may be ready in a year or two, but disaster does not coordinate its calendar with ours. Would we muddle through if Palin were to become president? Yes, we would, but it is worth asking whether we should have to.
Besides his pronouncement that she is stupid, we really don’t find much in Meacham’s column to doubt Sarah Palin’s capacity to be president. We have to take as given that she is unfit because he does not really do much to settle the question. Assuming he’s right, maybe it would be a bad thing to have a Sarah Palin as next in line for the Oval Office. But, there is nothing in this piece that compels one to agree with Meacham’s premise. He fails to prove his case.
He saves his best slam for last; she’s “dangerous.”
I could be wrong. Perhaps Sarah Palin will somehow emerge from the hurly-burly of history as a transformative figure who was underestimated in her time by journalists who could not see, or refused to acknowledge, her virtues. But do I think I am right in saying that Palin’s populist view of high office — hey, Vice President Six-Pack, what should we do about Pakistan? — Is dangerous? You betcha.
As far as ninety-nine percent of the country was concerned, Abe Lincoln, the rough-hewn western hick, was a surprise as president. Few people respected Andrew Jackson as an intellect. Truman was thought a country bumpkin. Ike was perennially depicted as a golf-playing dunderhead and Ford the well-meaning fool. In retrospect they turned out to be far better than their detractor’s worst claims. Meacham wants us to see Palin in the same dismissive light that these American presidents were cast in until they proved their mettle. Sure we should seek a good, qualified candidate. But why is it that Palin isn’t one?
If Meacham meant to convince us that Palin presented the worst-case scenario that was suspected in past American leaders, he failed to do so. But he did insult every normal American out there as he made the attempt.
» Filed Under Democrats, Elections, History, Liberal Media/Bias, News, Obama/Biden, Representative Government, Sarah Palin, Stupidity, The United States of America, U.S. Constitution
Trackback URL
Comments
21 Responses to “Newsweek: Palin Too Common, Too Stupid to be Vice President, She’s ‘Dangerous’”
Leave a Reply
You probably are too stupid to be president. Why do you have a problem with that? You’re probably too stupid to figure out how to launch a rocket and land on the moon, too. Think Palin can do that as well? She was on the P.T.A., after all.
Stupidity of the current administration is why the U.S. is in the awful state that it is. We need someone bright for a change, and Palin / McCain isn’t it.
Boo freggin Hoo! Whinny Steve, The sky is falling! The sky is falling! what is this a freggin nursery?
The socialist at Newsweek are to stupid to realize that attacking one parties candidates consistently is like screaming fire in a theater without any smoke, after a while nobody pays attention.
That’s why the ad sales and subscriptions at Newsweek are in the toilet (ò¿ó)
First of all, thank you for this wonderful post. I’d tried making this case before, elsewhere, about the actual Constitutional requirements for the Presidency; needless to say, my comments were “expunged.” It is simply inexcusable to allow one candidate a pass on “experience” but demand another be vilified for the same. This brand of thinking belies the old “any child can become President,” proving it is little more than gobbledygook.
Second, I am sick to death of those who insist on blaming the ills of society on the current administration. Perhaps they have forgotten the fact that we have three branches of government, with a system of checks and balances? Perhaps they do not understand that, in concept if not in practice, the legislative branch has effectively MORE power than that of the executive branch? Perhaps they are simply too ignorant to realize that essentially anything Bush has done could have been blocked by Congress – but was not – and, therefore, is just as much the fault of that (Democratic) Congress as President Bush?
Maybe they do, dismissed as nothing more than an inconvenient truth, thrown in the dumpster like a prom night baby.
It is not an issue of “stupid” it is an issue of knowledge, wisdom, and beliefs. I have several degrees, I am not stupid, and some say I am wise, but I would NEVER be arrogant enough to think I should be president, or even vice president. Most of us, even those who think they are smarter, should not be in public office. Especially the writer of the above article who totally misses the point. Palin is probably not stupid, but she certainly does NOT have wisdom, and her beliefs would take us back 50 years. And, one last thing, if your 13 year old daughter is raped, becomes pregnant, and has an abortion (which would be illegal if Palin had her way) she would be convicted and put in prison. Even McCain and Bush’s wives have said that in cases of rape, abortion should be an option.
If McCain and Palin win, most of the people in this country ARE stupid and/or the Republican operatives have once more succeeded in frightening enough people with their lives so they don’t vote for the right person: Obama. I personally know someone who I won’t out as he needs his job, who was hired by the republicans to figure out which is the best way to win. It is FEAR, scare people and they will back into their ignorant holes. Again, I know a lot of smart people who should NEVER run for office.
Dear Angie,
Have you forgotten that ALL branches of government have been controlled by republicans until very recently, and even now, there is a small majority of Democrats, often not enough to override the crap that gets put through. Are you also aware of the reason the Federal prosecutors were fired? It was because they were asked to investigate voter fraud in primarily Democrats or swing areas, they did their jobs, investigated, and reported truthfully that there was nothing to prosecute. Then, because they wouldn’t go along with the Republicans desire to stir up problems in those areas, they were fired. Why do you think the attorney general had to resign? These things are all documented and will come out as they do their investigations, and perhaps, perhaps, some day people will wake up. The problem is, it will be too slow and happen after the election. One of them has said that he believes that if there was not the small majority of Democrats in the House and Senate, this would NEVER have been investigated, the Republicans would have looked the other way because it serves their purpose….And, Steve, I agree, but I think the more dangerous thing about this administration, and a possible McCain/Palin, is not that they are stupid, but that they are, to change an expression, stupid like foxes…it frightens me.
I am a health provider and have to have people sign HIPPA forms, which you all have if you have been to a health professional. You might sign something saying it was offered to you. Anyway, read the fine print. The republicans put this through, and it states that the “goal is to have a national data base of medical information.” Why? To better serve us? Or, if things don’t change, to deny us if we have a pre-existing condition. I firmly believe it was the insurance companies pushing it, and if we continue the way we are going, many will be denied, because we will lose our jobs, have to buy our own, and will be denied if we have some past illness. We are in big trouble if this continues, and if McCain and Palin win.
Also, the “surge.” My nephew was a captain in the marines, in Iraq. He says that what we hear is NOT, I repeat, NOT what is actually happening. And, if things are “calmer” there, he says, why wouldn’t they be. If you put a police officer on every corner of a city here, crime would decrease greatly. So, we do that forever? Anyway, I am probably wasting my time, most people are so blind.
Thank you for Steve, Bilbo, and ddbel! and others like you. Maybe there is hope, after all…
I have to say one more thing, isn’t it interesting that in swing states they are having trouble getting people on the voter rolls? Gee, what a surprise! I knew it would happen, just didn’t know when…
Z: I never said the Republicans were all pure and sweet like a baby lamb. I know there are members of both parties that have led us down the road we now travel. Neither is innocent, and watching things over the course of my voting life (relatively short by some standards, as this is only my 5th Presidential election), honestly, is what has carried me to becoming an Independent. IMO, both major parties have outlived their usefulness and really just grown too big for their breeches.
As for the experience issue, I came up against that when Hillary was trying to crowbar Obama out in the primaries (for a bit of reference, I am a Michigan resident, and we all know too well what happened here and it was just plain wrong). I LIKED the fact of his “inexperience,” and I was deeply disturbed by those who continued to harp on it. This was, in fact, the time period during which my comments left in other places were deleted. I cannot “groove” on liking it in one candidate and be expected to denigrate another for the same, just because their parties are different. It’s hypocritical and just plain wrong.
I may not subscribe to the same beliefs of either Obama or McCain or of Nader, McKinney or Barr for that matter, but I can still vote for whomever I choose even knowing I am “throwing my vote away” in voting for a third party candidate. Whatever the outcome, though, I have to side with The Duke: “I didn’t vote for him but he’s my President, and I hope he does a good job.” This is why I have to draw lines around Bush, too; I didn’t vote for him, but he’s my President. He may not have done the best job, but he still deserves a modicum of respect.
obama / rezko / ayers / rev wright
no THANKS
Sarah Palin is too inexperienced and clueless to be vice-president and that’s not a slam at Mr. and Mrs. America. I’m an American, a published author, who’s very intelligent, but I certainly do not have the experience and capability to be vice-president of the United States.
As for Obama and Ayers, Obama was eight years old when Ayers did his “dirty work.” As for Wright, Obama has denounced him, but Palin has embraced the witch hunter who was a part of her church.
Just go home to Alaska, Sarah, and leave the lower forty-eight alone.
As a school teacher I find the Newsweek article reprehensible. We the people must rise up and be heard and make them accountable for their biased views.
Just like everyone else says, I don’t want a joe schmoe running my country! most americans are MORONS and I’m sure somehow I’m included in that category! So I want an intelligent individual, who cares? She’s stupid, she shouldn’t be running a country. That’s what’s happened 8 yrs in a row, a stupid person has been president. Look where it’s gotten us.
Zalan you are wrong…
You said “Have you forgotten that ALL branches of government have been controlled by republicans until very recently…”
This is an incorrect statement. NEITHER Party has “controlled” Congress due to the close split in the electorate. Yes, the GOP recently had slightly MORE power than the Dems have had. But the GOP did not CONTROL anything.
While it is true that the basic constitutional requirements for becoming president are minimal, I find it hard to believe that the founding fathers thought that all who met the basic crtieria set forth in the constitution were equally qualified to assume the office.
Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, and, I would venture to say, most of our founding fathers were exceptional men -the elite of their time.
Please do yourself a favor and read Lincoln’s speech on slavery that he gave at Cooper Union on Feb. 27 1860 – and tell me how you think Sarah Palin measures up.
Our country deserves to be led by the best and the brightest. Ignorance is not an option. Anyone who is not scared to death at the thought of Sarah Palin being a heartbeat away from the presidency is either seriously delusional or intellectually dishonest.
“Bob on October 9th, 2008 7:40 pm
As a school teacher I find the Newsweek article reprehensible. We the people must rise up and be heard and make them accountable for their biased views.”
What do you mean “we”?
You missed the whooooole point. It’s not that Palin shouldn’t be ALLOWED to be vice-president. It’s that our country is in dire straits, and we need the absolute smartest, most knowledgeable, sharp, creme de la frickin creme of the bunch to be in the White House. We are insulted that McCain expects us to believe that this blatant moron is the absolute “best” he could do. Doesn’t make me an elitist, doesn’t make me a snob. Sure as hell doesn’t make me sexist (I am a woman). I am an absolute realist, and this person has demonstrated time and time again that she is NOT READY, not knowledgeable, not prepared to take on such a huge responsibility. We have journalists, pundits, and voters, (liberals AND conservatives) calling for her to step down. She is a joke. She is a farce. She is not ready. I repeat: she is not ready.
I would place a [safer than the stock market] bet on that the majority of the population IS too stupid to be President or even Vice President of the United States. Remember, these are the same people who elected the same idiot twice [who was as "average" as a President gets in this age] and now complain about him every chance they get. Look at his list of mis-accomplishments.
..well, there is that point, yes. Anyone stupid enough to vote for Bill Clinton should not be trusted.
What I see is that some people make a case about why Sarah Palin should not be Vice President. What I see in response is that people attack them personally or their beliefs. I see no actual supporting arguments of why Sarah Palin is qualified to be Vice President.
Now, please do not take this the wrong way, I am in no way implying that Sarah Palin is mental retarded. However, by your arguments, a mentally retarded person who is a naturally born citizen and over the age of 35, should be allowed to be Vice President? What I am getting at is that even though the person is eligible to be Vice President, and Sarah Palin clearly is eligible, that does not necessarily mean that she is qualified to be Vice President.
For what I see is a double standard from some people. I see people readily admit that she is not necessarily the most experienced person with regards to this position. However, you then turn that same argument against Barack Obama. I read about how he is not experienced enough to be President. As you asked, where does it say that he has to be experienced enough?
So the point I am coming to is that if you are going to point out that he is too inexperienced to be President, then admit that Sarah Palin is to inexperienced to be Vice President. Otherwise, we should all just drop this line of argument and talk about actual issues. Not just pointlessly slandering each other.
Meacham is an [edited]; a typical selfishly dense metrosexual boomer. I have a Stanford PoliSci degree and I can tell you that Palin is smart – and getting smarter day by day. Listen to her in her interview by Laura Ingraham – she is more with-it than the other candidates! Plus she has what they don’t have – moral courage, one of the chiefest requirements of leadership. Where did all you butthead lefties come from? Here’s Sarah and Laura: http://hotair.com/archives/2008/10/09/audio-palin-and-laura-ingraham-knock-obama-on-abortion-ayers/
1. Misunderestimate is a Bushism, not a word.
2. William F. Buckley was an intellectual. He delighted in the debate of ideas and was articulate and brilliant. Sarah Palin is none of these things.
3. Sure, many people are ELIGIBLE to be President, but certainly not qualified.
4. Barak Obama was Constitutional Law professor. Sarah Palin majored in Sports Reporting. Which experience do you think would be most useful to some one serving in public office?
5. Imagine if you took the first 400 people from the phonebook, narrowed down the group (how elitist!), and then held a nationally televised debate. Then picture Tom Brokaw asking Joe Six-pack about the Treasury Dept.’s role in reparing the economy or maybe how to address the issue of spent nuclear fuel containment. Try to imagine what a joke that would be. It would get great ratings though.
6. Do I think Obama is lacking in experience? Yes.
Do I think Palin is lacking in experience? Yes.
Does this mean they have the same amount of experience and therefore it’s a moot point? NO!
I am shocked about the Palin cover. That was typical of newsweek. It should be called NEWSWEAK. What kinda trash do these people make? What kind of people work there? this publication is good to wipe with.
We need to ALL save our breath. John McCain sealed the fate of his campaign when he chose Sara Palin as his VP. He actually had a pretty good chance until then. The more she speaks, the more the Republican team slides in the polls. There will be a change in January, and that will be a Democratic reform. We do not need a continuence of Bush’s 8 years. McCain is too out of touch with what is going on. His retoric is humorous. We are not ready for Palin to step in as President, God forbid something happen to McCain. Palin is not ready. She has governed a state with a population the size of Austin, Texas. And all she talks about is what she has done as Mayor. Eligible yes, ready…..NO !!