The pick of Sarah Palin has gotten many Republicans excited about voting for presidential candidate John McCain. And that, my friends, is a genuine miracle.
These GOPers, it must be noted, are electrified by the idea of Palin as much as they are by the candidate. In many ways, it’s comparable to the allegiance that Democratic Party nominee Barack Obama enjoys — a devotion that isn’t measured by legislative accomplishment or experience.
Oh, wait. Palin isn’t running against Obama.
Palin, you see, is so thoroughly incompetent, downright beatable and hopelessly laughable that an army of columnists, bloggers and media types immediately jumped on every scandalous rumor, dug up every supposed indiscretion, and exhibited a sneering disdain for any experience attained outside the Beltway.
Preposterous rumors about Obama appear in my inbox with alarming regularity. Most are nonsensical. Yet, now, many of the same folks — so deeply revolted by the sorry state of political discourse — are peddling similar rubbish.
Was Palin’s four-month-old child with Down syndrome really hers or was it her unmarried 17-year-old daughter’s? This was the topic of the day on a number of respected political websites. (As if adopting an ill grandchild was an act of debauchery to begin with.)
Well, turns out Palin’s daughter is five months pregnant, so it could not be hers (which is even better). Palin supports abstinence programs, proving she is a bungling hypocrite. Others insinuate that Palin is also an unfit mother for neglecting her children by running for office, and — get this — putting them in a position to be smeared.
So much for celebrating the plight of the working mom. Then again, maybe you have to be the right kind of working mom.
Next, the always irascible Democratic Congressman Robert Wexler from Florida claimed that Palin was a supporter of “Nazi sympathizer” Pat Buchanan. Palin, apparently, wore a button of Buchanan’s when the candidate visited the town she was mayor of in 1999.
You may find it confounding that partisan Democrats believe that Obama’s relationship with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, terrorist Bill Ayers and convicted felon Tony Rezko are unfair “distractions,” yet Palin’s 17-year-old daughter’s pregnancy demands front-page attention from both the Washington Post and New York Times.
Now, e-mails pour in from folks who claim to represent “women” — women, I expect, who wouldn’t vote for a Republican ticket if Susan B. Anthony adorned it. They are, suddenly and wholly, offended by identity politics.
Palin is, without doubt, in part, a token pick. So what? The appeal of a candidate includes his or her policy position, but also background (that’s why we are blessed with the folksy charm of Joe Biden), experience, ability, race and gender. Hillary, despite what you’ve heard, is not the smartest woman in America. And can anyone dispute that one element of Obama’s allure is the potential of his becoming the first African-American president?
Perhaps critics believe if they keep telling the public that McCain’s pick is scandalous and irresponsible, the Republican nominee will tap a more reasonable mate (you know, like Joe Lieberman) before it’s too late.
Who knows? Maybe the lynch mob will bury Palin’s candidacy. Maybe Palin will bury herself, proving to be incompetent and unworthy. But how can a candidate be portrayed as a failure by experts who haven’t heard a word from her mouth?
Not only is this dishonest, it betrays a real political anxiety over Palin’s impact.
Do vice presidential candidates have the ability to sway an election or rally a party? Almost never.
But in this presidential election, excitement has become, for the first time, a shared experience.
Reach columnist David Harsanyi at 303- 954-1255 or dharsanyi@denverpost.com.
