A president 'just like me'

In a season where it's hard to pick the most frightening development, here's a leading candidate: the notion that the president and vice president should be "average Joes, just like me." It's especially scary considering that the "average" American now reads less, knows less history and is more ignorant about the world than most of the generations of the 20th century -- the American Century.

Now comes Sarah Palin, claiming she is a victim of the elites. She told radio host Hugh Hewitt, "Oh, I think they're just not used to someone coming in from the outside saying you know what? It's time that normal Joe six-pack American is finally represented in the position of vice presidency, and I think that that's kind of taken some people off guard, and they're out of sorts, and they're ticked off about it."

It is a sign of national madness if one has to point out the complex issues and challenges facing the nation's leaders. While years of preening and bullying in Congress are less meaningful (Republican John Sidney McCain III), our situation cries out for officials with sound judgment, wide knowledge, supple intellect not calcified in dogma, and curiosity. Palin has shown none of these traits in her tightly controlled interviews -- quite the opposite. We're reminded of a less qualified version of candidate George W. Bush. (And a little racist code there, in "normal...American"?)

Indeed, Palin has been treated with great -- I would say criminal -- restraint and "deference" by the traditional media. She has refused, like royalty or a dictator, to interact with the press. And they have largely gone along, although basic journalism required a gentle pointing out of her repeated misstatements on the "bridge to nowhere," etc. Her family chaos was avoided -- something no Democrat, or even male Republican candidate would receive. She got do-over questions from deferential anchors. I'm sure the newsroom diversity committees were holding long and serious meetings over any perceived sexism in coverage.

Palin's answers seem crafted to insult "normal Americans." Asked about her foreign policy experience, the "normal" answer would be something like this: I'm a governor who brings executive experience to the ticket. But obviously my foreign policy experience is limited. But I'm a fast learner, and I'm running with the best partner possible..." Instead, she sticks to this "Alaska is close to Russia" nonsense. Earth to "average Americans": The Republicans think you're stupid!

In fact, Palin is a stalking horse for the moneyed elite that runs the country to a degree not seen since the Gilded Age. Her running mate exemplifies the Washington elite. Her party is the party of permanent oligarchy, presently led by wealthy oilman George W. Bush, alumnus of Andover, Yale and Harvard. John Sidney McCain III is so rich through his beer heiress wife that he doesn't know how many houses he owns.

And Palin herself is a prime example of at least three real elites with considerable power. First, the reactionary evangelicals, the old Christian coalition, that took over most state Republicans parties in the 1990s and started snapping up elected offices from the school board on up. Second, the exurban and suburbanites that feel entitled to a lifestyle that is unsustainable, and will run the country off the cliff rather than make even marginal changes or sacrifices. Third, the most disturbing elite: the arrogance of ignorance. America has always had its "know nothings'; they never came close to the highest office in the land. And an elite that celebrates its lack of knowledge puts the country at particular risk in a century that will be marked by economic competition requiring talent and education, and complex global change and struggle.

Sadly, the decline of America -- and it's not irreversible, yet -- is partly a result of the decadence of the old elites, in politics, finance, business, the clergy and the press. These elites were often meritocracies, something utterly lost today. A Harry Truman couldn't become president today. And please, don't even try to make a Palin comparison here.

Truman was a deep student of history ("the only thing new in this world is the history you don't know."). He saw combat as an officer in World War I, fighting in France. He knew what newspapers he read. As a senator, he chaired the famous committee that shut down the war profiteers. He was curious, open-minded, non-ideological. Sarah Palin, you are no Harry Truman. The only parallel is that both were nominated to be vice presidents for men likely to die in office -- which makes McCain's selection of Palin (or cowing to the "base" powerbrokers) so wildly reckless. This is one more example of how the Republicans are the party that wrecked America. (spread the meme)

A fundamental of America's founding was that a meritocracy would rule. George Washington and Abraham Lincoln were not "just like us." Nor were Franklin Roosevelt, Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, Lyndon Johnson or Ronald Reagan. Willful ignorance and voting by emotion ("passions") were the rule of the mob that the Founders feared. I don't want a president "just like me." I sure don't want one dumber than me.

Comments

[Dylan]

When I need surgery, I don't want an "average joe" "nice guy" surgeon who I can relate to. I want somebody who isn't going to kill me.

I wish the people who think we need "average joes" in positions of great responsibility would stop for 10 seconds and think about it.

[soleri]

George Wallace used the term "pointy-headed intellectuals" to deride the meritocrats who ushered in civil rights. Richard Nixon co-opted that message and the Republican Party hasn't looked back. It became a party overtly hostile to culture, art, education, and the public square. Kevin Phillips knows this subject inside out since he was there at the inception. He calls Republicans the heirs of Dixie.

Know-Nothingism's implicit "idea" is that common sense is somehow superior to education. The problem is that the term common sense is really just a cover for a whole range of unexamined precepts and prejudices. It's why Republicans are not embarrassed by characters like Palin, or James Inhofe. There's nothing wrong, in their view, with anti-scientific hooey. They might call it "faith" or "common sense", but at its core is the small man's revenge against complexity and knowledge.

Talk radio is the main vehicle of this mob. The sheer volume of stations and right-wing demagogues has tilted the national discourse in their direction. It's why the bizarre charge that Obama is an "elitist" - but not McCain - could find so many willing believers in our punditocracy. It's why Chris Matthews was so enthusiastic about George Bush's personality. "Everyone sort of likes Bush except some wack-jobs, maybe on the left!". This when Bush's approval rating was below 50%.

The American right combines lynch-mob certitude with pro-corporate propaganda. It's a coalition cracking up before our eyes. Maybe Newt Gingrich can ride this tiger in 2012. Demographics are against him, however. When you lose Kathleen Parker, your movement is on life-support.

[Buford]

This just shows that many Americans view the Presidential elections just the same as they did their high school prom queen. It's a popularity contest.

Even the parties seem to run their campaigns that way; My clique needs to beat your clique and we'll reward or threaten the non-clique members to vote our way and then ignore them until the next election.

Congress is often no better. It seems to me that anytime there are two positions on how to solve a single problem, as soon as one side "wins" the right to try their solution the other party begins working hard to make that solution fail. They'd rather the problem continue to exist at whatever cost than have the other side succeed. (Wouldn't we all win if the problem were solved?)

I want to belong to an 'adult' party. One that recognizes the complex issues that Jon describes so well. One that can set aside petty differences for the common good. One that can resist childish reprisals to any foreign or domestic challenges.

I have not studied the early US political parties, but I certainly haven't heard of any 'adult' party since the Continental Congress or, possibly, the First (1789) Congress that wrote the Bill of Rights.

[Emil Pulsifer]

I was flabbergasted by recent media reports stating that, in response to criticisms from the media that the McCain campaign was protecting Palin (and indirectly itself) by sequestering her, she planned to embark on a whole round of interviews, in a "less scripted, more authentic" setting. The setting: conservative talk radio.

[koreyel]

I was going to try to write something substantial. But after reading the post and the first comment, 4 minutes of Bill Maher is all I got:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0sNJhphi7U

[Joanna]

Wow, I hadn't seen that Bill Maher clip. Sometimes, he takes a bit of a cheap shot, but this one was spot on! Good topic for a post. Timing is very good...