Not since their fawning, worshipful coverage of the election and inauguration of Barack Obama, has the media been so incessantly hoopla as it has this week on the release of Sarah Palin's book “Going Rogue.”* In many quarters, though, the coverage was decidedly neither fawning nor worshipful.

We thought it might be instructive to excerpt two current commentaries - and two earlier ones of my own - on the Palin phenomenon and, in part, the liberal-left's reaction to it..

 “...Her foes might be wise to contemplate the notion that someone of Palin’s background and sensibilities has a right, regardless of her views, to participate in the national debate merely because she speaks (though often unclearly) for many like her. If this possibility can’t be countenanced, then government for the people by the people is an abstract idea we’ve grown too cynical to practice. Sarah Palin endures not because she’s brilliant, smooth or philosophically correct, but because hope in democracy endures, too,” (Amanda Fortini, “The Annie Oakley of American politics,” Salon.com, November19).

“...What is Palinism? [Italics Added]. It is the suggestion that there is in Middle America a bubbling resentment against what is perceived as elitist snobbery against those who go to community college, shop at Walmart, view non-pet animals as food-in-waiting, read John Grisham novels and go to church on Sunday. It is not (or so I perceive it) a rebellion against affluence or superior education, but against what many in fly-over-land view as condescension and dismissiveness....”, (Mickey Edwards, “Between Palin and Palinism,” The Atlantic, November 18).

“...The [liberal-left's] obsession with Palin has less to do with her politics or who she is. Rather, it has more to do with who she isn't - Sarah Palin isn't one of them: not of their class, their schooling, their sophistication, their fashion and, oh yes, of their superiority...Palin is a nerd from an alien segment of unwashed American creatures best kept in her place - and out of theirs. Sarah Palin’s candidacy ignited [ed] a new culture war – thesnobbish elites versus theJoe...and Sarah Sixpack crowd. It’s a populist war of Us vs. Them.The dismissive, mocking, condescension that erupted over her candidacy was Them showing their contempt for Us,” ( 'The 'Hate Palin' Royalty at The New York Times,” Red County, July 14).

“...The Left’s hysterical, condescending outrage over Plain is primitive in its sheer hatred. No where is this better or more eloquently expressed than by the estimable Peggy Noonan in her 'Miles Apart' column in the September 12^thWall Street Journal. She says the Democratic and media response to Palin was a catastrophe. 'Here was the central liberal mistake: They used the atom bomb just a few days in. They used it so brutally, and yet so ineptly, in a way so oblivious to the true contours of the field, that the radiation blew back over their own lines... And it boomeranged. Most crucially, the snobbery of it, the meanness of it, reminded the entire country, for the first time in a decade, what it is they don't like about the left…' Noonan’s column makes you want to go out and kick some serious (liberal) ass,” (“First Shot Across the Bow,” Georgia Politics Daily, September 25, 2008).

In 2008, at a McCain-Palin campaign stop in Wisconsin, a woman replied, when asked why she suppored Palin, “She’s me.”And a reporter once asked Ronald Reagan why the Amiercan people seemed to like him so much. “Because,” said Reagan, “I’m them.” The appeal of both is based on the same visceral, gut feeling - we identify with them and they with us.

What is Palinism? It comes from a proud, old American political tradition - Populism.

Palinism and what it represents, is far more significant for our politics today and the future than Palin herself. Most of her detractors don't get that. But she does and so do we.

*The Assciated Press sent 11 (count 'em 11) reporters to “fact-check” her book. AP and other media oulets are pathologically obsessed with Palin. Did AP fact-check President Obama's two books? Nope, of ocurse not. By the way, it's reported that Palin's book sold a staggering 300,000 copies on the first day of its release.

 

 

 

 

The Fort Hood tragedy - a domestic terrorist attack - should finally be a wake-up call to our PC attitude when it comes to Islam and the evil it still generates in the 21^st century. Both David Brooks in his op-ed piece, “The Rush to Therapy” and Dorothy Rabinowitz in her Wall Street Journal piece, “Dr. Phil and the Fort Hood Killer” eloquently make the case that it's past time we recognize the evil of Islamic extremism.

At the risk of being labeled an Islamophobe, let me be clear on where I'm coming from. The truth of the matter is that Islam is a violent, repressive, degrading religion antithetical to freedom and tolerance. And don't tell me about those "peaceful" Muslims - where are they? They're sitting on the sidelines while their brethren are engaged in barbaric behavior throughout the world.

In 1899 - 110 years ago - a young Winston Churchill wrote a prophetic observation of Islam in “The River War.” It begins:

"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lay on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries...”

And Churchill concludes:

"...Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science - the science against which it had vainly struggled - the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome."

What has Islam accomplished these past thirteen hundred years? What are the Islamic achievements today in the The Arts? Medicine? Technology? The Sciences? Islam remains mired in the 11^th century. However, its hatred and violence are alive in the 21^st.

Before starting his killing rampage at Fort Hood, the suspect reportedly yelled in Arabic “Allahu Akbar” - “God is Great.” Forgive me, but I much prefer the English translation and the Western civilization from whence the language comes.

At last week's Fort Hood memorial service, President Obama said: "But this much we do know - no faith justifies these murderous and craven acts...” No, Mr. President, the faith of Islamic Jihadists does;

“...no just and loving God looks upon them with favor...” No, Mr. President, the Allauh of Islamic Jihadists does;

"And for what he has done, we know that the killer will be met with justice - in this world:” No, Mr. President, under your Administration I have my serious doubts;

“- and the next." Yes, Mr. President, Amen to that.

 

 A new poll shows former state senator Kasim Reed with a 49 percent to 46 percent advantage over Councilwoman Mary Norwood, with a 4.5 percent margin of error - a statistical dead heat.

The poll shows Norwood exactly where she was a week before the November 3 election - 46 percent - which suggests she may have garnered all the votes she's going to get.

Included in the poll's analysis is what we've said here in several commentaries* - “[U]underneath the surface, the results paint a picture of two different Atlantas. White Atlanta backs Norwood 4:1. Black Atlanta backs Reed 3:1...”

Also, as we've noted here, turnout for the runoff will be even more abysmally low - and volatile - than it was November 3 coming as it does five days after Thanksgiving

*Atlanta Mayor's Race in Black and White, Atlanta Mayor's Race in Black and White, Part II

 

 

 Two months ago, we began the “Atlanta Mayor's Race in Black and White” with a quote from an op-ed piece “Race has always been and remains a factor in Atlanta politics - sometimes more overt; other times more subtle.”

An analysis by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution of last week's mayoral election results validates the racial aspect of Atlanta politics.”Voting along racial lines in mayor's race; Data shows Atlantans not colorblind when casting ballot.” ..

If the November 3 results are any indication, the December 1 run off between Mary Norwood and Kasim Reed will most likely also fall along racial lines. Here are some excerpts from the article:

“The path to victory for Atlanta’s next mayor is clear, even if the candidates don’t want to say it. It’s about race. [Italics Added].

 If Tuesday top vote-getter Mary Norwood, a white woman, can hold onto her strong support from white voters, and she draws away a respectable minority of black voters as she did Tuesday, she wins Dec. 1

If Kasim Reed, a black man, can boost his black get-out-the-vote effort and bring in supporters of third-place candidate Lisa Borders, a black woman, he wins.

[Last] week’s mayoral election showed that decades after the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. urged that people not be judged by the color of their skin, blacks and whites in his hometown are voting along racial lines. Race was a leading predictor in whom Atlantans chose for mayor last Tuesday...While some voters crossed racial lines, the overwhelming majority did not.

Data show:

● Norwood won more than 58 percent of her vote from three predominantly white council districts - on the north and northeast sides of the city.

● Reed won 57 percent of his votes from five predominantly black council districts - on the east, west and south sides.”

So, there we have it - in Black and White.

Oh, the analysis says “...turnout everywhere was low (only about 30 percent).” The run off probably won't even draw that many voters to the polls.

 

 

 

 

 

Mary Norwood and Kasim Reed will face a run off December 1 to decide Atlanta's next mayor.

Tuesday's results:

- Norwood 45 percent;

- Reed 37 percent;

- Lisa Borders 14 percent;

- Jesse Spikes 3 percent.

However, many voters weren't enthused about the election or with any of the candidates. As we observed here last week, “Generally, voters are gloomy about the future, deeply unsettled by the economy and distrustful of politicians. There's a palatable yawn from most city residents and a jaded, sullen indifference to the oh, so earnest appeals from the mayoral candidates...The question is - given the sour mood of Atlanta's voters - how many will show up to vote? Ho hum.” [Italics Added].

Only an estimated paltry 24 percent of the city's 258,000 registered voters turned out yesterday

The run off election could be historic as well. Many experts believe Norwood could become Atlanta’s first white mayor since Sam Massell left office at the end of 1973. However, race has been a frequent storyline in the campaign and many believe it will play a part of the tale on December 1.

 

 

 

 

 

Atlanta voters go to the polls November 3 to choose a new mayor, new city council president, city council members, board of education and municipal court judges.

The race to succeed two term Mayor Shirley Franklin has, of course, has drawn most of the scant attention voters are paying to the election.

Franklin, once named one of “America’s Best Leaders” by U.S. News and World Report and ranked by Time magazine as one of the top five mayors in the country in 2005 has, by most accounts, been an unmitigated disaster during these last two years of her final term.

Generally, voters are gloomy about the future, deeply unsettled by the economy and distrustful of politicians. There's a palatable yawn from most city residents and a jaded, sullen indifference to the oh, so earnest appeals from the mayoral candidates.

Crime is the number one issue with recent and sharp increase in home invasions, smash and grabs, car jackings and break-ins, robberies, thefts, shootings killing and muggings- a litany of woes. The relentless crime spree - appropriately enough - has even struck across the street from City Hall.

A property tax increase wasn't greeted with any acclaim - naturally - as many see city government being dysfunctional, plagued with a deficit and still bloated with too many employees and heavy bureaucracy. Two of the three leading candidates for mayor - Mary Norwood and Lisa Borders - are members of an unwieldy, 15 person, contentious, city council which sucks $6.9 million annually from taxpayers.

A new poll, released this week, shows [Mary] “Norwood Far Ahead in Atlanta Mayor Race.”

- Norwood at 46 percent;

- Reed at 26 percent;

- Borders at 17 percent;

- Spikes at 2 percent;

- Undecided voters at 5 percent.

This poll - and others - and conventional wisdom say Councilwoman Mary Norwood will finish first but face a December 1 runoff. Race has already raised its ugly head in the campaign and might do so again, polarizing the city.The question is - given the sour mood of Atlanta's voters - how many will show up to vote? Ho hum.