Joe McGinniss
Finally! Someone from MSM Admits it: They Need Sarah
Lawrence O’Donnell of MSNBC tells Playboy: “She’s been good for us, and we’ve been good for her. We are doing everything we can to feed her moneymaking capacity by keeping her alive.”
Full interview here.
What Sarah Palin REALLY Cares About//UPDATE: LA Times on what Sarah and Common have in common
If nothing else, Sarah’s new advisers have managed to bring her Twittermania under some semblance of control.
Last summer, it seemed that Sarah was tweeting hourly, to the extent that it was devaluing her “brand.”
I’ve always thought that Twitter was the perfect medium of expression for Sarah. If she has to extend a thought, feeling or impulse beyond 140 characters, the vacuity of her mind becomes plain for all to see.
But even within the Twitter framework the sheer relentlessness of her tweets lessened the impact of her opinions. If somebody never shuts up, we stop listening to anything they have to say.
The post-Tucson version of Palin sometimes lets whole days pass without twittering. Not counting re-tweets, Sarah has only tweeted five times this month.
Thus, when she does, we’re more likely to assume it’s about something that matters to her.
That’s why her most recent tweet is so interesting:
Oh lovely, White House… http://dailycaller.com/2011/05/09/burn-a-bush-michelle-obama-invites-rapper-common-to-a-poetry-reading/
What got Sarah’s goat? Michelle Obama’s invitation to the Grammy-winning hip-hop artist Common to participate in tomorrow night’s White House tribute to American poetry.
No problem when Barbara Bush welcomed child-molester Michael Jackson to the White House.
But let a black president’s black wife invite a black rapper to a broad-based celebration of an art form–poetry–that Sarah knows nothing about, and her lily-white knee jerks immediately in outrage.
In THE ROGUE, I’ll have plenty to say about Sarah Palin’s attitude toward people of color.
But with today’s tweet she’s given us all a little preview.
UPDATE:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/05/sarah-palin-and-common-have-at-least-two-things-in-common.html
If only Sarah weren’t Sarah, She Coulda Been A Contender//UPDATE: John Podhoretz in Commentary
That’s the thesis propounded by Joshua Green in the June issue of The Atlantic.
The magazine, however, went with the classier title, “The Tragedy of Sarah Palin,” and illustrated the piece with the striking image above of Sarah in full presidential mode.
“But over the past few months, Palin has begun fortifying her profile by visiting foreign countries and delivering speeches that extol her record as governor, especially on energy, as she did in March to an audience of international business leaders in India….She seems to be reintroducing herself.”
Given that I’m presently writing the last chapter of THE ROGUE I’m not going to critique Green’s piece, though I’m sure some will take issue with his conclusion that Sarah was a great governor of Alaska, who accomplished extraordinary things.
I find it interesting that during his week in Alaska Green spoke to the same people I talked to two-and-a-half years ago about Sarah’s accomplishments as governor–Gregg Erickson, Pat Galvin, Hollis French, Les Gara–and came away with conclusions very different from those I reached and published in my 2009 Portfolio cover story.
I will say that I hope Howard Kurtz reads Green’s story. In the current Newsweek, Kurtz writes about the end of the Sarah Palin phenomenon in a piece titled, “Is Sarah Palin Over?”
Kurtz says she’s toast. Green says she just might be a soufflé only starting to rise.
Maybe Andrew Sullivan, formerly of The Atlantic and now with Tina Brown’s Daily Beast-Newsweek behemoth could moderate a Kurtz-Green debate on The Dish.
UPDATE:
Even Commentary compares Sarah to Daryl Strawberry.
Even while pining for what might have been, Podhoretz writes her off. But who will win his heart next?
Or can Sarah lure him back by offering lunch on the concrete block on Lake Lucille, the way she seduced his buddy Bill Kristol over lunch at the governor’s mansion in Juneau?
After 22 Years, My Rebuttal to Janet Malcolm Goes Public
Thanks to the miracles of modern science (i.e. the internet) the 26-page essay I published as an epilogue to the 1989 edition of Fatal Vision, in response to Janet Malcolm’s wrongheaded and factually inaccurate New Yorker attack on my journalistic ethics and me, (later published as a book titled The Journalist and The Murderer) is now available online.
And guess where?
Right here. On this very site where you already are.
As I say in the introduction to the epilogue–I know it’s weird to have an “introduction” to an “epilogue,” but what can I do?–
In 1989, the New Yorker published a two-part article by Janet Malcolm entitled “The Journalist and the Murderer.” In the article, which was published in book form a year later, Malcolm offered her skewed perception of my relationship with Jeffrey MacDonald–the subject of my 1983 book, Fatal Vision–to support her bizarre hypothesis that “Every journalist…knows that what he does is morally indefensible.” So numerous and egregious were Malcolm’s omissions, distortions and outright misstatements of fact that I felt compelled to set the record straight in an epilogue to the updated edition of Fatal Vision that was published in 1989. There is no statute of limitations on truth. Even now, twenty-two years later, Malcolm’s fictions ought not to be accepted uncritically.
What makes this relevant to THE ROGUE is that Jeffrey MacDonald was the first pathologically narcissistic psychopath about whom I ever wrote a book.
Guess who’s the second?
Why Is This Not A Surprise?
The poorer and less educated you are, the more likely you are to like Sarah.
HAPPY KENTUCKY DERBY DAY//Update: The Perfect Mint Julep//Update 1.1: Wait ’til Next Year
The 137th Kentucky Derby will be run tomorrow at Churchill Downs in Louisville. Up to twenty (depending on late scratches, such as UNCLE MO this morning) three-year olds will be racing a mile-and-a-quarter, the first time these young adults have been asked to go that far.
My money will be on DIALED IN (shown above winning the Florida Derby at Gulfstream Park on April 3), trained by the incomparable Nick Zito (upper right) and ridden by the brilliant Frenchman Julien Leparoux.
To celebrate Derby Weekend, I’m taking time off from my Sarah Palin watch.
I leave you instead with this story I wrote for Sports Illustrated in 1969 about my first Kentucky Derby, forty-eight years ago.
Enjoy the weekend! NBC will have live Derby coverage starting at 5 p.m. EDT tomorrow.
By the way, Nick Zito says Bin Laden deserved his fate. DIALED IN was not available for comment.
UPDATE:
Henry Watterson, founder of the Louisville Courier-Journal, and a man described almost a hundred years ago as “the last of the great personal journalists,” settled once and for all the debate about the recipe for the perfect mint julep. He wrote:
“Pluck the mint gently from its bed, just as the dew of the evening is about to form upon it. Select the choicer sprigs only, but do not rinse them. Prepare the simple syrup and measure out a half-tumbler of whiskey. Pour the whiskey into a well-frosted silver cup, throw the other ingredients away and drink the whiskey.”
UPDATE 1.1
That’s how it goes in racing. They are horses, not machines. DIALED IN never got into the race.
Who knows why? You’d have to ask him, and he ain’t talking.
But the Derby, won this year by ANIMAL KINGDOM, always produces good stories:
a) Graham Motion, the British trainer, learning early last week that his bigger horse, TOBY’S CORNER, hurt himself in training and could not run in the Derby–then saddling lesser light ANIMAL KINGDOM, who won at odds of 21-1.
b) John Velasquez, one of America’s top jockeys for the past decade, learning last week that his horse, probable favorite UNCLE MO, had diarrhea so bad that he had to be scratched from the race.
c) Robby Albarado, the regular rider for ANIMAL KINGDOM, getting thrown from a horse he was riding last week and being injured badly enough so that Motion had to find a new rider.
d) Motion, the day after UNCLE MO was scratched, signing the suddenly unhorsed Velasquez to take Albarado’s seat aboard ANIMAL KINGDOM.
Result: ANIMAL KINGDOM, Motion and Velasquez win. Albarado, nursing a broken nose, loses.
I hope Velasquez, a classy guy, will give Albarado a share of the $125,000 he’ll receive for his two minutes and two second display of expertise.
Why do I love horse racing? It’s like opera.
Why do I love opera? It’s like horse racing. Except in opera you know the winners and losers ahead of time.
And how is the Kentucky Derby like bad sex? Prolonged buildup, mounting anticipation, excitement cresting to fever pitch–and then in two minutes it’s all over.
Right Wing Rallies Round “The Tragedy of Sarah Palin”
Pen a fantasy about how Sarah Palin could have been Barack Obama if only she weren’t so:
a) selfish
b) filled with anger, resentment and hate
c) greedy
d) stupid and uneducated
e) all of the above
and you tap into a deep vein of right-wing nostalgia for the Sarah-Who-Never-Was, which will prove of immense benefit to your personal brand and career.
I’m not impugning Joshua Green’s motives for writing his “Sarah-We-Hardly-Knew-Ye” paean of praise in the June issue of The Atlantic.
I’m sure he felt he had a legitimate, counter-intuitive, against the flow argument to make. He’s proven himself to be an excellent and fair-minded reporter in the past. And nobody should knock him just because his first job in “journalism” was at The Onion.
It may be that with “The Tragedy of Sarah Palin,” Green is returning to his satirical roots. Although if you read some of the comments in response to my earlier post, “If Only Sarah Weren’t Sarah, She Coulda Been a Contender,” you’ll find some strong fact-based arguments against Green’s hypothesis.
In any case, I’m sure Green was perspicacious enough to sense the likely windfall that would result from a “St. Sarah, The Fallen Star” story.
And he’s knee-deep in peaches and apples already, as the huzzahs arrive from all the obvious right-wing shills:
—John Podhoretz in Commentary
—Jennifer Rubin in the Washington Post
—Ross Douthat in The New York Times
This chorus sings in only one key: the key of sorrow, for the loss of a Sarah Palin who never existed outside the realm of their collective yearning, and who ever existed only as a figment of their collective imagination.
Andrew Sullivan wrote a bracing response yesterday and today added:
Josh’s piece will serve as balm to the right. And it will allow them to believe that their choice of veep in 2008 was not an indictment of them or the media – but just an unfortunate decision by Palin to change her colors. The only problem with this argument is that it is manifestly untrue. But we know that Palin lovers, like Palin herself, must perforce be wedded to mountains of untruth.
Amen.