Sarah Palin: idiotism mixed with religious zeal in the pursuit of furtherance of war

CSMS Magazine Staff WritersThere was a time going to war on the premise of re-imposing America’s power on a “renegade” region of the world was considered quite chauvinistic and extremely popular. There was a time patriotism mixed militarism shaped the dialectic of war in Washington; and traditional politicians—republicans in particular—used it as a strategic tool to make political gains. And every four years, tough talks backed by a dangerous frenzy of arrogance sweep the campaign trail. For years, traditional politicians have learned this script by heart and have also profited from it, until now.This was the best of time, the time when the get-rich-quick mania dominated household conversations at the dinner table. From Appalachia to the remote bayous of Louisiana, real estate property values were pushed to new highs, and investment banks grew like mushrooms in the morning dew. Of course, money alone does not suffice to restore glory or imperial control. But when one sits on top of the world’s mightiest military machine, a combination of two can achieve the desired end. That was 8 years ago when America was riding on an economic windfall that seemed endless.This election cycle, things are quite different. Uncertainty is the order of the day, as millions of Americans find themselves in an economic sinkhole not knowing what tomorrow will bring. To many, it is the worst of time—an altruism that most ideologues from the eastern establishment now confirm, except for those who live in the shadow of the McCain campaign and that of his Republican running mate, Sarah Palin. Palin is the quintessential example of traditional politic. Her win over potentials rivals for the VP post was the direct result of a cynical obsession to win at any price, including exposing the country to the most dangerous, remote and trivial elements of the political class.            While McCain was quick to defend his choice, there was a serious consensus among conservative ideologues that the Republican campaign was doomed from then on. The fear was based on doubts that the Alaska governor was nothing but a political spoiler.Spoiling the campaign, she really did. A series of media interviews quickly confirmed the doubts that many had on Palin—a clumsy actress in a hollow show. Spooky conservative’s politicians got even spookier when Palin’s initial frenzy faded like sporadic drizzles on evergreen leaves, and McCain’s dilemma began to make its way in the opinion polls.It all started with the ABC’s broadcast over three nights of interviews with news anchorman Charles Gibson. Many had the suspicion that the interview was designed to expose the Alaska governor’s blatant ignorance and the politics of the ultra-right. Gibson hit Palin with some of the most crucial questions that since then have cast doubts on her ability to take the reins of power if something were to happen to McCain who is quite old and had already suffered from some serious health problems, in the event of a Republican win in November.In what was described as one of the most peculiar exchanges to be presented on national television in recent political history in the United States, Gibson took aim at Palin who struggled feebly to response to questions that everyone knew she had no clues about their perfect and educational answers. She sounded petty before the ABC News anchorman, who looked more of a worried professor quizzing his failing student rather than an intellectual exchange between a vice presidential candidate and a T.V. News host.On Iraq, Palin claimed that the country is now being pacified, and the surge, which McCain supported, is the direct result of it. By all independent accounts, the fragile and shaky quietness now in some parts of Iraq, is loosely based on internal divisions within the Iraqi insurgency, not because of military headways achieved by American commanders on the ground. Still, those who live in the Green Zone cannot take the risk of venturing freely outside of it without security escorts.Praising her son who is currently serving in Iraq and using a visit she paid earlier this year to show support for members of the Alaska National guard currently stationed there, Palin stuck her chest out to tell an audience of ten millions that she does have foreign policy experience.The most shocking of all was her response with regard to Russia in general and specifically with regard to Russia’s recent war with the republic of Georgia. She claimed the war was “unprovoked” when many NATO countries, including the Bush administration’s State Department, have repeatedly claimed to have warned Georgia not to try an armed adventure in South Ossetia and in Abkhazia—two strong allies of Russia. Palin was adamant on the issue of going to war with Russia, a country that defense secretary Robert Gate said the United States should avoid going to war with at all costs, something that has been the policy of the United States for over 45 years.When Gibson questioned her on what insight, or sensitive information, she had concerning Russia that could force her to be so blithely prepared to wage war, Palin’s response was particularly embarrassing for the McCain campaign and the country in general. “I could see Russia from part of Alaska,” she replied totally unaware of what Gibson was talking about.During the interview, Palin was unequivocal in declaring her support for the integration of Ukraine and Georgia into the US-led NATO alliance, two former Soviet republics; and when Gibson asked her whether this meant that the US would be bound to wage war against Russia if Moscow again were to make a military move against these countries, she replied with such naivety that even the anchorman appeared stunned. “Perhaps so,” she replied, as if a conflagration between two giant nations controlling huge stockpiles of ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads capable of obliterating the world is the most logical solution to a geostrategic and political crisis. “I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you’re going to be expected to be called upon and help,” she continued.On the Islamic fundamentalism, Palin said she was in synch with the Bush Administration’s vocation and creed to “rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell bent on destroying our nation” and added that any “mistakes” or “blunders” along the way could certainly [be] fixed by the introduction of new elected officials. The issue of the US military conducting cross-border attacks inside Pakistan came up, and when Gibson pressed her on this one specific question of whether the US military had the right to carry out such attacks, without the permission from Islamabad, the site of the Pakistani government, Palin’s answer was ignorantly blunt. “In order to stop Islamic extremists, those terrorists who would seek to destroy America and our allies, we must do whatever it takes and we must not blink, Charlie, in making those tough decisions of where we go and even who we target.” She violated the sample principles she swore few minutes earlier to uphold when she accused Russia of “invading a small democratic neighbor.”On Israel, she took the same position, suggesting that Tel Aviv has the right to stage any military strike against Iran not knowing such attack could certainly trigger an Iranian response that could put US servicemen and women in Iraq in a direct crossfire. While Palin claimed not to be aware of the Bush Doctrine during the interview, her foreign policy position falls utterly in line with that of the Bush Administration enunciated in September 2002 just before the Iraq war, which clearly stipulates that the United States will go to war anywhere that it feels its security and its strategic interests are threatened.Then there is the question of Sarah Palin religious affiliation with the Christian Right. There are ample evidence shown on CNN and other news networks about her connection with the Alaskan Independence Party, which her husband is a member and in which she participated and made political speeches in many of its conferences. The Alaskan Independence Party, which calls for Alaska to secede from the United States, is an ally to the Constitution Party, “an ultra-right electoral party whose program incorporates the outlook of a Bible-based fascism,” affirmed Bill Van Auken, editorialist for the WS website.Sarah Palin, who makes her political trajectory in the most reactionary tendencies within Christian fundamentalism, has nothing to seriously offer to well educated urban America other than a scary “religious-based bigotry and hostility to democratic rights, anti-intellectualism, phony right-wing populism and unwavering support for American militarism, in short, the stock and trade of the Republican right,” continued Van Auken. The only reason why McCain chose Palin was that he had hoped of energizing the Republican base and he wanted to lay the bait for millions of Hillary Clinton’s female supporters. Sadly for McCain, the latter did not take the bait, and the latest opinion polls indicated that only 32% of the electorate favors Sarah Palin—a historic low point for any VP candidate in years.  When ignorance fusing with religious fundamentalism in control of State power, it can be a dangerous recipe for a doomsday scenario. Thus explains why there are some serious misgivings within the eastern establishment, the heart of the ruling elite, over some possible pitfalls of having someone like Palin a “heartbeat away” from a presidency occupied by a 72-year-old man with significant health problems.” So Sarah Palin is a vivid reminder of what might happen if she or someone like her were to be in charge of the presidency.        Also see US Republican presidential candidate John McCain is desperate  Barack Obama rocked the house last night A text message that kept the world guessing for more than 72 hours As Barack Obama ends his historic trip abroad, serious questions arise over his antiwar credentials Barack Obama rocks the Middle East and Europe Obama’s candidacy and the bittersweet feeling within the African American leadership When will race seize to be the cornerstone of American politic? Hillary Clinton’s Paranoia and the Democrats Dilemma Hillary Clinton wants to clinch the nomination at all costIs Barack Obama unstoppable after his stunning victory in Iowa last week?   The Obama campaign plunges deeper into the defensive after the Nevada lost last Saturday