Academic

Said the night wind to the little lamb . . .

By Nareissa Smith

Much has been written about the disaster that is Sarah Palin.  (I tried to be nice, I truly did, but there really is no other word.)  I don't have to rehash what has been stated clearly and repeatedly from those in the center and the right.   But for me, the question isn't why did he pick her or is she qualified or why is she still on the ticket.  To me, after Sarah Palin's less than stellar performances, the question is WHY IS THIS ELECTION EVEN CLOSE? 

I wonder, in all seriousness, what is it that is keeping McCain as close as he is?  Granted, Obama is ahead, but not by much.   I thought about racism, but I'm thinking that is the easy and obvious answer.  I'm not saying race isn't a factor, but I think there is something more insidious at work.

As the night wind asked the little lamb, I'd like to ask McCain supporters, "Do you see what I see?"  I know the answer is "no," but I am intrigued by the reasons why.  I think that over the past few generations, Americans have simply redefined what it means to be a leader.  At one point, our leaders were expected to be "great men"  - to be better than the average citizen.  However, at some point (my guess is after the disappointment of Watergate) we  went from admiring our leaders and according them a lofty status to relegating them to the status of normal human beings.  This would not be bad in the abstract as politicians are merely flawed people and do not have any superpowers.  (Though it would be cool if they did!)   But in reality, we don't expect our leaders to be normal - we expect them to be like us.  That is the problem.  Who cares if Sarah Palin doesn't know anything about foreign policy?  Not some voters, who will merely say, "Neither do I."  As I have reflected and looked in many comment boards, people are willing to defend Sarah Palin to the death despite all evidence to the contrary.  And why not?  If someone attacked you, wouldn't you respond? 

On a certain level, one can understand the desire to vote for a reflection of oneself.  However, there is a fine line between desiring relatability to normal concerns and a narcissistic demand that only a candidate that is just like you in all ways deserves your vote.  Narcissism makes everything personal and clouds our ability to judge candidates on the merits of their positions.  Therefore, even the most painfully true attacks on someone like Sarah Palin are greeted with an ears-in-fingers "La La La La!  I'm not listening!"  response because to allow her to be attacked is to allow yourself to be attacked, as she is the political representation of you.  This is quite dangerous to the continance of our democracy.  How can we have a civilized debate when personalities are more important than facts?

Note:  In addition to narcissism, I also believe partisanship is playing a huge role.  More on that in the next post. . . .

One more Note:  I know I can't be the only person to have thought this in recent days, so I'll try to see what those more versed in this area have to say.

Full post as published by The Faculty Lounge on September 30, 2008 (boomark / email).