Investing Words with Meaning

"Obama will reinvest words with meaning. That is the basis of everything. And an American leader able to improvise a grammatical, even a moving, English sentence is no bad thing."
--Roger Cohen, New York Times, November 6, 2008

More than enough has been written about Sarah Palin already. But I can't pass this up: how ironic is it that John McCain, in his concession speech – probably the best and most honest of his entire campaign – paid tribute to her as a "great campaigner"?
And that he wasn't entirely wrong?
And that, in spite of her abilities, she probably lost him any chance he had?
He obviously wasn't just thinking of her nomination acceptance speech, written by former Bush speechwriter Matthew Scully a week before she gave it and then tailored to her, which she delivered brilliantly. She made that speech sound both so personal and so sincere that even seasoned commentators forgot that the words weren't actually hers.
But Scully clearly wasn't responsible for her subsequent speeches, and although they were received just as rapturously by her crowds, they didn't actually say anything or make a case for anything but groupthink.
Here's a typical excerpt, from a speech she gave in Clearwater, Florida:

As I explained to Senator Biden, John McCain is the only man in this race who will solve our economic crisis and not exploit it. And he's the only man in this race with a plan that will actually help our working families, and cut your taxes, and get our economy back on track.
(Applause.)
He's the only man in this race who talks about the wars that America is fighting and he isn't afraid to use the word victory.
(Applause.)
Our opponent gives speech after speech about the wars that America is fighting and it sure would be nice if just once he'd say that he wants America to win.
(Applause.)
See our opponent voted to cut off funding for our troops even after saying that he would never do so.
(Boos.)

You really have to see the video clip to appreciate the impact of this pure – and effective – demagoguery.
By October 6, when she gave that speech, in spite of the crowds and in spite of her presentation skills, her credibility was already pretty much over. Palin's Couric interview on September 24 had cruelly exposed both the breadth of her ignorance and her inability to string together a coherent sentence or thought:

Couric: What other Supreme Court decisions do you disagree with?
Palin: Well, let's see. There's, of course in the great history of America there have been rulings, that's never going to be absolute consensus by every American. And there are those issues, again, like Roe v. Wade, where I believe are best held on a state level and addressed there. So you know, going through the history of America, there would be others but …
Couric: Can you think of any?
Palin: Well, I could think of … any again, that could be best dealt with on a more local level. Maybe I would take issue with. But, you know, as mayor, and then as governor and even as a vice president, if I'm so privileged to serve, wouldn't be in a position of changing those things but in supporting the law of the land as it reads today.

In the euphoria of the Obama-Biden's victory it would be easy to forget that 46% of the American electorate voted for the McCain-Palin ticket, and that a significant number of them did so because of, not in spite of, Palin's belief system and rhetorical powers.
And it would be easy to forget that she's one of 28% of American adults who have earned a university degree. That's compared to only 23% of Canadian adults!




(I notice that Occidental College in Los Angeles, where Obama spent his first two years after high school, prominently features this fact on its website; I couldn't find any reference to Palin (nee Heath) on the website of the University of Idaho, from which she graduated with a BSc in Communications-Journalism in 1987!)