« TIME magazine features Anton Gunn | Main | Yelling at the television »
Saturday, 30 August 2008
You know who Sarah Palin reminds me of?
Those of you who did not like my referring to Sarah Palin as a "babe" yesterday probably won't enjoy this post, either. But I am honor-bound to be honest with you, my readers. Also, I have a journalistic duty to tell y'all as much as possible about a candidate about whom so little is known, even if it's based on nothing but my overactive imagination.
I had never before seen a picture of Sarah Palin, and yet from the first moment I saw her, she looked familiar. Did she to you? If so, you're dating myself. It's not so much that Gov. Palin looks like a particular individual. But she's a dead-ringer for a stock character that frequently appeared in sit-coms back in the '50s and '60s. If you're my age, you've seen that character dozens of times.
Here's a summary of a "Beverly Hillbillies" episode which featured that character (I've bold-faced the relevant part):
It’s Spring Tonic time, and Granny hands it around to the family, giving Jed a double dose because he made a mean comment on it. Meanwhile, at the bank, the secretary Gloria Buckles, who has worked on the Clampett account, has said she can take the paper work to Jed. When she gets up there, she transforms herself from a plain secretary to a gorgeous one, with her sights set on Jed’s money. She flirts with Jed, telling him that she needs a mountain man to make her happy. The family is worried about this young gold digger, and the fact that Jed has had a double dose of tonic. They call Drysdale and he rushes over, not recognizing Gloria. She reveals that her and Jed have discussed marriage, and when questioned, Jed says it is true. Gloria asks when they should set the date, and Jed says a few years, because that is when Jethro will be of marrying age. Jethro runs off with Gloria, and Jane runs after them to get her man back. Elly asks her father why he doesn’t want to marry her, and he says you have to start worrying when the bait starts chasing you.
Do you recognize her now? Yes, she's the frumpy secretary who first appears in a conservative business outfit, wearing glasses, with her hair tied up on top of her head, who, at a critical moment in the plot, suddenly removes her jacket, whips off the glasses and lets her hair come tumbling down, and immediately looks like Miss America.
Of course -- and this was the really cheesy thing about this plot device -- she looked like Miss America when you first saw her, just Miss America with glasses and her hair done up. I never could decide whether the sitcom writers really thought America was stupid enough to be surprised by this plot device, or whether we were supposed to see through it, and see the transformation-to-glamour coming -- you know, so that the folks at home would say, "I know what's going to happen -- watch this!"
That's what made me realize that's who Gov. Palin reminded me of. She IS beautiful, obviously so, and the specs and the tied-up hair are simply devices meant to say to us, "I'm serious; I'm not just a babe; you can vote for me."
The bad thing about this is that on some level, deep down, some of us who grew up on 50s and 60s TV are thinking, "This is gonna be good -- watch this!" (And subconsciously, we're expecting a scene in which she suddenly lets her hair down and removes the glasses, and of course, Cindy McCain walks in at that moment and says, "John! Who is THIS?" and a befuddled McCain goes "Hominahominahomina," and the laugh track plays.) Or maybe that's the GOOD thing, in terms of keeping voters interested in the ticket. I don't know.
By the way, I couldn't find a picture to illustrate what I was talking about, but here's video of the relevant part of the Beverly Hillbillies episode. The transformation of Gloria Buckles occurs toward the end of the first part:
LikeTelevision Embed Movies and TV Shows
Posted by Brad Warthen at 07:49 PM in 2008 Presidential, Elections, John McCain, Popular culture, Republicans, Sarah Palin, Total Trivia, Women
Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c4ea353ef00e554e942878834
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference You know who Sarah Palin reminds me of?:
Comments
How stupid!
How sexist!
Posted by: Lee Muller | Aug 30, 2008 9:19:37 PM
wow....i cant believe i lost two minutes of my life reading this...i thought there might really be a point in there about something but there wasnt....what a stupid post. but then this is sc a state with one of the lowest or perhaps THE lowest graduation rates and education systems in the nation.add this to "this just proves it..." line
Posted by: dee | Aug 30, 2008 9:24:12 PM
Not cute, not funny, questionable taste, certainly disrespectful.
We may disagree on some things, Brad, but I've respected you and demonstrated that. I have to say, you've really disappointed me.
Heads-up to anybody who thinks this is about Palin, "rabid feminists" or Hillary Clinton: it's not. It's about respect. And, if it matters, I've been an Obabma supporter from the day he announced.
Posted by: Claudia | Aug 30, 2008 11:22:38 PM
Claudia, male minds think thusly. My husband had earlier said, "Palin's like the sexy librarian with glasses and pinned up hair who takes off her glasses, shakes out her hair, and..." blah blah blah.
And there comes Lee, out of the woodwork for this one!!!!!!!
I can see Granny in a matriarchal role in the "Hillary-verse." With her scratchy, irritating voice saying, "MMA!!!"
MMA = PUMAspeak for the now-REALLY-mad ones.
Posted by: SC Hillacrat | Aug 30, 2008 11:45:43 PM
Why is it that with female candidates (and sometimes female spouses of male candidates) so much still is made of their appearance. Nobody commented on Biden's baldness, Obama's exceptional slimness, chief Dittohead's weight, etc., but with females we seem to feel it is open season on their appearance. While relevant if competing in a beauty contest, it seems of little relevance in a political contest. I don't recall Brad ever commenting about the appearance of Cindi or other female State staffers-at least not in print.
Posted by: george32 | Aug 30, 2008 11:50:05 PM
Only one thing pops into my head reading this, "Brad, you're an idiot, have you been spending too much time with Bob Coble... because it's starting to rub off?".
Posted by: Bill C. | Aug 31, 2008 8:05:19 AM
Dee, I had the same feeling about you when I read your response.
From what bastion of knowledge are YOU that advocates saying such nasty things about SC?
Bless your heart.
Posted by: Joanne | Aug 31, 2008 8:14:47 AM
SC Hill - trust me, that's not a statement of support from Lee. I can only judge by his postings on this blog, but that individual is about as broad-minded as long-leaf pine needle.
george32 - thanks for the back-up. It's nice to read that some of the males (assuming you are one) blogging here get that is simply wrong to judge people based on their appearance, and shallow to comment on it in a public forum. Brad knows that, and he knows he's being blatantly disrespectful of women in general with this kind of nonsense and irresponsible as a journalist. THAT'S what really ticks me off, Brad... you know better.
John – see above. Brad’s wife doesn’t deserve a hit on her appearance, either.
Posted by: Claudia | Aug 31, 2008 8:31:00 AM
What a stupid, sexist commentary!
I generally dislike you comments, but you have really hit a new high in lows!
Posted by: John P. Baker | Aug 31, 2008 8:54:47 AM
Well, well, and liberals like Warthen are always blasting others for commenting on a persons looks. Warthen, could not come up with a substantive comment so he stooped to trying to marginalize Mrs. Palin because she just happens to be attractive. Of course the liberal Democrats have their female "babes" like Cindy Shehan. (LOL)
Posted by: Bob | Aug 31, 2008 9:05:57 AM
I bet Lee has never felt the need to complain about sexism before.
This is so telling about Brad. He is bound and determined that he will enlighten/punish everyone he thinks might be racist by not publishing their comments. But, he is oblivious to sexist comments.
Posted by: martin | Aug 31, 2008 9:07:22 AM
You're right, Claudia. But I'm guilty too. About as shallow as a home-made catfish pond.
:(
Posted by: SC Hillacrat | Aug 31, 2008 9:13:02 AM
1. This is a blog, not a cell phone, dee. Your post about not expecting better in an under-educated state deserves no better than a "D" for punctuation and syntax, but who could expect you to be better than a "dee" when you are one? In the spirit of sexism, is that cup size, grade average or just the easiest letter for you to type when you send a text message?
Posted by: p.m. | Aug 31, 2008 9:17:04 AM
2) To balance the books commenting on appearance by sex, Joe Biden's eyes are unpleasantly narrow slits.
Posted by: p.m. | Aug 31, 2008 9:21:45 AM
3) It's not wrong to just a president or vice-president on appearance, Claudia, because I will have to look at the winners for the next four years, and so will everybody else. I can take that into consideration when I cast my vote if I wish, and this is America, I can say what I want to say whether you disagree with it or not. Sexism is part of human nature, the hardwiring that ensures our survival. Male and female aren't identical. Get used to it.
Posted by: p.m. | Aug 31, 2008 9:27:21 AM
4) That should be judge, not just, above.
Posted by: p.m. | Aug 31, 2008 9:28:22 AM
Brad this was either an amazingly bold or an amazingly stupid pick and probably one of the more important things for many of us to ponder in this whole race as we will only have two months to meet and consider this person who admittedly (as late as last Spring) passed along to the press that she hadn't really thought that much about the situation in Iraq. She has lots of pluses and minuses - as for Obama, love him or hate him - we have been picking him apart and dissecting him for well over a year and he has had to answer tough questions to national audiences with several other key figures of his party taking pint shots at him as well.
As for Palin, we know nothing about her (except that she is a hunter and hockey mom et cetera) and need to learn about her fast. Your post adds nothing to this important task that most Americans have ahead of them to make a meaningful determination regarding Palin's fitness for office.
Please post something substantive soon.
Posted by: Silence Dogood | Aug 31, 2008 10:45:36 AM
Y'all need to chill! Brad, I think your column is a hoot. I'm somewhat of a Republican woman, not so much now as I used to be, and I think it's a hoot! Who says that women politicians need to be dour an masculine? She makes Cindy McCain - who looked MUCH better with her short hair, by the way - look like Cruella DeVille.
But am I having trouble taking her seriously. I think her name doesn't flow well off the tongue, and more than once I've called her the Vice Princess. She is what she is folks, a beauty queen. I think she could use a "serious" haircut.
Posted by: empe | Aug 31, 2008 11:19:43 AM
Brad, you've accidently hit on something here. The dishonest goldigger going after a wealthy person through charm and a flattery. The only problem is you targeted the wrong person on the GOP ticket. Wasn't it John McCain who lied about his age in, what turned out to be a successful, bid to gain the affections of one very rich beer heiress?
Posted by: bud | Aug 31, 2008 12:20:57 PM
#1 - “Sexism is part of human nature, the hardwiring that ensures our survival.”
#2 - “Male and female aren't identical. Get used to it.”
These are, from a certain perspective, quite fascinating statements. I wonder if the poster could cite any studies backing up #1. (The poster likes numbering points for clarity, so I’ll accommodate him/her.)
From a sociological perspective, I’d be interested in learning more about this poster. Where did s/he grow up and become educated? What social factors influenced him/her? Was racism and/or classism also a factor in his/her upbringing?
This poster is quite sure of him/herself. The statements are presented as facts, not opinions. #1 assumes an anthropological certainty that the perpetuation of the human race is dependent upon sexism, in addition to assuming as a neurological point of fact that the human brain is physiologically constructed so as to ensure prejudice. If we postulate that the poster is not alone in his/her belief in these two assumptions, we could conduct some very interesting studies to further explore how this belief system is formed. Indeed, I’m sure that many such studies already exist.
In #2, the poster makes another presupposition: that I am persistent in my belief that the two different sexes that make up the human species are, in effect, identical. S/he then delivers an instruction: “get used to it.” The first part of the statement is likely based on an opinion of me that the poster has formed based on prior statements that I have made. It’s interesting that the poster is assuming that I am quite uninformed; indeed, ignorant enough to believe that men and women are physiological duplicates. S/he then offers me, in my ignorance, a generous piece of advice. Here, what I am being advised to “get used to” is that this supposed belief that I hold is, in fact, false.
I’m quite tempted to quote Arte Johnson at this point; his pungent observation would certainly apply to this entire thread.
Posted by: Claudia | Aug 31, 2008 1:11:27 PM
This is not unexpected.
It is juvenile. It is sexist. It demonstrates the lack of either piercing intellect or courage we so often see when libs encounter a real, live and unabashed conservative who really "walks the walk."
The surprise to me is that Brad is being such an A-hole to Governor Palin when she has been picked by Brads' idol.
Hey Brad...lighten up! This 'babe' is on your side. By the way, I bet you don't have the b*lls to call Cindi a babe.
Coward.
I did notice that you have bud in complete agreement with you. You gotta feel good about that, I reckon.
Dave
Posted by: david | Aug 31, 2008 2:11:57 PM
You know, it occurs to me that Cindi (with an "I" dang it!) really is a babelicious reporterette babe.
Too bad she's such a "Frau Blucher" type flaming liberal.
I can't think of any characters on Beverly Hillbillies that she reminds me of right now, but I CAN imagine her with her hair pinned up and wearing glasses.
Yum.
David
Posted by: dave | Aug 31, 2008 2:21:20 PM
It demonstrates the lack of either piercing intellect or courage we so often see when libs encounter a real, live and unabashed conservative who really "walks the walk."
-David
No she doesn't. A real conservative would not abandon her young, special-needs baby to tour the country running for vice president. That's not family values conservatism, that's selfishness.
Posted by: bud | Aug 31, 2008 2:49:21 PM
would it be okay for a conservative father to abandon his young, special needs baby to run for vice president?
Posted by: george32 | Aug 31, 2008 3:08:48 PM
You're a coward as well bud. You and jokers like you on the left are piddling in your pants about how strong this woman is and how devastating what she represents is to your partys' utter lack of morals or courage.
You hate how good and wholesome and strong Palin is, and in typical Lin fashion, all you have to counter her is a flimsy slur on her motherhood.
Once more for the slow people in the class: Governor Palin is a big girl. She has 4 other children. She was a successful mother before she became a mayor, before she became a governor and will remain one as vp.
You should rejoice, and indeed would do so if you were consistent and for real. Consider: Palin fulfills the feminist ideal that combines achievement and motherhood.
Isn't it funny that these liberal objections to mothers in public service are only voiced against conservative women?
Doesn't it seem strange that people in the party which supports abortion up to and including the point at which the baby is completely delivered except for his head, are now wringing their hands in mock anguish and faux outrage in supposed concern for a baby?
Fear looks good on you bud.
David
Posted by: faust | Aug 31, 2008 3:16:07 PM

