Palin the Pit-Bull

What have you heard so far about Sarah Palin's speech last night? That she thrashed Barack Obama? That she reclaimed her story from the media? I don't know yet--I haven't read about it. I want to write about the speech before I hear what everyone else is saying. But I'm going to guess those are the two main themes. And I'm going to disagree with one.

I watched the convention's proceedings from inside the hall. (And that experience is worthy of a post of its own--sitting among Republican delegates, rising to give standing ovations to ideas I don't believe in, being handed a McCain-Palin sign and doing my best to avoid waving it around...) Palin was certainly the main event, and the organizers made no bones about it; Rudy Giuliani spent much of his speech praising her, and Hawaii governor Linda Lingle devoted her entire talk to lauding Palin's life executive experience. The hour before she appeared was devoted mostly to her, and particularly to her story. Given this build-up, and given the scandals and rumors surrounding her, I was confident that Palin would use her speech to craft a new narrative for herself. That's not at all what she did.

Palin's speech did three things, in no particular order: attack Barack Obama, laud John McCain, and define Sarah Palin. Defining Sarah Palin got short shrift. There were a few sentences about being a "hockey mom," about being a mayor of Wasilla, about fighting corruption in Alaska. She's a pit bull with lipstick. To my mind, that's about it in terms of narrative. Nothing she said about herself hadn't been said before by surrogates. She even trotted out the canard that she opposed the "Bridge to Nowhere." Palin, of course, supported the bridge until it was apparent that the bridge was doomed. When Palin finished this part of her speech, I was sure she was going to bust.

Not so fast. After some words about McCain, Palin went on the attack, or perhaps the warpath, against Obama. She belittled his community-organizing history, diminished his experience, mocked his message of "hope," claimed his mantle of "change," and accused him of serial deceit. Sitting among the delegates and other Republicans in the crowd, I had a pretty good sense of what they liked to hear, and they loved this. I barely sat down before I had to rise again to give another standing ovation to a one-liner about Obama. The man to my right started a chant of "Zero! Zero!" in response to a line about Obama's lack of experience. The delegate to my left, laughing uproariously, bellowed, "That's throwing the crowd some red meat!" To say the crowd was enthusiastic about the attacks would be an understatement. It was like manna from heaven for them.

I was astonished. Rudy Giuliani had already torn into Obama; I assumed he was doing it so Palin could focus on herself. Clearly, the Republicans had a different strategy. And in retrospect, it may have been the way to go.

I thought Palin would try to reframe her narrative. But what's wrong with the narrative she has? The problem is not the narrative itself; the problem is the image it conveys. The media narrative paints Palin as a inexperienced, naive young woman who rose through the ranks on the strength of her north-country charm and her good looks. Palin put that image to rest yesterday evening. She was a pit bull. Palin was assertive and in command--a chief executive. She would not be bullied--ready to take on the likes of Vladimir Putin. She tells it like it is--an agent of reform. Palin may not have taken back her story, but she certainly took back her image in this speech. And as a liberal, I'm worried.