Is There A Difference Between Sarah Palin And Paris Hilton?

Republican politics has devolved from serious political movement to MTV-style reality TV casting.

Sarah Palin is NOT a politician; she is a reality TV star.

There is arguably no difference between Sarah Palin and Paris Hilton. Both are famous simply for being famous.

Paris Hilton says the catchphrase, “That’s hot!”

Sarah Palin has the catchphrase, “You betcha!”

Paris Hilton is not a Constitutional scholar nor can she actually write legislation – and by that I mean she literally doesn’t know the formatting, the legal/Constitutional concepts or exact phrasing necessary for a Bill to be presented.

And neither does Sarah Palin. THAT is significant. Sarah doesn’t actually have any “ideas” nor can she write them down to be voted on. Simply saying “government sucks” isn’t enough.

Paris Hilton gets in front of tv cameras and makes vague semi-incoherent statements such as, “Somebody in, like, government should, like, help people and Haiti with, like, food and stuff. I guess. Because, like, earthquakes are not hot!”

Sarah Palin engages in the exact same rhetoric simply spouting out mindless catchphrases about how Obama is a tyrant, all government is evil, she loves freedom and people are basically good (except for the ones that live in big cities and have college educations or are gay).

We witnessed for the first time in history a reality star getting nominated as VP!

Would Sarah Palin have EVER been nominated as VP in the 1960’s or 1970’s? Probably not. The reason being that American culture at that time DEMANDED and EXPECTED a certain level of competence from their elected officials. If Sarah gave the exact same answers as she did in the Katie Couric interview – she would be laughed off the public scene in 1969! If Sarah gave her same speeches verbatim in 1972 --- she would be again laughed off and NEVER taken seriously as a politician. But from 1999 to 2008 America has been so inundated with “reality tv” that we no longer make much distinction between being famous and being qualified.

In 1969 you couldn’t just say “Government sucks!” and “You betcha!” and be taken as a serious candidate. Can you imagine her during the Cuban Missile Crisis????

The problem is that in 2009 it is enough to simply be famous and say things like, “Government sucks!” and earn the nomination for vice president.

niceguyinhell niceguyinhell
31-35, M
10 Responses Feb 10, 2010

Paris Hilton made the following statement,<br />
<br />
"there is one crucial difference between me and my sister Nikki, she's a better shopper than I am". <br />
<br />
I have tried to identify the critical success factors that one might attribute to ob<x>jectively assess how one is a better shopper than the other. <br />
<br />
1 bought Jimi Choos at greater discount<br />
2 Got frebee at perfume counter<br />
3 got two for one butternut squash in grocery store<br />
4 used out of date discount voucher<br />
<br />
i mean it doesn't make sense as a statement. This proves Sarah would make a better president than Paris. Oh and her name isn't like some draft dodging garlic eating country, state....I mean city.

She must be trying to read about the third reich again. the whole "death panels thing was such a panic sandwich she tried to feed people. and her fan club took it and ran.

Good news!

Great news, MusicMouse!

More importantly...how exactly is Sarah Palin "qualified" to be a world leader?<br />
<br />
Just from an basic intellectual point of view....do you really think she would understand military options if they were laid out in front of here? Do you really think she would understand complex Constitutional issues?<br />
<br />
How is Sarah Palin significantly different than Paris Hilton in terms of education?

"Dangerous"?<br />
<br />
How exactly is one of the most moderate President's in our history "dangerous"?<br />
<br />
He's been in office one year....so please detail the wars he has started, the freeedoms he's taken away from, etc.<br />
<br />
I wouldn't have a problem if you said he was unpopular or if you merely said that you didn't agree with a few of his policies...but "dangerous"? C'mon. Ya have to admit that is just a silly thing to say.

Well, being hot is subjective...but compared to, say, Nancy Pelosi Sarah's pretty hot. Sorry Nancy :-(

I think her being a babe has something to do with it, and I think you are right that it wouldn't have worked before this millennium. I think it is time for a Sarah Palin talking doll, the kind with the pull cord. "You betcha!" "Government sucks!" "How's that hopey-changey thing working for ya?" "I can see Putin from my rooftop!" "Who is Obama really?"

Haha! I'd watch that too, Eve!<br />
<br />
Here’s an interesting experiment:<br />
<br />
If we took a few of Sarah Palin’s speeches and simply gave them to a totally unknown male actor – put that actor in front of a group of Republican voters and had him read her words – would the reaction be as enthusiastic?<br />
<br />
There is a cult of personality that has developed around Sarah (just like it did around W Bush) and the evidence could be easily demonstrated by simply taking her own words and putting them in someone else’s mouth. I hope Bill Maher tries this example for one of his Real Time segments.<br />
<br />
“I think government needs to stop meddling in people’s lives and what not! You betcha I do!”<br />
<br />
This line will get thunderous applause and grown men will faint because they are so overcome by the intensity of the moment if Sarah herself says it….but would people really be that “thrilled” at Sarah’s rather bland statements if they were read by someone else? Someone they haven’t built a personal mythology around? Someone they haven’t invested or attached any emotional energy to?<br />
<br />
Love or hate Obama his speeches stand on their own. They are great no matter if he reads them himself or if you just read the text. <br />
<br />
Could any of Sarah’s “ideas” or speeches make the same claim…or is the “power” associated with them coming for her and not the ideas themselves? <br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
And following on that line of thought, what if we were to transplant Sarah’s words and speeches back to 1968? If we were to give her words to a man (to eliminate any issues of 1960’s chauvinism) to read….would that man be nominated a VP for the Republican ticket?<br />
<br />
No.<br />
<br />
Why?<br />
<br />
How do we explain why Sarah is a major political “voice” in the Republican Party in 2009…but her exact words and ideas would get zero traction and zero notice in 1969?<br />
<br />
How do we account for this? <br />
<br />
Why is Sarah “brilliant” in 2009 but unnoticeable in 1969?<br />
<br />
Why are her speeches “brilliant” if she delivers it, but boring, bland and uninspired if someone unknown reads it?

What's that reality show where celebrities eat worms and bugs? Sign her up! I might even watch that show for a change! Or I should say, for a hopey changey.