David Yeagley is the great-great-grandson of Comanche leader Bad Eagle. 
In the media plethora of Sarah Palin, we may miss the most important ’shout out’ of her message: the failure of white men.
The media has absorbed the Sarah Palin image with a ‘roguish’ rigour, indeed, but this is not a special feat, since she lends herself so well to the utmost attention of all. Democrats believe that she will divide the Republicans so abjectly that the Democrats can easily win whatever election she campaigns for, hers or anyone she supports. Therefore the liberal media gives Sarah 24/7 coverage. They made “Obama,” so they figure they can break the Republicans with Palin. Republicans are thrilled that she is a grass roots, frontier women, not another crooked politician, not seasoned in fraud and double talk.
Sarah Palin, whom indolent, self-indulgent men would rather look at, then compete with; whom white American men would rather send into battle, than to stand up and fight for themselves.
Everyone delights to look at her. That’s the one unifying factor. (FoxNews is even happy to have its errors in reporting about her dramatized!) She’s one fine looking woman. And she has a fine, tempered steel strength, like all beauty pageant girls. She’s known how to take hits since she was very young. She will never crumble under pressure. (She may resign when wise, appropriate, and necessary to do so for the benefit of all parties concerned, as she explains in her book, Going Rogue. But that isn’t buckling, at all.) Take Carrie Prejean, for another, younger example. She has a new book out, too, defending herself. There is no silencing or intimidating a pageant queen. Most people have no idea about that pageant personality. No one should be particularly impressed with Palin’s public behavior. She thrives on productivity and aggression.
But that so many men would look to a woman for a triumph is the loudest element in the Palin story. It just means that American men have resigned. It is yet another sign that American men have abdicated their responsibilities in true, patriotic, American leadership. They want someone to stump for them, to pinch hit for them. This is a national shame, really.
A nation is never conquered until the hearts of its women are on the ground, as the Cheyenne proverb says. When women aspire to national leadership, that tells me they think very low of their men. They are without confidence in them.
Sarah Palin is a novelty, an intensely entertaining novelty. She is a frontier woman, the like of which hasn’t been seen in the political public in a century, and never before in the presidential realm. But, consider this phenomenon in context.
America just elected an alien, black African Communist liar. Or, to put in more popular terms, America elected a Negro, a black man. For the first time. All social ills were absolved by such a sacrificial act. Or so the stupefied-by-materialilsm Collective Conscious of the country dictated. It was a most inebriated intuition.
But, when we make one mistake, we are inclined to make another. (So I was taught in Sabbath school, a thousand years ago, by an elderly educator, Dr. Brewer, whom I remember well.) We just foolishly elected an alien Negro to the white house. And now, we are considering electing a woman?
Is this more of the same ‘monkey see, monkey do’ tactic the Republicans used when they appointed Negro Michael Steele as head of the Republican Party? That was the Republican response to the election of Barry “Obama” Soetoro. Why, Republicans wouldn’t be out-done. They would play the race card, too.
So, it looks like Sarah Palin, the woman, might be the answer. It is all in the sport of using the White House, our sacred, national seat of power, to express popular idealism–whatever it is at the time. We elect an individual as an expression of our whimsical social mores at the time. This is very much the reason why Sarah Palin is becoming so profoundly popular. It is also the reason she might be another, even worse mistake.
Not possible? Don’t count on it.
Even if she represents everything conservatives and patriotic Americans believe in; even if she will actively pursue the exemplification of America’s most precious and beloved values; even if she seems the perfect person, she isn’t.
She means American men have bowed out. She means American men, white American men, have recused themselves from the court of public opinion. White American men have cowered from the battlefield of the country.
That’s what Sarah Palin ultimately means.
Some call to mind the great Margaret Thatcher, the iron-clad dame of Britain, who sent her Royal Navy to war when rights of a few British citizens were curtailed on a tiny island some eight thousand nautical miles and seven weeks away. Surely one could not ask for a stronger, better leader. But what has followed in England? The nation is about to succumb to Sharia law. The nation is about to be buried with foreign Muslims. English men have surrendered.
Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, 1982
It is the last act of the noble warrior, when all enemies are defeated, when all ills are vanquished, to kindly sacrifice himself. Without an enemy, the warrior kills himself. This is England. America follows.
Is a people good for only one war? After historical triumph and unprecedented victory, must a nation then dissolve itself? Even among the American Indian nations, the same is nearly true. American Indian men have failed to fight the kinds of battles presented to them in modern times. Our women run off with the first non-Indian that offers more than an Indian man offers her. This is defeat. This is failure. This is the dissolution of nations.
Palin, as governor of Alaska.
Putting Sarah Palin up for office, for the president of the United States, while it seems inevitable and right, is an omen following a disaster (Barry Soetoro). It can’t be better, even though most of us think it has to be. It cannot be worse.
But let’s not act on emotions alone. Let’s not operate from reactions, conditionings, or even inevitabilities. Let’s think about this. Let’s think objectively, historically, and wisely. The show boat king (Barry) doesn’t have to be followed by a show boat queen.
Where are the strong white American men? That’s all I can say.
Sarah goes “rogue” while
white men go fishing.
25 responses so far ↓
1 David Yeagley // Nov 19, 2009 at 6:09 pm
It’s called hiding behind a woman’s skirt. No offense to the woman, mind you. This is simply self-defeating behavior on the part of the American white male.
2 Walksthrough // Nov 19, 2009 at 11:48 pm
As far as England goes, they gave up their bid for greatness when they betrayed Israel.
Are we not doing the same thing right now.
In ancient Israel, McGee makes the same sort of statement regarding Deborah who judged Israel for a time during the time of the judges, before Israel demanded a king. There was nothing wrong with Deborah being a judge apparently, except it reflected a lack of men of ability.
It is always, finally, the big picture of the spiritual condition, of the individuals, the institutions, of the nation as a whole. Our best efforts and desires fail us. Our nation must repent. Not to the races, not to religions not ours, but toward the God of the Bible.
3 David Yeagley // Nov 20, 2009 at 9:12 am
Amen, baby!
4 Szyhxc // Nov 20, 2009 at 9:19 am
Walksthrough make a good observation. While reading Dave’s article I thought of Golda and see her as a clear exception to Dave’s premise.
I agree with Dave that white men are failing America but we (I am one) have been kicked around unmercifully of late and are justifiably gun shy.
A lot of the kicking is deserved. For example Newt was on the right track until he sold out in NY-23. (The only true conservative white guys are not running.) I have confidence that Sarah will be good for the country and welcome her. White males should take note.
5 David Yeagley // Nov 20, 2009 at 9:28 am
Well, I have to say, she may be the only candidate available, or willing to step up to the plate. While this is profoundly tragic, it may be the only bet we have as conservatives.
I except the Republican Party will shape up a good bit, in the process. In fact, I expect a lot of Democrats to be a different breed in the future.
6 whitetrash // Nov 20, 2009 at 9:38 am
Elizabeth the First led England to prominence as a world power and is the standard by which Thatcher is judged. That would seem to dispel the notion that the emergence of a woman as leader foreshadows doom for a nation.
Palin is not the answer. Nothing could be more obvious, but that does not preclude the notion that a strong people can be led by a strong woman. Nor does the treason of the Republican Party under the Bush Family preclude the emergence of authentic and principled American leadership. It could happen, but not under the framework of the current system that has entrenched two criminal political parties and excludes any alternatives.
7 David Yeagley // Nov 20, 2009 at 9:48 am
And then there’s Xena…
8 David Yeagley // Nov 20, 2009 at 9:58 am
WT, how do you then account for Englands’ demise? And look at Germany, or even Iceland. Women leaders, as a rule, indicate a problem.
The kings and queens of the Renaissance and later reflect a completely different social/political circumstance. They were not elected officials.
9 whitetrash // Nov 20, 2009 at 10:49 am
I’m not sure that social/political circumstance dictates the effectiviness of authentic leadership, but it can obviously impact the emergence of that leadership. When our system became so corrupted with corporate money that leaders were fabricated (Bush, Clinton, Obama) as opposed revealed through a meaningful process, we hit the wall.
The problem with Sarah is not her gender… it is her lack of depth and ability. She is so without merit that even the Global Corporations who appointed King George II and followed him up with Obama won’t install her.
10 David Yeagley // Nov 20, 2009 at 11:36 am
Ha! Well, just remember, she bucked the big oil boys (”Republicans”) in Alaska. She ain’t ‘fraid a nothin’! Got everyone beat on that score. What kind of merit are you looking for–a record of “success” in dealing with the dealers?
Her merit is precisely dangerous!
Having said all that, I still say, where are the strong white men?
11 Dat Beast // Nov 20, 2009 at 2:15 pm
Whitetrash, didn’t Elizabeth have the same kind of derision pointed at her from her MANY detractors? She had to step up and stomp them out.
As far as an alternative to our current two parties, the reason we haven’t had serious third party candidate is that they have all been fringe personalities. Nader, Perot, etc… Maybe she needs to leave the party and finally we will have a serious third party candidate that is just like you and me, just an American.
That is why they attack her, she is everyman, and they are scared of her.
12 whitetrash // Nov 20, 2009 at 3:48 pm
Dat Beast,
I like Sarah. Baby Sister is a good and strong woman, but she lacks the steely eyed poise and reflective intelligence of Elizabeth Regina, Maggie Thatcher, or Ronald Reagan. It’s just not there. Glibness and poise are not the same thing.
Watch the Oprah interview. At one point Winfrey asks a completely rude and inappropriate question about Levi Johnson being invited to Thanksgiving Dinner. Sarah attempted to answer the question in a very humane and decent fashion, and Winfrey stepped on her. Sarah stammered but remained courteous. Maggie Thatcher would have put a clown suit on Winfrey and left her puddling her famous couch. In fact, it is hard to imagine Winfrey daring Thatcher to such a confrontation.
That’s the kind of American leader I am looking for, and if it’s a woman, so be it. We don’t need an average American at the helm. We need and extraordinary American.
13 whitetrash // Nov 20, 2009 at 3:51 pm
“Having said all that, I still say, where are the strong white men?”
You won’t find them at a Republican Convention, on Wall Street, in possession of an Ivy League degree, or whining on the radio… but they are out there.
14 David Yeagley // Nov 20, 2009 at 5:20 pm
Touché
(But can they read? That may be important. It was for Emiliano Zapata, at least in the movie.)
15 Sioux // Nov 20, 2009 at 9:07 pm
It’s all that estrogen being excreted into the water system, particularly in big cities and college towns. Men have been feminized and the women have been hyper-Xena’d due to the BC pills -that’s my medical theory. Even Colin Powell is a wimp – and W who got slapped down by Laura for being a man and trying to protect the country…in the end he just wanted everyone to like him, to no avail. Too much estrogen in the water, I say!
16 John Sandusky // Nov 20, 2009 at 10:35 pm
Palin’s a quitter, and the reasons she gave for quiting are quintessentially girly and girly-man.
She resigned because of the tremendous pressure, time and financial burden of a litany of ethics complaints in the past several months, she said. The complaints were without merit and took away from the job she wanted to do for Alaskans, Palin said.
If the big tough “barracuda” can’t handle poduck Alaskan politics, how can she possibly handle any form of the D.C. nuclear, biological and chemical political warfare.?
“CA-CHING$” . . . “CA-CHING$” now; Sarah Palin who, in twenty-ten+two.
I never could understand how both Bush Presidents could live with women that were pro-choice. That in of itself tells me the world about their true convictions.
We are going to find out who the real men are in the senate, based on their closure vote on the disastrous Reid health care bill.
I suggest that the GOP read the Reid bill and the Pelosi bills out loud if an old fashioned filibuster is needed, although I think they don’t even bother with that sort of thing now.
17 David Yeagley // Nov 21, 2009 at 10:12 pm
Well, I don’t think she’s a quitter, at all. The way she explains things in her book, it sounds like the best decision for all concerned. However, you do have the point: things would only be 10 times worse in DC.
People do resign, in life. Maybe presidents should be more willing to do the same. Vice-presidents, certainly house speakers, and obviously, congressmen. They should all resign, immediately.
And while I also grant that the governorship of Alaska is no comparison to the presidency, it was infinitely more experienced that what Barry boy had to offer–which was absolutely NOTHING!
18 John Sandusky // Nov 22, 2009 at 12:34 am
Take a good look at Sarah Palin; listen with a fine ear at what she says and how she says it . . . her political career is over, she’s simply not cut out for the rough and tumble in D.C..
She would be perfect for a conservative leaning show that would rival the likes of Oprah. Conservative women and girly-men would eat it up, and after four years of Obama, America will be ready ripe for another major right turn.
Remember, you heard it from me. . .”Welcome to the Sarah Palin Show (airing around 8PM, since conservative women are working during the day, unlike the Oprah crowd of slackers).” “Tonight we’re going to talk about how to stay fit, while being a mom and at the same time having a career.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWLuz4GTxE8
19 whitie for congress // Nov 22, 2009 at 2:38 am
Hola,
I take issue with you about no white men willing to take a stand. I’m not “presidential” but I’m not a coward. I’m not polished and my English is worser than Bush’s. But, I’m willing to do what Beck and the other “talking heads” and politicians won’t do.
Sounds like you guys want the best of both worlds. You want the rough and tough, but demand they be polished and eloquent. Well, I wonder what you guys will say of me. Of course you will have to actually take a bit of time and listen to my first interview.
http://www.jeffpritchardforcongress.com
It’s time to shake things up. I don’t think we have time to wait for the polished and pedigreed to grow a set, so you may have to settle for those of us with dirty finger nails and a get’er done attitude.
I’m curious to what you think. See my site, listen to my interview, and sound off when you’re ready.
Hope to have you on board. Thank you for letting me post.
20 Awen // Nov 22, 2009 at 6:46 am
Well, whitie, you are in very bad company here, I am sorry to say and might even be the only man, white or otherwise, who’s made a post on this page at all. I am glad that my DHS babysitters (yes, I work for them) picked tonight to leave me to my own devices so I could discover you and your website, which I have carefully scrutinized for any sign of what I am going to expose here now and I am glad to find nothing there that would incline me to include you in my verdict over the rest here.
Did you perhaps notice what was the topic of this page and the general message of it? It’s called gender-bashing, which has already bled three quarters of the hoped-for Conservative base away and these men here indulging in it are simply too stupid to notice and too irresponsible and self-indulgent to care.
Who does almost all of the fund-raising, the grassroots work, the canvasing and who has most of the buying power in America? Do you know the answer to that, whitie? Who are the vast majority of single divorced parents, who are the poorest of the working poor, who are 96% of the caregivers for elderly relatives in America? Who fed you your bottles, wiped your asses and held your heads when you puked? Who will be watching over you with the power of life and death over you when you are old, ill and helpless? How do you really deserve to be treated by these unnamed ones?
Yeagley, stand before me whilst I hold a mirror to your sickening psychosis, your unreasonably repressed homosexuality, the hatred and bigotry you spew from your little Net corner and the evil and violence you help to perpetrate on an already exhausted planet. I’m going to make it as simple as I can for you; there is such a thing as too much testosterone poisoning on the brain clouding your ability to reason at all:
Any survivor of the Holocaust can tell you that it didn’t start immediately with violence, let alone systematic extermination. It started much as political correctness has made it perfectly OK to insult and revile white people, in case you haven’t noticed. To be the butt of all jokes, the usual victim of common street crime, the one not allowed to complain about his steady and relentless dehumanization and objectification by others. It becomes OK to despise people, not because of anything they did to you but rather for the one thing nobody on earth has a choice about: their race, their sex, their country of origin, their tribe or clan. It creates a tacitly allowed mindset in the society at large that makes room for the next steps. I charge you, Yeagley for all of this and all the next steps for which you share personal responsibility.
Those are so common in the news today as to have become quite boring. The great majority of emergency room visits among women in this country are due to male violence. 98% of violent crimes are committed by males, and all wars are started by them and for them. Fully half the women in America have been brutalized at least once by their own male partners. The human male is the only animal on the face of the earth that hunts and kills his own young and females for sport. In this country alone, over thirty thousand little children a year are sexually molested or murdered in their own homes. Every year another species or two of life is made extinct because of male aggression and greed.
And where do the poor victims go for comfort and ’spiritual guidance?’ If they’re human, likely to another male set up in a house of worship decorated with a phallic symbol in honour of a motherless and merciless foreign fairy tale male deity who’s going to remind them they are second-class citizens and are supposed to put up with all that crap. Can anyone wonder why the intelligentsia of all civilized nations long for the abolition of organized religion and the quick dispatching of stone age fundamentalist patriarchs to oblivion? How much they wish you all would just dry up and blow away because you stand in the way of our evolution to something better?
It is usually only the strong who can afford to be kind. The weak are always vicious. One who has proven himself through fire doesn’t need to pick on the defenseless to prove any more to himself who he is. You lash out at any you think cannot fight you back and you long for strong men only because you’re afraid you’re not one – and that’s not even true; I wish I could get my hands around the throat of whomever taught you that. You trash your own mother’s people in public and shame your ancestors with your fulsome submission to your spiritual genocide as a people to add to all the rest of it.
So, back to the noble Ms Palin. You can do no better than to complain about her sex. Only days after you write an article praising the Muslims for hiding their women in sacks and who regularly execute them if they dare to raise their faces to the sun, then you parade one in a leather corset and whine for the return of strong white men – to do what for you, Yeagley? It’s completely obvious to everybody else but you what it is you reveal here. If you had a speck of decency, which you patently do not, you would at least leave the ladies alone completely. Do not mention them, do not fantasize about their intent, do not obsess about their clothing – which to your great surprise, is usually for their own comfort and not to attract poor tortured Cotton Mather dispositions like yours and tempt you to sin. You would not insist on violating what little right to privacy they have left with your puerile, adolescent and filthy-minded attentions. You bite at the ankles of your betters and try to denigrate them from the safety of a little website because you’d probably suffer a coronary of one of them so much as looked upon you. You hate Ms. Palin for being a lovely as well as accomplished woman only because you are too afraid to be a man. This is the public picture you are drawing of yourself now. I do not know if it be a true one; I think if it were and not just a tantrum (which I well know the reason for….) you’d be hiding it far better.
And this blog is a little hate party of absolute losers. What are you all defending? What good are you doing anywhere when all any of you can spread around is yet more division between human beings and more hatred? You can’t even insult the President without zooming in on the one thing even he cannot help: the colour of his skin! How puny-minded and weak of character, bereft of honour can you all be? You are utterly useless, not only to any hope of a strong Conservative base in America but also to the planet itself and the only place any of you nasty-minded bigots is heading, for which I thank all the Gods, is extinction. Don’t like the lady leaders? It’s called evolution; deal with it. Now please, do the planet a favour and go get those flu shots that Baxter is lovingly cooking up for you. People who really want to outgrow cruelty, violence, rampant stupidity and reckless destruction of everything decent are SO tired of being offended by your foul breath on our airspace.
21 Phyllis // Nov 22, 2009 at 7:30 am
Awan….I was more than impressed by your vitriol. Your critique is summed up in your complaints of accusations of gender-bashing and hate by this site and participants.
Well, its been a long, long time since I have seen such gender-bashing focused on the vile male gender. This, belongs to YOU. I thought the ‘feminist’ rant with all its venom spewed towards men had eased up a bit, especially since the such advocates had not balked at acquiring the very traits they so abhorred in these hateful males.
You have taken up the refuge of all the ranting, emotional, liberal, ignorati:
“Anyone who disagrees with Obama and his agenda are simply racists.”
What a cop out!
Mrs.(not Ms.), or rather, Governor Palin, was presented here more as a “Where are the men who might lead us?” After 25-30 years the societal mind set totally diminishing everything ‘male’ it is a valid question.
Your diatribe flummoxes me. And it reveals there is, within your psyche, a trauma or indoctrination which indicates there is something other than ’selective’ historical presentiments which influences your mind set. You need to deal with that before you can objectively, intelligently, and rationally address that with which you disagree.
22 Awen // Nov 22, 2009 at 7:46 am
P.S.
I do not expect or desire any response from you, Yeagley, or from any of your sicko friends here. You never could present an argument against me because of one insurmountable difference between us: your entire persona is a falsehood and all I have, or ever said to you, is the absolute truth. Any response of yours would only shame you further, built on feeble words a man of honour would rather slit his own belly open than ever utter. What you never understood is that I didn’t give a shit what bull you throw out to the public. But you and your creepy friends here went too far and when you degrade your own honour to the point that you have made yourself about as pleasing to behold as a cockroach, as with the cockroach. I’m going to step on you repeatedly until you rediscover your humanity.
And you’d better remember that ‘Fairness Act’ soon to be upon us and having so little to do with actual fairness and keep a better watch on your nasty posters. One more threat against people in government, any more spreading of hatred and you’ll be designated a hate site and shut down and can consider yourselves lucky if that’s all you get. You give me the least excuse that I can expound on, inflate, or even distort and I’ll surely help nail you to the wall. You may find mercy from whatever gods you worship but you can bet your life you’ll never get the least bit of it from me again.
23 Phyllis // Nov 22, 2009 at 7:46 am
To John Sandusky…I agree with you and think that a ‘talk show’ format for Sarah would be the ideal slot for her. She is a magnificent woman and could well be the next ‘Oprah’. She is no ‘Margaret Thatcher’!
24 Phyllis // Nov 22, 2009 at 8:05 am
Awen…(sorry I misspelled your name in my last post)
Fairness doctrine advocate! The constitution be damned! LOL! It is ‘fair’ only if it agrees with YOU! Hon, you need to blog on Huffington Post. There you will find comfort, and reassurance and you will resonate beautifully.
Dr. Yeagley…I think its time to be fair to Awen and block her/him from this site. That way she/he can spend more time with bloggers who are ‘FAIR’ like she/he is……
25 Dew // Nov 26, 2009 at 8:13 am
The bottom line is that good, White men will not make it to the top-they won’t be given the chance-and they don’t want to make it to the top because the goal of those running this country is to cast it to the ground and stamp it into third world status.
There are good men out there, but they are too afraid to step out and deny and fight the racial hate that is so obvious in the U.S.A.
You must log in to post a comment.