9 December, 2010: The Guardian: If only talking about Sarah Palin didn't boost her power

The Guardian (UK) If only talking about Sarah Palin didn't boost her power She treats criticism of her as proof that she is the lone outsider, one of the common folk, pilloried by a corrupt media

Were she still an actual politician, Sarah Palin's domination of the American political landscape in 2010 would be impressive. That she hasn't actually held office since July 2009 – when she resigned as governor of Alaska – makes her, well, I hesitate to use the word "influence" so let's just say ubiquity, downright extraordinary.



Interactive calendar Who were the heroes and villains of this year? From now till Christmas Eve, you'll find a new one each morning in our advent calendar Despite representing and certainly encouraging the ugliest elements of politics in America today, Palin was not my first choice for a villain of 2010. Not because she is in any way unvillainous, but partly because talking about her only seems to boost her power. Criticism in the mainstream (no, I will NOT use her coinage "lamestream") media is to her what blood is to a vampire: a life giving sustenance that ultimately may well destroy the source.

This is because Palin is a master of that school of politics known as turnthatfrownupsidedownology. This is when skilled practitioners take what would generally be seen as a negative and whip it up into a positive, and it's a skill she brought to new heights, or depths, of perfection this year. Thus, criticism of her in the press is proof that she is the lone outsider, one of the common folk, the speaker of truth, pilloried by a corrupt press intent on keeping the elite in power, never mind that with her estimated annual earnings at $12m (£8m) at least, she has about as much to do with common folk as Julia Roberts.

To anyone who doubts whether Palin really can keep spinning her own lack of political knowledge, experience or even current post into a convincing presidential candidacy in 2012, behold how she has managed to refashion that most inane of modern culture phenomena – reality TV – into a political gesture. Dancing with the Stars became the subject of national political debate when it was rumoured that the real reason behind Bristol Palin's endurance as one of the contestants despite her lack of dancing talent was mass voting from the Tea Partyists. Perhaps they confused host Tom Bergeron with news broadcaster Tom Brokaw and thought Dancing with the Stars was another midterm election.

Never known for self-restraint, the Palins appeared in not one but two reality TV shows this year, Dancing with the Stars and Sarah Palin's Alaska, in which Palin introduces viewers to the state where, as Jon Stewart put it, "bountiful lands are teaming with strained Palin political metaphors" (a fence her husband built to keep out a nosy journalist neighbour was "what we need to do to secure our nation's borders"; any sighting of a bear was "a mama grizzly, defending her cubs"; etc etc)

Even though the show fails to provide any material evidenceto support Palin's asserted self-image as an all-shootin', all-huntin' normal kinda gal (aside from the reliance on private planes and luxury coaches, it was evident by the end of the first episode that Palin has fewer outdoor skills than Bridget Jones), she has now achieved a status akin to that of the dictator of a corrupt country: no matter how many times the leader's deficiencies have been exposed, they retain a Christ-like position in the eyes of the faithful.

The question of how realistic a President Palin scenario is, has been exercising the pens of US political commentators all year, and will continue to do so until she quits her tiresome teasing and announces whether or not she will run. Optimists say the fact that only about 50% of the candidates Palin endorsed in the midterms won, coupled with Bristol's eventual ejection from Dancing with the Stars, proves that Palin's popularity only takes her so far.

I say that the fact we are talking about the relation between Dancing with the Stars and a presidential election shows that Palin has, in a sense, already won in the dumbing down of American politics to a place where celebrity trumps skills.

And to return to my earlier point, another reason Palin wasn't my first choice was because I considered citing the man who has done more than anyone to keep her in the public eye and bestow her with a certain kind of credibility. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you, the one and only Rupert Murdoch, who keeps her both on TV (Fox News) and in publishing (HarperCollins).

But only one of them can and very likely will run for president in 2012. I never thought I'd say this but, frankly, I'd rather have President Murdoch.