Why Palin is not at risk of being the Republican’s Messiah

Charles Krauthammer wrote a nice article tracking Obama’s swift rise and (probably inevitable) decline.  In the section dealing with Obama’s peak moments, Krauthammer compares him to Reagan — and explains why the two men and the public’s reaction to those two men are completely different.  If you substitute Palin’s name every time Krauthammer writes “Reagan,” you’ll see why we’re not at risk of turning Palin into a pathetic political Messiah:

The problem is that Obama began believing in his own magical powers — the chants, the swoons, the “we are the ones” self-infatuation. Like Ronald Reagan, he was leading a movement, but one entirely driven by personality.

Reagan’s revolution was rooted in concrete political ideas (supply-side economics, welfare-state deregulation, national strength) that transcended one man. For Obama’s movement, the man is the transcendence.

Which gave the Obama campaign a cultlike tinge. With every primary and every repetition of the high-flown, self-referential rhetoric, the campaign’s insubstantiality became clear. By the time it was repeated yet again on the night of the last primary (No. 3), the tropes were tired and flat.