T'Aint "Elitist" to Be Anti-Palin

I HATE TO pull rank here. But it seems I am almost the only Republican still standing who can criticize Sarah Palin without being accused by my fellow conservatives of suffering from an "elite education. "

Peggy Noonan, David Brooks, Christopher Buckley, Kathleen Parker and [my husband] David Frum have all had their heads put on pikes by the self-appointed rulers of Conservatism. As Rush Limbaugh said:

These are the people who are embarrassed by Sarah Palin 'cause she's not an intellectual and she didn't go to Harvard or have a college degree from approved universities and she drops her g's from words like morning and says mornin'. She's embarrassing, and I think something else really bothering these people is that they believe that she may become one of the key leaders of the conservative movement beyond 2008 if she and McCain lose this.

Those with degrees from approved universities are capable of mounting their own defense. But what about those of us who did not go to Harvard -- and yet whose eyes still bug out at the prospect of a Palin vice presidency, let alone the prospect of her as a "key leader"in the future?

In fact, not only did I NOT go to Harvard, I have no education to speak of. Not beyond high school anyway (and it was one of those large, urban high schools from which many of the most successful graduates went on to become garage mechanics). To paraphrase Melville, a tabloid newspaper was my Yale and my Harvard (and yes, it is possible to have read Melville without attending Yale and Harvard. It's Sarah Palin's kind of story, too: lots of huntin' and guttin' ).

My lack of post-secondary education isn't something I'm proud of. Certainly I've never been moved to boast about it in public. Honestly, if I'd had more sense at eighteen, I would have gone to college -- preferably, an elite one. But I grew up in a newspaper family and was eager to join the business. So instead of spending my early twenties engaged in discussions of Keynes and Friedman, I found myself knocking on the metal doors of public housing developments, asking residents for recent photos of their murdered children. I never said "Get me rewrite" because, more often than not, I WAS rewrite. And like Palin, I was raised to disdain anyone who thought himself too clever or above everyone else (usually a reporter from the competing broadsheet). In my world, an elite degree marked you as someone with permanently retarded judgment, a reader of The New Yorker -- the sort of person of whom Orwell would write, "Only an intellectual could say something so stupid."

Maybe it's because of my background that I've been wary of Palin from the get-go -- and more than taken aback by those who insist the only reason a conservative could oppose her would be because of intellectual snobbery.

Don't get me wrong: I love the idea of Sarah Palin. She conforms to an early American (and pre-feminist) ideal of womanhood: rifle on one hip, baby on the other. I love her modern incarnation of this ideal, complete with Sex-in-the-Tundra wardrobe and kick-ass Jimmy Choos (even if they are paid for by the RNC). I love the idea she represents "common sense" over fancy-pants theorizing. I love -- and certainly identify with -- her real world, "out there" experience over her opponents' closed-off years in Washington. Truly, there are few women I'd rather share a beer with.

The problem is that the reality of Sarah Palin does not match the idea of Sarah Palin. It's as plain as day -- glaringly obvious! -- that she's unfit for the job she's running for. We wouldn't expect the best darn regional car saleswoman to be appointed the next vice president of General Motors. We wouldn't fly in a commercial plane piloted by someone with a Cessna license because we trusted her gut. We wouldn't follow a woman into battle because she's a crack shot at moose hunting. Why is it unreasonable -- or snobbish! -- to have expected a better choice from our party for the next potential leader of the free world?

And please don't reply with, "The other side doesn't have experience either!" That's an argument you can make without having graduated from elementary school.

Those of us who came of age as Reagan Republicans expected more from ourselves. Leave the left to its demagoguery and name-calling. We'll make the case using facts, reason - -and yes, common sense.

Now it seems my side are the ones circling the wagons, shouting abuse at dissenters -- determined to lose rather than ask ourselves why we aren't winning.

As Orwell once might have said...

Comments

[sixx]

The corporate sponsors who put GW Bush at the top desperately want to keep Palin viable. They'll dump McCain at any time. The dumb, folksy President GW Bush has made many Republicans large sums of money, and the Bush model will not be discarded without a fight. This will be the Republican battle in the coming years, whether to continue the dumb figurehead or go with some quality. The fact that Palin was selected the VP candidate shows which faction is currently in the lead.

[kymlosang]

great article!! i think you hit the nail on the head regarding palin. she is just a nightmare for the mccain ticket. he should have vetted her and this is the result of an impulse decision. more the reason these two can not be elected in. everybody must see that by now. sadly a contingency doesnt and think she is just amazing.

[bigbadsam]

I have a commercia licence. Never heard of a "Cessna License". Stick to politics.

[belle92]

.. but you need to be certified for the type plane you fly ..

[FirstShirt]

With respect, Danielle, your bio says you live in DC with a speechwriter.

Palin grew up and became a governor in a man's world in Alaska. She didn't just belong to the PTA and read about feminism. She became her own woman, like her or not...just like a man.

Can you honestly compare your life with hers? Not if you are objective.

[belle92]

"man's world"??? pleeez ...

[Vladdycat]

Not too impressed with your assesment of Palin's lack of skills, nor your bragging about subscribing to the rhetoric of Ronanald Regan. Your chioce of husband, priceless.

[Ben is right]

Since when is there a qualification list for President of the United States, other than the basics of must be at least 35 years of age, a natural-born citizen, etc.? Is there such a list in anyone's mind? If so, I'd like to know what that list is, so that I may make a more informed choice on election day. Shouldn't the choice be based on the electorate's judgment of those running? Isn't this writer attempting to color that judgment? Is there another qualification, other than the basics and this writer's approval or disapproval? Does this writer's opinion matter more than mine, on the basis of her syndication on this website and elsewhere? What, exactly, is the point of this piece? Who cares, really? All important questions, I believe.

[brynn6]

Everyone has their own list. It is their own vote after all. Some lists will contain only one item while others may take more than one sheet of paper. Your judgment is what counts and if you are open-minded and want all the input you can find you will consider all well-reasoned arguments. Facts are what I look for. Opinions are, after all, only opinions.

My name is brynn6 and I approve this message (grin)

[Ben is right]

I absolutely agree, brynn6. That's exactly the point I was trying to make. It seems that 90% of the opposition to Palin, at least in terms of this article and comments, concerns a perceived lack of intelligence. I would say that this perception is incorrect and is based on ignorance of the subject. Either way, there are more important things to think about than what Sarah Palin might score on an IQ test. Would you agree?

You mention well-reasoned arguments and facts. What are your well-reasoned arguments? What facts do you see which color your opinion on the matter?

[paulfree17]

While it is true that if your are 35 and a natural born citizen you have the right to run for president. Those are the legal requirements. It does not mean you are qualified to be president. While it is true that there is no test of Presidential qualifications maybe there should be some minimum requirement.

After all, to practice a lot of professions you need to pass some sort of test. To fly a plane you have to pass a test. To teach you have to be certified. To be a CPA, a doctor, a lawyer, you have to have demonstrated some basic training and competence.

Maybe we need to have a similar basic qualification test for any public office. An incompetent pilot can kill a plane load of passengers. An incompetent doctor can kill a patient. An incompetent president with his or her finger on the button can destroy the world.

[Ben is right]

I would be inclined to agree with you, if I thought it would help. I don't think it would. Airline pilots still crash planes. Doctors still botch operations. Lawyers lose cases.

It is a matter of judgment of the voter, and that was the point I was making. That's probably the best way. I was trying to say was that the writer of this piece was offering her opinion based on her judgment. However, she seemed to represent her judgment as definitive.

That's all I was saying. I stand by that.

[Kojerk]

Many on the Right are choosing to remain ignorant (or, at least, feign ignorance) of the real reason why many of us dislike Palin: It's that she's a talking head for the worst kind of "movement conservatism", an ideology whose bankruptcy need not be detailed here (the failure of "trickle down" economics, the Bush doctrine, free-market fundamentalism, etc.) I don't care what she wears, how many g's she drops from the end of words, or how great she is at field dressing a moose. She is just another in an unfortunately long line of people espousing hateful rhetoric and championing sick opportunism. She, more than John McCain, represents a continuation of America's most destructive ideologies and policies.

[Teeninchee]

perfect

[OkieIntellectual]

Great article, but there’s one thing I just don’t understand. What’s with all the intellectu­al-bashing­? It seems to be the national pastime for anyone right-of-center. What is it about an intellectual that is so vile and unacceptable that we are looked down and spat upon by… well almost everyone. What is it about being intelligent, educated, thoughtful, and unashamed of those qualities that strikes so much fear into people that they feel the need to attack us for expressing opinions? Do we not get to do that, do we not get to have a voice because people are inexplicably intimidated by us?

I know I know, its because we’re all arrogant & think we’re better than everyone else. Now personally I have a pretty low opinion of myself as a human being, but when I walk into a room I know that chances are I have the highest IQ and the most education or anyone there. And I refuse to feign shame for that or to dumb myself down for the comfort of others.

Oh and by the way, News Flash (and its gonna sting folks)… some people ARE better than others. EVERYONE considers themselves to be better than or above someone else, whether its your boss, your least-favorite politician, or some dirty homeless crack head. If you say you don’t, you’re a liar and you’re boring.

[Ben is right]

I don't feel an ideological bent to your writing, so I can't tell if you're a Democrat or a Republican. You obviously, by your own admission, are an intellectual. You disagree with the bashing of intellectuals. I believe the derision poured on intellectuals, of late, is due to the fact that they, while claiming to be intellectual, cast judgment upon someone about whom they know very little. That, certainly, is enough to deserve derision, I believe. The fact that their judgments are unanimously negative brings a sense of a mob or a gang, with an innocent as its target who needs to be rescued. In short, the derision is deserved because intellectuals are not using their vaunted intellect in forming their judgments, and they are piling on, creating a backlash. I have poured a little derision myself. In my experience, the reaction is not against intellectualism or all intellectuals, but against those who have participated in this particular activity.

[Michale32086]

Ben.... is right... :D

Michale...­..

[11907281]

"while claiming to be intellectual, cast judgment upon someone about whom they know very little." - Straw men don't put up much of a fight. So you are saying only 1 person on your ticket should be open to criticism but both on our ticket are open for criticism? THEY refuse to put her out there and it's the intellectuals fault for critiquing what they have to work with? Pretty nice deal you guys set-up, but it won't work this time. The reality is that intellectual bashing is part of the pander package they setup for the religious right to demonize those evil intellectuals who try to kill god by teaching evolution. You guys have been bashing intellectuals way before Palin and you will continue to bash them long after Palin, after all it's part of the religious right pander package.

[OkieIntellectual]

Well I guess that's part of the beauty of being an intellectual. (this is gonna sound really pretentious, but I don't mean it that way) Having much more experience with truly critical thinking than most folks affords one the skills to make accurate judgements about a particular subject quicker and with less information.

Its all about intellectual experience, and by "intellectual" I'm refering to the act and behavior of actively using one's critical thinking skills and one's education all the time. Most folks don't really do that. In my experience, most people are content to wake up, go to work, come home, eat dinner, then veg out in front of the TV for an evening of reality shows, all without ever really engaging their brain to a level which actually matches their intelligence. (see what I did there, giving folks credit for being smarter than they allow themselves to be)

[KareninSac]

Well said, thank you. I would have felt the same way about Sarah Palin had she been a Democrat or a man. She is patently unqualified for the office she is running for. PERIOD.

People, America is in a real bad way right now, and we need solutions. Palin was not a solution, just a gimmick.

[FirstShirt]

Yet you democrats will not blink or even blush at the obvious double standard.

Obama has less executive governmental experience than Palin. No problem to the Rose Colored Glasses crowd.

[JMBrodie]

Let Palin go through the gauntlet, like Obama did. Until then, she has proven nothing. Let her answer for the AIP, her husband's involvement in it, the hateful anti-American language of its founder.

Let her answer questions about her patriotism.

Let her answer for the political scandal, the bridge to nowhere, her association with a convicted felon.

Let her go into the "enemy camp" at MSNBC as Obama did with O'Reilly.

Let her be grilled on her foreign policy positions, let her defend her stance on the Bush Doctrine, the Surge, Bin laden, Georgia, Iran, North Korea.

Let her answer for where those of us who don't live in small towns fit into her vision of America.

Let's hear he defend or repudiate the acts of those who work on her behalf. Let's hear her make a speech about how we are all Americans -- or does she not believe that?

Let her go through 21 months of scrutiny, a real public vetting, then talk to me about double standards.

[gemstone1000]

"Leave the left to its demagoguery and name-calling. We'll make the case using facts, reason - -and yes, common sense."

Are you kidding me? Nobody can demagogue like the Republicans can. Also, I can't remember the last time I noticed a Republican using facts, reason or common sense. Oh, wait a minute. Yes, I do remember. It was President Eisenhower when he said: "In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist." Now there was a great Republican.

[Michale32086]

So, because the Right does it, that makes it perfectly OK for the Left??

Is that your position??

Michale...­..

[brynn6]

Illogical strawman question. I know you love to have your fun, but please hang up and dial again.

[Ben is right]

Apparently, a great Republican is one who agrees with you, a non-Republican. How does that demonstrate the use of reason or common sense?

[FirstShirt]

"Also, I can't remember the last time I noticed a Republican using facts, reason or common sense. "

Well, unless your attention span is less than about 15 seconds, try this fact: Biden said Obama was not qualifed to be President.

[Michale32086]

ZIIING....

Michale...­..

[brynn6]

He was running against him at the time. What did you expect? Politics is for grown-ups.

[jessieo]

Thank you. Lately I have been questioning my own disdain of SP and thinking that maybe I am being unfair. I am happy to have renewed faith that most people think she is ignorant at best, and quite possibly corrupt at worst.

[brynn6]

Worse than ignorant, willfully ignorant. IS corrupt and was found guilty by a panel of 10 Republicans and 4 Democrats. Then flat-out denied the verdict. Any expectation she might have had that the Personnel Board (which she can fire at will) would come up with a different verdict was crushed when they hired the best lawyer they could find for protection. Sarah has a long history of vindictive firings.

There is a lot more coming: The pipeline she likes to tout is under investigation for illegal contract-fixing among other things. She's going to have to reveal who Todd's buddies were that built their $552,000 house at the same time the money-pit sports complex she pushed through was being built a mile away. Wasilla needed a sewage treatment plant which they can't build even now because this money-pit left the previously debt-free city over $20M in debt. Not my idea of fiscal responsibility.

There is more and more and more. I would take an essay to list all the lies and distortions about this travesty John McCain tried to foist on us.

[gogobigO]

yes and obviously ben you have never read any comments from the actual people of Alaska....­Because i was VERY curious where McTic got his poll that SP was the most popular governor ........??­??? I think if maybe you've read any Alaskan newspapers. The people of Alaska aren't thinking LOVE and popularity for their governor at all but, impeachment, unfairness, corruption. Most feel like they have been swindled. go to adn.com and read for yourself..­...

[Ben is right]

Most people? Have you taken a poll? I didn't catch the results. Could you re-post them? Thanks.

[joecairo]

A wonderful article. However, the point of not needing much brain power to win the "experience" argument has me pondering. If experience alone were a guarantee of governing success, then the combined years of governmental experience of the Bush cabinet(s) should have us all a lot better off than we are.

Plus, there is experience and then there is EXPERIENCE. Given the high rev motor that Barack Obama possesses and the ultra-high wattage of the man's intellect, the years he has spent in public service have not been frittered away.

I go where the Smart Money goes. The brightest guy in the room usually has the advantage. Combine that with a calm, steady demeanor that seems unflappable and you've got some compelling reasons to cheer an Obama victory

[dozaa]

Not to mention he is an expert in Constitutional Law.....wh­ile she doesn't know the difference between the Constitution and the Pledge of the Allegiance.

[Downwithdumbness]

Danille: The point should not be about Palin's lack of refinement, eloquence, sophistication or an Ivy education, What is disturbing about her is her lack of knowledge and curiosity about the world beyond Alaska. Forget about books--she does not appear to read newspapers, or know much about current events, or basic historical facts She barely knows anything about the war in Iraq--basic stuff you get from paying attention to the papers or even watching the nightly news!! (the MSM is too Communist for her I guess). And traveling to different countries, which Palin has evidently never done, is hardly so bourgeois. This woman is insular and knows nothing except some talking points that have been crammed into her empty head. This isn't about the superficial trappings of formal education. I DO NOT WANT A PRESIDENT OR A VP WHO DOESN"T EVEN SEEM TO READ THE NEWSPAPER!! The cocktail party elitism argument is Bulls*$#T. And if she was a man, of course, she would have never been the pick. She would have been laughed out of town by the GOP

[Ben is right]

I see a lot of commentary about how Palin doesn't read the newspaper. So? Do you read the newspaper? If so, which newspaper do you read? Would any newspaper suffice? Does it have to be a specific newspaper? What if the reason she doesn't read newspapers is that she's too busy getting things done? Perhaps she, the busy governor, mother of five, wife, daughter, sister and friend has chosen her priorities, and her priorities don't include sitting around reading newspapers. Is that so wrong? I ask you.

[seenitall]

you are joking...h­ow much dumber do expect this country to be? she at least needs an eighth-grade civics refresher.­..with pictures, of course.

[arrogantsob]

It is her job to know what is going on in the world. If she has to spend so much time with her family then she shouldn't have run for governor. If she is not intellectually curious, then she is not qualified to be dog catcher. Albert Einstein said " I am not smart but I am intellectually curious." He was modest but you get the point.

[gogobigO]

you must be joking right? wow. SHE is the one that said she was a voracious reader ok????? Then when asked what she does read, "what do you make sure you do read?" We got the usual deer in headlights look, she couldnt come up with an answer. "Oh gosh....we­ll, i just read ya know?" who the he!! doesnt have a clue what they read??? Its plain and simple, SHE DOESNT...a­nother lie shes told us!!!! LOL and what is sooo funny about it, is she blamed the media for a 'gotcha' question..­.seriously folks.

[Downwithdumbness]

So you don't really care that she knows nothing about the war, the Iraqi government, the problems facing an administration that claims the US can "win" the war (ha) ? You don't care that she knows nothing about the job description of the VP and the constitutional role of the VP (grade school stuff, yes), given all the recent discomfort with Cheney's abuses of power? You don't care that she doesn't know what the Securities and Exchange Commission is or does, or what is involved in choosing Supreme COurt justices (judicial activism, huh?), let alone whether Syria is a friend or a foe of the US?

Wow. Your standards for vice president and president of the United States are astonishingly low. And this is what is wrong with America. The Bush years dumbed some Americans down to the point that they will, in all seriousness, accept this as reasonable. It almost makes me weep.

[seenitall]

one more thing, Danielle..­.you are married to the guy who thought he could ambush Rachel Maddow...d­id he consult with you about taking that approach..­.you know, dishonest with the show's producers? Of course, Rachel handled herself with aplomb and he was left to skulk back home and try to spin it away from his dishonesty. For that reason, I really question your motives with this piece.

[brynn6]

Yep. I literally applauded her. She was in control the whole time and never had to raise her voice. Class wins over Rogue every time.

[seenitall]

must be her high falutin Oxford education.­..:-)

[ctman47]

If there are more like you, then there is hope for the GOP yet.