|
Lileks on the hating of Sarah Palin: "I swear, its the heels."
So Davids apologized; good. Not going to carp. My work here is done! Yes, my piece in the New York Post pushed him over the edge, and activated his contrition glands. (Kidding, in case youre tone-deaf.) It would seem mulish to continue the matter - and its not like there arent greater matters to consume us. . . .One of the things I found interesting about the matter was the position Palin continues to occupy in many peoples minds; its as if the Right was making Geraldine Ferraro jokes deep into the opening measures of the Reagan administration. As I may have said before, Im less interested in Palin herself than what she does to other people, because its funny. Todays example comes from Matt Yglesias, (h/t contentions) blog, and it has to do with the real story of the day, Iran. Its interesting to see people unwittingly demonstrate that they dont spend a lot of time dealing with disparate opinion: Ahmadinejad is in most ways a classic right-winger, a demagogic nationalist and cultural conservative. In a manner somewhat reminiscent of a Sarah Palin, however,... Youll be forgiven if you bale out at that point, be you left or right; its like a conservative commentator ruminating about whether Kim Jong-Il uses the rhetoric reminiscent of Rev. Wright. Perspective. Proportionality. But note how cultural conservative becomes conceptually elongated, so right-wingers who may, for example, not wish to redefine marriage become bunkmates with someone who denies the existence of homosexuals, and whose regime hangs them from lampposts. Well, we know the right-wingers here would, if they could, right? Its only the possibility of bad PR that keeps Dick Cheney from setting his daughter on fire. As for demagogic nationalism, one suspects that Yglesias finds demagogy in anyone who talks about love of country and the great things America has done without landing with both feet on a big wet BUT, and then goes on read the syllabus from a Howard Zinn course. I didnt love America any less in the Clinton years than I did in the Bush years, or vice versa; I dont conflate my opinions about transitory leaders with my opinion about the nations role in history and its exceptional, if occasionally improvised, conflicted, and compromised struggle to do the right thing. I mean, go back in history and find another one of us. (Note: small ethnically coherent Nordic states that cant project power six feet over the border really dont count.) But unqualified love of country unnerves some people, as though the lack of qualifications means you dont recognize qualifying factors. Me, I think theyre obvious; were made of humans, after all, and every house we build has beams of crooked timber. But I dont recall a lot of FDR speeches laying out a litany of American sins in order to bolster the case for why America should fight Hitler, despite all those troubling similarities. After all, we lynched Jews, too, ergo we must face our own demons as well as those abroad. And so on. Its interesting how he mentions Ahmadinejads demogogy, his language of class resentment, painting his more pragmatic and reformist opponents as decadent elites out of touch with ordinary people, and his populist use of oil revenues, and Sarah Palin comes to mind instead of Chavez - who, after all, called Ahamdi to tender a warm congrats. I swear, its the heels. They just make some men feel so small. In any case, when she gives a speech at the UN and later describes how she felt herself enveloped in a godly glow, give me a call. Posted by: Mike 2009-06-16 |
| http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=272135 |