Not My Usual Patch…but this line brought back such fond memories
2nd Update: I realize I wasn’t being entirely clear. What’s striking about Siskind’s nonsense is not simply its content, wild enough, but that she wrote this not in the heat of the election and/or its immediate aftermath, but this month, after the spectacular melt down of whatever remained of temporary-Governor Palin’s plausibility. That’s what made Siskind’s doubling down so engrossing, in the same way one can’t look aside from a seven car pileup in the next lane.
“I am a lifelong Democrat who for the first time in my life voted Republican in the 2008 elections. I did this for one reason: McCain selected a woman as his running mate.”
Has Ms. Siskind forgotten that Samantha Bee had nailed this argument long before?
Vodpod videos no longer available.
Has Ms. Siskind really concluded that there is no bar so low that she would choose chromosomal complement over any judgment of fitness for the job?
Does she really, in this October of our discontents actually think that the Sara Palin of fact, rather than form and fantasy, would as Vice President allow her to sleep soundly at night?
If so, I’m impressed.
Horrified, but impressed.
That is all.
Update: It seems to me that Siskind is an example of what DougJ correctly excoriates as the jackass quality of high-Village contrarianism. Siskind is a dull writer (not terrible, just not capable — or interested, perhaps — in delivering any pleasure in her use of language); she’s a deeply pedestrian analyst (Palin trumps Obama because he merely celebrated the NCAA women’s basketball champs, whilst she actually played XX chromosome prep ‘ball); and she’s prone to twisting her facts to and past their tensile limit to defend her “daring” challenges to alleged conventional wisdom (Palin is “open-minded, a centrist and a party noncomformist,” except, of course, she’s not*.)
But she’s a playah, Daily Beast and all that, because she’s hit on that tired old formula that turns on the embrace of (false) intellectual courage. Kaus, as DougJ points out, is the past master this — but so is the laughable Jonah Goldberg, for those that care about the company they keep.
These are the folks that will say whatever it takes (as long as it is satisfying to that section of the elite that signs big paychecks) to paint the other side as dupes and/or liars.
Everyone thinks that climate change is a problem? They’re wrong — and only, say, Leavitt and Dubner have the intellectual chops to see through the delusions.
Everyone believes that Obama will serve the cause of gender equality more than a McCain led, Palin involved adminstration? They’re wrong — and only Siskind has the courage to point out that Palin is a woman…or something.
It’s a great tactic if all you want is a gig. But beyond that, you’ve got to remember a couple of things. You get a choice: you can either resign yourself to the soul-eroding cynicism of knowing that you are uttering nonsense for the money/fame/cocktail party acclaim (are you listening, Peggy Noonan?); or you have to train yourself into belief, which means you have to be willing to will a noticeable drop in your intelligence, your ability to take the measure of the actual world around you in order to preserve that belief inviolate.
*This last link just to illustrate that whatever else she may be, Palin is not a “party nonconformist,” but rather a face of a recognizable wing of the GOP.