Evan Sayet, writing at Front Page, discovers that his liberal interlocutor in a coffee house conversation hates Sarah Palin with a white hot passion, but (surprise, surprise!) on being pressed is unable to identify exactly what Palin political positions she opposes. It must not be positions, he concludes, that drive liberals round the bend. It has to be who she is, her life story.
what is it about Ms. Palinâ€™s life story that generates this blind loathing? The answer is that, at every turn, Ms. Palinâ€™s story debunks the myths of victimization and self-centeredness that is at the heart of the modern liberal ideology.
First, Ms. Palin is married with children. The Democrat Partyâ€™s treasured storyline is that women with children â€“ especially those who take care of them themselves â€“ are oppressed, victimized and doomed to a life without personal fulfillment. Ms. Palinâ€™s life proves them wrong and the Democrats hate her for this. If Ms. Palin were a Democrat she would have offed the last child before he was born so that she could have more â€œmeâ€ time to pursue her own wants and pleasures. There is clearly something very â€œwrongâ€ with this woman who allowed her â€œspecial needsâ€ child to live. They hate her for that.
One of the most obvious demographic differences between the Left and the Right is that people without children â€“ those too self-centered and jealous of others stealing â€œtheirâ€ attention, angry and hate-filled â€œfeminists,â€ radical homosexuals and school children too young to have started a family â€” are just about guaranteed to pull the lever for anyone with a â€œDâ€ next to their names. Those married with children are just as assured to pull the lever for someone from the Right.
And Sarah Palin ran a small business. Democrats donâ€™t run businesses. In fact, Democrats donâ€™t do anything. If you eliminated from the voting roll everyone who did nothing other than talk â€“ the academic, the newscaster, the actor, the politician â€“ and those who game the system, collecting welfare and years of unemployment benefits and â€œworkmanâ€™s compensationâ€ and food stamps, how many people would be left voting Democrat?
Letâ€™s put it this way, if having had a job â€“ having done something that required either physical labor or risking oneâ€™s own money â€“ were a prerequisite to work in the White House, Barack Obama would have to fire 94 percent of his top advisers. Thatâ€™s a real number. Ninety four percent of Obamaâ€™s top advisers have never done anything like run a small store, paint a bridge, wire a house for electricity or anything else other than flap their lips.
This is the genesis of the notion that Palin is â€œstupid.â€ Liberals are convinced that thereâ€™s something â€œthe matterâ€ with people who have jobs. This is what they mean by â€œWhatâ€™s the Matter with Kansas,â€ Kansas being a place where people work â€“ Hollywood, Cambridge Massachusetts, the TV studios in Manhattan are places were people talk. To the liberal, anyone who has a job must be stupid, after all, not everyone is as good a talker as they are, but surely everyone can find one excuse or another to sit at home and collect welfare.
In fact, to the modern liberal, anyone who has a job is not just stupid, he (or she) is dangerous. These people â€œclingâ€ to their guns and their religion because they toil for their reward. These people are constantly on the verge of violence, whether itâ€™s an attack like the one they caused in Tucson (according to the leftist script) or just by going home and beating their children. Consider the lyrics of â€œthe working manâ€™s troubadourâ€ by Bruce Springsteen:
Early in the morning/factory whistle blows
Man rises from bed and puts on his clothes.
Man takes his lunch, walks out in the morning line
Thatâ€™s the work, the workinâ€™, thatâ€™s the workinâ€™ life.
End of the day/Factory whistle cries
Man walks through them gates with death in their eyes.
And you just better believe, boy, somebodyâ€™s gonna get it tonight.
(Why?) Cause thatâ€™s the work, the workinâ€™ thatâ€™s that workinâ€™ life!
Sarah Palin is stupid and dangerous because, well, to those who have made their millions by doing nothing other than talking, thatâ€™s the work, the workinâ€™ thatâ€™s the workinâ€™ life. Just in case you think thatâ€™s just one example of Springsteenâ€™s take on anyone who has a job, consider the horrors of his â€œdaddyâ€ who â€œworked his whole life, for nothing but the pain.â€ In this song, â€œAdam Raised a Cain,â€ daddy, of course, beats his children, â€œnow he walks these empty rooms searching for something to blame.â€ And, in fact, it gets worse because, clearly, a child who is beaten is going to continue that cycle of violence and beat his child (â€œyou inherit the sins/you inherit the flamesâ€). So, even to the most sympathetic leftist like Springsteen, not one, not two, but three generations are destroyed all because â€œdaddyâ€ had to go to work.
And they hate Sarah Palin because she joined the PTA and made things better. No, no, thatâ€™s not supposed to happen. Schools (read: the teachersâ€™ union) need more money, only more money will solve the problems in the schools. Sarah Palin must be destroyed!
And, finally, they hate Sarah Palin because she was a successful mayor and governor. The Democrat Party narrative is that the American people are too stupid to successfully govern themselves and need Harvard and Yale elitists to dictate to them how they should live their lives. If a graduate of the University of Idaho can successfully run the biggest state in the union, then so can a kid who graduated from Texas A & M or even a kid with a degree from Eureka College.
I think he’s on to something.
Read the whole thing.