The eastern conservative disease

J.R. Dunn:

...

We need to know the precise reasons why too many of the core commentators of our movement turned on Sarah Palin. That is the only way that we can discover if the situation can be salvaged. What we've heard so far is only part of the truth, at best. The response to Palin by such figures as Brooks, Frum, Brookhiser, Buckley, Parker, and Noonan (Krauthammer and Will have been considerably more rational, if still mistaken) has been the farthest thing in the world from reasoned. It has been vicious and feral. People do not react to a merely disagreeable political figure in this manner. All the individuals I mentioned, including Krauthammer and Will in this case, have attacked the McCain/Palin ticket with more ferocity than they have Barack Obama, the most socialist presidential candidate since Henry Wallace. This requires an explanation.

People react that way only to threats. We have to know precisely why the conservative elite is threatened by a successful conservative governor to the point that they have completely lost their bearings. The reasons we've heard so far are nonsense -- you don't call a woman a "cancer" because she says "like" too much or wears flashy shoes. If these questions are not answered, then we will be obliged to formulate our own.

My opinion is no mystery to readers of this site -- that the urban conservative crowd is frightened of Palin because she represents a threat to the standard model of conservatism constructed since the wilderness years of the 1930s, in which a highly-educated and well-connected East Coast coterie led a much larger, less-informed heartland contingent. This, like it or not, is elitism. By their very nature, elites tend to corrode over time. And Sarah Palin, through the very fact of her showing up, has revealed this to be the case in our circle. She upset the enclave conservative applecart, and now they are angry -- a lot angrier than they have been at any lefties in recent memory.

...

I think they may spend too much time with liberals and have not done the hard work of refuting their arguments. From here on the Texas Prairie it is easier to see the hypocrisy of the left that questions Palin's qualifications but ignores Obama's lack of qualifications. But then I don't waste my time socializing with liberals. I don't find them very interesting and I certainly do not agree with their opinion of conservatives.

You need to start with the premise that infects virtually all liberals. They think if you were really smart you would agree with them on everything.

I recall a Peggy Noonan piece during the 2000 campaign where she was worried because AlGore was smarter than Bush. To get there she had to overlook Gore's lack of academic achievement and his flunking out of divinity school. She also had to overlook Bush's MBA from Harvard which is no small accomplishment. I chalked it up at the time to her spending too much time at cocktail parties with liberals in New York and not enough time really thinking about the question. One of the lessons from this is mingling with liberals can diminish your intellect.

I think Palin is intelligent because I agree with her on most issues. On the big things, national security, energy and taxes she is far smarter than Obama and Biden. Biden is not smart at all. Obama is smart only in the sense that he hides his ignorance better than most liberals. What he does not know about the three main issues in this race is scary.