The Shield of Achilles: Divorced from reality

Thursday, September 04, 2008

Divorced from reality

Just one more post on the Palin controversy for now.

Andrew Sullivan prints one of those "dissents of the day", a reader that disagrees with him (that's the only way he can respond, since he doesn't allow comments at his site). A quote:

I have been so disappointed in the double standard I have seen you apply over and over again to the McCain and Obama campaigns. ...This week I have seen feminists question whether Sarah should be working, what with her five children and special needs son; I have seen them savage her decision about HER BODY to get on a plane when she was perhaps in early labor. I have seen the majority of the media mock and cast doubt on her experience, her character, her intelligence etc. to the degree that they have NEVER done to Obama, in truth lesser qualified on paper than Gov. Palin. ... That the media doesn't understand how this plays to the general public just shows how insulated and out of touch they are. I have followed campaign after campaign because I am a junkie, and I have never seen this type of venomous treatment of a candidate before. I am not even sure that I won't vote for Obama, but the treatment of Gov Palin makes me sick to my stomach. The media and the bloggers, yourself included, had better prepare for a backlash. If someone like me, 37 years old, mother of three, fiscal conservative but social liberal feels this way, I can guarantee I'm not the only one. I have been so disappointed in this blog; usually so fair and even handed. I am saddened that whatever disillusion you have with the current administration seems to have led you to join the ranks of the rest of the rabid, hypocritical, and out of control media.

"Usually so fair and even handed"? Who is she kidding? Anyway, except for that, there really is no justifiable counter argument, but I have to give Sullivan credit. He contorts heavily and comes up with a pretty creative response:

What the reader doesn't get, I think, is that all the revelations about Obama took place over a very long period of time - months and months. Because Palin is a total unknown and because her past is so colorful, to say the least, and because there are only two months before the election, the media has jumped all over it. That's our job. They have compressed in five or six days what was raised about Obama over twelve months. Of course it seems tougher right now. But I don't believe it is. If Obama's family were as colorful as Palin's, you can bet the press would have been all over it. If Obama's sister had nine kids from two fathers neither of whom she is currently living with, do you really think the press would not have written about it?

This is an illusion created by a very compressed schedule and a totally unvetted candidate...

Get that? The only reason why the media has gone hysterical over a 17 year old girl who is not even running in the election is because of the time crunch until the election! If Sarah Palin had only been running for almost two years, like Obama, this never would have happened! Sullivan cannot possibly be so stupid as this. It doesn't matter if it's 100 stories in year or 100 stories in a month. Invading the privacy of this 17 year old girl is still just as wrong either way. And he's wrong about Obama's family anyway - he's got quite a few colorful relatives; he has a brother living in absolute poverty on less than a dollar a month in Nairobi, Kenya (which would be kind of embarrassing for a sitting President), and claims to have cousin-in-law who is a black Jewish Rabbi (pretty unusual, and certainly colorful). And these are just the tip of the iceberg. But the media shys away from this because Obama is their darling and they don't want to make waves.

Previously, Sullivan, like so many others, gave a different excuse for targeting Gov. Palin's children:

Brandishing a child with Down Syndrome as a campaign statement is daring the press to ask questions about him.

Disgusting. Yes - the family simply accompanying Gov. Palin at the convention equates to "brandishing" or "parading" them around. Of course, if they weren't there, he would be one of the first to accuse them of a "cover up" or being ashamed of their child. And as Palin sexism watch states: