The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
The Largest Selection of Liberal-baiting Merchandise on the Net!
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email

AmSpecBlog

Conservatives and Palin, Continued

Matt Lewis responds, and I'll take on a few of his points.

He writes that, "here is where I think Philip misses it.  His analogy of Bush and Palin is a false one. Unlike my criticisms of Bush, the criticism directed at Palin has had nothing to do with philosophical reasons.  Instead, her unforgivable sin was in merely giving a few unimpressive interviews."

But that was precisely my point. If the criticism directed at Palin isn't philosophical, than how can it have any bearing on whether or not the person doing the criticizing is a true conservative?

Lewis also observes:

It seems to me that there are essentially three groups of people who have specific problems with Palin that has resulted in their resenting her.  They are as follows:

1.  Intellectuals -- I'm quite familiar with great thinkers such as Burke, Kirk, Hayek, Friedman, et al.  But I also have great admiration for men like Rush Limbaugh and Ronald Reagan -- both decidedly anti-elitist conservatives.  My suspicion is that much of the criticism of Palin is actually an elitist tendency to be suspicious of anyone who hasn't spent years working in government or academia. 

... It just strikes me as too much of a coincidence that Palin's greatest defenders have been men like Fred Thompson and Rush Limbaugh, while her loudest detractors have tended to be members of the conservative Intelligentsia.  Could it be that they view outsiders like Palin as merely rubes?

I don't think it's fair to say that Palin's critics "resent" her. Speaking for myself, I actually like Palin and think she's a fine governor of Alaska. However, that is a completely separate matter from whether or not I think she's qualified to take over as President of the United States on a moment's notice. I'm also a bit tired of conservatives dismissing honest criticism as somehow elitist, and I don't think such anti-intellectualism is healthy for the movement.

Lewis brings up Reagan. But if you go back and read Reagan's a 1964 "A Time for Choosing" speech, or, if you prefer something unscripted, his 1967 debate with RFK just a few months into his governorship, it reveals somebody who has a true philosophical understanding of conservatism as well as a person who has thought seriously about world affairs. He may have been anti-elitist, but he certainly wasn't anti-intellectual.

In any event, if Lewis wants to call people who criticize Palin "elitist," that's an entirely different question from whether or not they are truly conservatives.

topics:
Conservatism, Alaska

Comments

Leave a Comment

Related Articles

ADVERTISEMENT

Are you in a mob?

The Democrats say Obamacare opponents are a mob. Are they right?

         

Participating in this survey will subscribe you to the American Spectator email newsletter. You may unsubscribe at any time.

Members to Watch

Philip Klein

* * * *

The 39 Democrats Who Voted "No"

Philip Klein

* * * *

Pelosi's Pyrrhic Victory?

Philip Klein

* * * *

Pro-Life Amendment Passes Easily

Philip Klein

* * * *

The Stupak Amendment

W. James Antle, III

* * * *

One Step Forward, Two Races Back

George Neumayr

* * * *

Divisive Unanimity

Daniel J. Flynn

* * * *

Joe Wilson, Call Your Office

Larry Thornberry

* * * *

ACORN's Big Spender

Matthew Vadum

* * * *

The Spirit of 1989

Doug Bandow

* * * *

The Somali-Kenya Connection

George H. Wittman

* * * *

Tex Mess

William Murchison

* * * *

Feeding the Beast

Philip Klein

* * * *
ADVERTISEMENT