November 11, 2008

Kathleen Parker just found a new BFF

Norah Vincent calls herself a "libertarian fiscal conservative," and in today's L.A. Times, she writes a column about how she's begun to regret that she didn't vote this year...for Obama:

I have, to my great surprise, found myself moved to tears by the president-elect, by his poise and graciousness, not to mention what seems to be his almost Hegelian historical significance. I now wonder if I missed out on the moment. Am I going to feel a little caught out one day when I have to say that I did not vote for him? Or will I feel vindicated by what will surely be the many and great disappointments of the Obama administration?
She then goes on to briefly discuss some of the possible downsides to trusting "someone, anyone, who can manage to get himself elected in a democracy, and moreover someone who can do it while moving you to tears," Concluding that someone like that "is either P.T. Barnum or Gandhi." And then she returns to polishing his knob:
Maybe he's just an absurdly hopeful person with a lot of energy and belief who can strike the infinitely delicate balance of making the masses happy while sticking to his core beliefs. Maybe he's someone who knows how to tell us what we want to hear while at the same time doing what needs to be done. At this point, it's anybody's guess.

But whatever the case, watching Obama, I can't help myself. I feel proud of us. I think the world is actually proud of us too, and more than a little surprised. It didn't think we had it in us. To tell you the truth, neither did I. We -- well, actually, you -- didn't elect a black man to the presidency. You elected someone who is an incredibly inspiring man, a Kennedyesque, Lincolnesque, Rooseveltesque man, who happens to be black. You elected him not because of or in spite of his race, but without regard to his race, and whether he lives up to even the 100th part of his promise, the electorate has lived up to its, and sitting here now, embarrassedly wiping my eyes, I sort of wish I had been part of it.
Yeah, I just threw up a little bit, too. But that's not the worst of it. No, in listing her reasons why she didn't cast a vote for either candidate, guess what her main reason for opposing McCain was? That's right, a major case of PDS:
Christopher Hitchens was right on the money when he called her a "proud, boastful ignoramus," though I would go further. She is a belligerent ignoramus. The resounding theme of her candidacy was a shamefully rabble-rousing, nauseatingly populist denunciation of knowledge, intellectual expression and reasoned debate, all apparently the vicious province of the media elite and not the hard and hardy backbone of the "real" America.

Watching her made me sick, and the thought of her ascending to the highest office in the land on the possible demise of her less-than-robust 72-year-old boss was not something I could live with. A vote for him was, in all likelihood, a vote for her, and I just couldn't do it.
Sure, Norah. She's just an ignorant, Bible-thumpin' snowbilly who hasn't accomplished a tenth of what you have. Why, I bet she doesn't even get invited to any of the cocktail parties you attend.

I'll bet Sarah Palin doesn't have a book deal like Norah's. She's the author, we're told at the end of her column, of the forthcoming tome "Voluntary Madness: My Year Lost and Found in the Loony Bin."

Perhaps she should have stayed for more than a year, seeing as how she gets all weepy watching speeches from a guy she couldn't even bring herself to vote for.

Posted by: Sean M. at 07:41 PM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 636 words, total size 4 kb.

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
15kb generated in CPU 0.01, elapsed 0.0139 seconds.
61 queries taking 0.0084 seconds, 133 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.