What Took 'Em So Long?

From the moment she appeared on the scene, this reporter (I've always wanted to write that. Actually I never wanted to until just this moment. Seems silly. But the subject is silly) has been pointing out the shallowness, vacuity, and danger of the former half-term governor. Finally, some of the so-called conservative intellectuals are noting the same thing:

This year, the conservative intelligentsia doesn’t just tend to dislike Palin — many fear that her rise would represent the triumph of an intellectually empty brand of populism and the death of ideas as an engine of the right.

“This is a problem for the movement,” said Will about what Palin represents. “For conservatism, because it is a creedal movement, this is a disease to which it is susceptible.”

The line of modern conservatism that can be traced back to National Review founder William F. Buckley would be broken by Palin, Will said.

“There’s no Reagan without Goldwater, no Goldwater without National Review and no National Review without Buckley — and the contrast between he and Ms. Palin is obvious.”

Asked if the GOP would remain the party of ideas if Palin captures the nomination, Will said: “The answer is emphatically no.” (Related: Liberals like Palin candidacy)

Columnist Charles Krauthammer, without talking about Palin specifically, noted that “there’s healthy and unhealthy populism,” and there is concern about the rise of the latter.

“When populism becomes purely anti-intellectual, it can become unhealthy and destructive,” said Krauthammer.

Wehner, now a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, cited the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s famous 1980 declaration that the GOP had become “a party of ideas.”

“Conservatives are very proud of that,” Wehner said. “But she seems at best disinterested in ideas or least lacks the ability to articulate any philosophical justification for them. She relies instead on shallow talking points.

(I thought George Will had better grammar than that...)

She, of course, and her deluded supporters -- given their proud anti-intellectualism -- will consider this a badge of honor, which will cause them to crank their aggrievement and self-pity even higher.

The opening sentence of the linked article features Ms Palin's claim of sexism because people hate a strong woman. Sorry, Sarah. It's not about strong. It's about superficial, self-absorbed, and stupid. I come from a state with a serious, smart, and hard-working governor and two similarly-described senators. I voted for them all, enthusiastically.

Women, every one.

P.S: Hard to sign onto the "Party of Ideas" thing, given the sort of un-mathematical, unserious, unoriginal, and unsupported-by-history stuff spilling out of the teabagged Congress of late. But since the term makes no claim to good ideas, I guess it's literally true, if a little Foxobeckian. One is not surprised. Anyone buying it?