Palin's enemies; believing three impossible things before breakfast.

Palin detractors are legion, but the strange thing about their claims – when you actually think about their claims – is their appeal to people’s stupidity. One of the first impossible things we are asked to believe is that Sarah Palin doesn’t read newspapers. This claim is made because she did not name a newspaper she read during her Katie Couric interview (see video). As a result, if you Google “Palin doesn’t read newspapers” you get over 9,270,000 links. Think about that for a moment … OK, does it sound even slightly plausible that the Governor of Alaska - or the candidate who makes national news - doesn’t read newspapers?

I have to admit that I rarely read my local paper for news because the Internet provides me with a much greater variety of sources and is much more current than any newspaper. Technologically, newspapers are obsolete.

I do glance at the editorial section because I am an opinion junkie. Which led me to the second impossible thing we are told to believe about Palin; this one a little more current. Eugene Robinson, a Washington Post columnist, demands you believe that Sarah Palin doesn’t know the conventional story of Paul Revere’s ride. In this he is joined by lots of people whose knowledge of history is limited to grade school stories and poetic tales. Here are a few things that these people believe: that Paul Revere rode alone, that he cried out “The British are coming,” and that he finished his ride in Concord, alerting the Minutemen. None of these things are true, but that is the children’s version; the Eugene Robinson version. Robinson even goes on to claim she said things that she did not say, including a comment about the Second Amendment that she did not make. The fact is that Paul Revere was captured by a British patrol, that he told them that there were a lot of people who were up in arms to resist them, as a result of which they let him go after taking his horse. That was not Revere's original objective but that is what he did. Palin’s syntax was mangled and she implied that he was ringing church bells and firing warning shots as he was riding along, something that was done by people he was alerting during his ride. Here’s the point, Palin’s knowledge of history was deeper than that of her critics and that’s something they can’t forgive her.

Which brings me to the third impossible thing: the straight-out fact-less smear. An excellent example of that is Peggy Noonan writing in the Wall Street Journal. Noonan is a former Reagan speech writer who has traded on that part of history for the rest of her career. She is famous for plagiarizing a poem by John Gillespie Magee, Jr. for Reagan’s speech following the Challenger disaster. After fawning (she won the New Republic Strange New Respect Award in 2008) over Obama during the last general election she knows that her stock with Conservatives is nil, so she has become the official media booster-in-chief for Mitt Romney. Here’s how she contrasts Palin and Romney: 'Hmm, Palin or Romney—a trip to Crazytown or the man of sober mien.'  That’s the kind of “subtle” dig that distinguishes the people afflicted with PDS (Palin Derangement Syndrome). Palin’s not unqualified, stupid, or [include disparaging remark of your choice], she’s CRAZY!

A word in Romney’s ear: unless your plan calls for a three way race with Obama and a Tea Party candidate opposing you, shut people like Noonan up. They are not doing you any favors. (On the other hand, that may be the plan.)

This is what Noonan said about Obama in the fall of 2008 when his election:

Whoever is elected Tuesday, his freedom in office will be limited. Mr. Obama is out of money and Mr. McCain is out of army, so what might be assumed to be the worst impulses of each -- big spender, big scrapper -- will be circumscribed by reality. In Mr. Obama's case, energy will likely be diverted to other issues. He will raise taxes, of course, but he may also feel forced to bow to a clamorous base with the nonspending items they favor: the rewriting of union law to force greater unionization of smaller shops, for instance, and a return to a "fairness doctrine" that would limit free speech on the air.

In a nutshell, this Noonan column (and Robinson's) is a dramatic illustration of the fact that you don’t have to get even one thing right to be an editorial writer for the MSM.

So there you have it. Palin may not be your cup of tea. You may not want her to be President. But to use the reasons that her enemies have given - and believe them - demonstrate an inability to reason. It is said that experience is the best teacher. I pray that what the vast majority of the people in this country are experiencing now will have its impact on the next election.

UPDATE:  The "Palin is so stupid she can't read and doesn't understand the story about Paul Revere" theme has as many adherents as there are hack Liberal opinion writers.  I'm going to keep a running tab on this as articles are brought to my attention. Today, Leonard ("All things black all the time") Pitts joins the chorus.