Proof That Sarah Palin Derangement Syndrome Is Real
Hangout with us

Proof That Sarah Palin Derangement Syndrome Is Real

The weirdest thing happened today. In a world with few sane liberals, Jeffrey Goldberg is a sane liberal. He’s typically sober-minded and almost always worth a read on any number of topics. But today he tweeted out something very, very, very weird. Pardon the abbreviated French I used in my response:

— Mollie (@MZHemingway) September 19, 2014

Um, yeah. This went over precisely as well as you’d expect it to and Goldberg quickly realized its imprudence. So let’s cut immediately to this part:

— Jeffrey Goldberg (@JeffreyGoldberg) September 19, 2014

We all say, think or tweet stupid stuff. It’s best to just acknowledge that we can all be idiots at times, say we’re sorry, and move on. It may be a good idea for Goldberg to explain precisely what he was thinking, but apology accepted. I’m just using the whole incident as a means to discuss the broader oddity of American progressives’ Palin Derangement Syndrome.

Now, I’m no reflexive Palin-defender. See, for example, my “No, Sarah Palin, Baptism Isn’t A Good Punchline For A Terrorist Joke.”

But more than anything I might say in favor of or against her policies, I’m struck by how she causes people with progressive tendencies to lose their ever-living minds. What is that about? And I’m interested in that not just because she gets everyone to Peak Freud in under 10 seconds, but because she’s just a great example of how progressives treat all women who share some of her characteristics.

And that’s whether we embrace life in all its messiness — fertile wombs, grizzly bear mothering, shooting wolves out of helicopters, you know the usual — or simply reject the victimization status so graciously conferred upon us by feminism or, horror of horrors, we trust in God.

I’m honestly wondering why, though. Why are we such a threat? Is it the power of our non-barren wombs? Is it the power that comes with not accepting progressive politics of constant victimization? Are women only really acceptable to liberal elites if we’re constantly trying to be just like men? Is it our understanding of guns? (A friend noted in response to Goldberg’s odd comment that of course that picture isn’t reminiscent of Sarah Palin since “Palin knows the third rule of gun safety.”) Is it the confidence we exude as faithful women?

It may be that. One Goldberg defender suggested that there was no big deal with comparing the eye-cloaked, Burqa-wearing woman with Palin. Here was his explanation:

— C.J. (@CraiWai) September 19, 2014

Because all religions are exactly alike, according to the deep thinking of some folks walking the earth right now. Of course that’s an easy comparison. Easy peasy. And idiotic and reductive to the extreme, but whatever.

I don’t know Goldberg. And I like his writing a lot. But if this kind of derangement can get even to someone like him, it’s disconcerting.

— Mollie (@MZHemingway) September 19, 2014

— Mollie (@MZHemingway) September 19, 2014

Let’s stop with the weird double standards for slurs allowed against conservative women that aren’t allowed for liberal women.

You don’t have to like Sarah Palin, although if you’re still obsessing over and against her in 2014 you may want to seek professional help. But also, just consider precisely why you fear fecundity, Christianity and strong women. And whether current elite embrace of death and barrenness, the empty public square and victimization of women are all they’re cracked up to be.

Mollie Ziegler Hemingway is a senior editor at The Federalist. Follow her on Twitter at @mzhemingway
comments powered by Disqus
Most Popular
Related Posts