Camille Paglia, author, staunch liberal feminist and pro-choice advocate, has some interesting comments on the election and Sarah Palin today in her online column at Salon. Thanks to Hot Air. Paglia expresses doubts about the media’s coverage, or lack of it, of several controversies surrounding Obama during his campaign. She says:
In the closing weeks of the election, however, I became increasingly disturbed by the mainstream media’s avoidance of forthright dealing with several controversies that had been dogging Obama — even as every flimsy rumor about Sarah Palin was being trumpeted as if it were engraved in stone on Mount Sinai. For example, I had thought for many months that the flap over Obama’s birth certificate was a tempest in a teapot. But simple questions about the certificate were never resolved to my satisfaction . . .
Paglia also discusses the Ayers non-controversy and says that at first she was aggravated by Clinton’s harping on Ayers during a debate with Obama, and accepted Obama’s explanation of Ayers being just somebody in the neighborhood. Although her concerns about Ayers were “slow in developing,” her doubts were enough to propel her into doing research on her own, even renting the movie “The Weather Underground. She has some interesting observations about Ayers and his wife Bernardine Dohrn, who worked at the same law firm in Chicago as Michelle Obama in the 1990s.
Amazingly enough, Paglia recognizes that the media, with their bias against Palin, were too busy pursuing every single non-issue against her instead of doing proper investigative work on the many questions surrounding Obama’s associates.
Given that Obama had served on a Chicago board with Ayers and approved funding of a leftist educational project sponsored by Ayers, one might think that the unrepentant Ayers-Dohrn couple might be of some interest to the national media. But no, reporters have been too busy playing mini-badminton with every random spitball about Sarah Palin, who has been subjected to an atrocious and at times delusional level of defamation merely because she has the temerity to hold pro-life views.
Most telling was Paglia saying “the shocking level of irrational emotionalism and at times infantile rage was exposed at the heart of current Democratic ideology — contradicting Democratic core principles of compassion, tolerance and independent thought.”
I am truly taken aback that Paglia recognizes the Democratic hatred that spewed forth and surrounded Palin from the time she was chosen by McCain. The liberal left with the help of the media absolutely tore Palin apart piece by piece. The emotion showed by both camps was similar to sharks in a feeding frenzy. Any little tidbit the media could talk about, whether it had a shred of truth or not, was discussed endlessly. Is Trig really her son (gasp!)? Did she want to censor books at the library? She has no experience! She’s a hypocrite! Troopergate! Palin wants creationism taught alongside evolution (horrors!)! Her clothes! Her church prayed for her (terrible!)! She should stay home with her kids – No, it’s okay to work outside the home!
Was all this frothing at the mouth because Palin dared to be a strong pro-life, pro-gun, evangelical candidate went against the Washington establishment and ignited the evangelical base that McCain had not only ignored but dissed, calling “agents of intolerance?” Yes, I absolutely think it was, and Paglia certainly recognizes that much of the antagonism toward Palin was because of Palin’s stance on abortion and the fact that she didn’t graduate from an Ivy League college. Don’t get me wrong, Paglia also places blame on the right for the lack, but some of it is certainly deserved. However, she points out that Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, from Kansas, has a very similar record to Palin, and she was supposedly on Obama’s short list for VP nominee. I suppose it’s just surprising to me to hear this kind of admission from someone on the left.