Mind numbing

I’m out of my territory here a little bit, but yesterday’s excursion into press narratives (although only to make a kind of side point) inspired me to read a little more of it.  With that in mind I stumbled across Gail Collins’ column in the New York Times.  She is another card-carrying (remember that phrase anyone?) of the liberal media.  Let’s read:

It’s all up to Pennsylvania!

Yes folks, over the next seven
weeks — the amount of time it takes a normal country to conduct an
entire national election — we will be obsessing about the critical
upcoming Pennsylvania primary. Harrisburg! Altoona! The Poconos! Did
you know that in the Poconos, some hotels have bathtubs shaped like
hearts or Champagne glasses? We actually plan on bringing that up a lot.

That’s really how the article begins.  I think it’s pastiche of the kind of irrelevance we will be subjected to in the coming days.  The kind of irrelevance the following paragraphs provide: 

Of all the things that went right for Hillary Clinton on Tuesday, the
Ohio primary win was most impressive. Although Ohioans politely tiptoed
out of Hillary’s more boring round-table discussions
, they came to
she could be a president who would fix things, no matter how
complicated or frustrating. The mere fact that she had the staying
power to keep her eyes open, they felt, was a good sign.

response, the Obama campaign has reportedly decided to do far fewer
exciting rallies and lots more mind-numbing round-table discussions in
Pennsylvania. I’m sure I speak for everyone when I say we are all
really looking forward to that.

Collins’ fact-free insight and vast power of generalizing amazes me.  Notice two things.  First, she knows what Ohioans are thinking, believing and feeling–in detail "no matter how complicated or frustrating."  Was that a poll question?  I doubt it.  Beyond that, she’s intolerant of meaningful discussions of policy–they’re boring!  Mind-numbing!  And on that point–who is the "we" who is not looking forward to these discussions?  Maybe it’s Collins, who wants to talk about the Poconos.

Maybe I’m just impatient with this stuff, and I miss the larger points Collins is making.  I guess I’m a conservative that way.  I like my assertions supported by evidence.  

Keep in mind, of course, that while the liberal media over here at the New York Times can’t even bother to discuss matters of policy, George Will, conservative luminary, is busy eviscerating such leftist heroes as Oliver Stone, Norman Mailer, and Jean Paul Sartre, for their admiration of Fidel Castro, or Cuba (or something).  What’s wrong with them?  Well, Cuba has basically sentenced people to jail after one-day secret trials.  I know, I know.  That sounds awful to be stuck in Cuba in some kind of extra-legal limbo and convicted after a Stalinesque one-day secret trial.

One thought on “Mind numbing”

  1. The white male vote, which keeps shifting, was split. I’m beginning to
    suspect that the white males have realized that they’re either going to
    be accused of racism or sexism and have therefore made a secret pact to
    take turns.

    Couldn’t be that white male voters in different parts of the county have differing opinions, could it, Gail? I guess not. If the punditocracy has taught us one thing this primary season, it’s that none of us have any principled stances on the candidates. Nope, we’re all just sheep, who vote either out of sycophantic awe or a desire to be absolved of some sort of hate-tag. Here I thought I supported the candidate I support for his/her positions on the issues, but I guess I just don’t want to be labeled a racist or a sexist. Maybe I’m just bowled over by grand, eloquent speeches; maybe I’m scared of who will answer 3 AM phone calls. Perhaps I should write-in this really awesome message I left on my own voice mail the other day. That would satisfy both my concerns.

    But if I were a super delegate forced to choose between two attractive
    candidates, I’d look for the one who won the big primaries where people
    were actually encouraged to vote.

    The problem, Gail, is that this could describe both candidates. Stop positing the flimsy dichotomies that exist in your narrow mind as if they were extant circumstances.  And if you were a superdelegate, I’d say the system should scrapped.

Comments are closed.