Skip to content

Charles Krauthammer Suffers From Stockholm Syndrome…

29 November 2010 @ 10:24

David Stockholm Syndrome, that is.

As my colleague, Dr. Clyde ‘Fingers’ Proctor, has written:

This is a serious condition that involves being held a mental hostage by the Establishment Elites in a given geographical area and slowly finding oneself thinking more and more like the cerebral kidnappers until there is absolutely no difference between the two.  Hostages are invited to all the right parties, soriees, and conferences where they are praised constantly for their ‘insight’ and told they are ‘well-respected’ by unnamed high officials in the Administration and the Congressional Leadership, both in the majority and minority parties.  In some cases, the Establishment Elites task certain of their kind from the ‘opposite’ side of the political spectrum of the hostage with seducing the hostage, bedding he or she, and telling the hostage repeatedly that they are ‘like Brad Pitt/Angelina Jolie in bed’ and even better in their analysis and thinking.  One of the results of suffering from such a condition is that the hostage will automatically start to believe with all their heart that their sh-t don’t stink.

—From Sucked Into The Vortex Of The Black Hole: The David Stockholm (neé Stockman) Syndrome [Charles Dutton Prison Books, 2004] by Doctor Clyde Keister Proctor, OB-SCAT.

I have a great deal of respect for Mr. Krauthammer.  He is often one of the more insightful commentators on domestic political and foreign affairs situations.  But the legitimacy of his insights are undermined by his being a willing captive of the Elitist Thinking inside the beltway of Washington D.C..  Ninety percent of what he writes and speaks is spot-on and then he has to go ruin it all with ten percent of Establishment blather.

This latest exercise in my criticizing Mr. Krauthammer comes on the heels of his remarks on the latest edition of the PBS program Inside Washington [a show you may have heard of and watched once and realized life is too short to waste time on] regarding Sarah Palin, a person he disdains for what he perceives as her lack of sophistication and intelligence. 

Noel Sheppard of Newsbusters has the video and transcript of the segment here.

While it appears at first glance, and if you only read the transcript, that Mr. Krauthammer is not saying anything against Mrs. Palin, if you watch the video, you end up thinking as Stacy McCain does.  After listing those aspects of Palin Derangement/Obsession Syndrome that are not the fault of Mr. K., he remarks:

However, it is Krauthammer’s fault that he can’t speak of Palin except to dismiss her with a sneer. (Am I the only one who noticed his significant pause between “glorious” and “woman”?)

Indeed.  He is, of course, not alone in his sneering, but as, perhaps, the most well-respected conservative by all groups on the Right, his attitude does damage, as Stacy explains in commenting on her critics on the Right in general:

Here’s my problem with such dismissive attitudes toward Palin from conservatives: It sets up the 2012 primary contest as a battle between Smart Republicans (who are presumed to oppose Palin) and Dumb Republicans (who presumably support Palin). This message — which is being shouted from the rooftops by Krauthammer, Rove and many others — will tend to become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Which is to say, most of the Smart Republicans who take their political cues from the conservative intelligentsia will in fact oppose Palin. But the influence of Rove, Krauthammer et al. is not so great as they wish and, in a multi-candidate field, the irreducible hard core of Palin supporters among GOP primary voters is still large enough to win pluralities in every state where the primary electorate is limited to registered Republicans. (Seriously: Comparing the average Romney supporter to the average Palin supporter, which is more likely to trudge through the snow to attend an Iowa caucus meeting?)

There is therefore a very real possibility of Palin winning the 2012 presidential nomination, at which point all the sneering condescension of the Krauthammer/Rove class will justify the MSM in declaring, “The Dumb Republicans have won!”

And that’s not going to help beat Barack Obama, is it?

Most certainly not — it happened in 1980 and made it all the tougher for Ronald Reagan to win. 

The Stupid Party lives to fight itself another day!

Here before us is another reason we, the outsiders, the TEA Party folks in action and spirit, must show no quarter towards the GOP Establishment.  Besides living in a collegial and congenial past that no longer is [call it what you will, the Gerald Ford or Bob Michael Era], the GOP and conservative Elites have a track record that is strewn with utter and abysmal failures.  In fact, historians not yet born will label them as the Useful Idiots of the Left who, by their weaknesses and naiveté, help bring about the lamentable situation we now find ourselves in.

In a related posting, Stacy cites William Jacobson on the phenomenon known as The Weekly Sarah Palin Segment.  The Professor is wrestling with two different ways of approaching 2012:

I’ve put forth the proposition that the best way to defeat Obama is to put forward a conservative but non-controversial candidate who will keep the election focused on Obama. Because the Obama record and devolving persona are the equivalent of a death panel for Obama’s reelection.

And nothing matters more than defeating Obama because the damage he is doing to the country is generational.

But as I reflect back on the past two plus years since Palin’s nomination, I’m wondering if an all-out, knock-down, drag-out fight with the Palin haters is just what this country needs most, not least. And whether that is just as likely to be successful in defeating Obama as the “safe” route.

Please do take the time to click on the link and read the rest of it.

‘Go ahead, I dare ya — keep underestimating me.’

15 Comments
  1. 29 November 2010 @ 12:54 12:54

    I would rather have someone espouses free-market, constitutionally-limited government; who has a terrific resume (at least two terms as governor); and who is not sneered at for a lack of education.

    Having said that Palin epitomizes common-sense sollutions AND she terrifies the left. She might be just the one we need at this moment to end this government-knows-best narrative.

    (Of course the government-knows-best types will never be completely be defeated. They’ll only go into hiding for a few years and then come out with the same philosophy with a new name.)

    As a side note regarding terrifying the left: see CNN’s Roland Martin’s “opinion” piece?

    Roland Martin says: “It’s clear that we can’t go 24 hours without Sarah Palin saying something so stupid that it defies logic.”

    What did Sarah Palin say that was so ludicrous?

    Sarah Palin: “And I know I’m going to be again criticized for bringing this up, but instead of a government thinking that they need to take over and make decisions for us according to some politician or politician’s wife priorities, just leave us alone, get off our back and allow us as individuals to exercise our own God-given rights to make our own decisions and then our country gets back on the right track.”

    • bobbelvedere permalink*
      29 November 2010 @ 16:30 16:30

      TheCL: This derangement/obsession is positively clinical.

  2. David R. Graham permalink
    29 November 2010 @ 19:06 19:06

    1- Not to put too fine a point on it: The picture name implies she is carrying a rifle. It looks like a shotgun, an over-under.

    2- “I would rather have someone [who] espouses free-market, constitutionally-limited government; who has a terrific resume (at least two terms as governor); and who is not sneered at for a lack of education.”

    The smug conceit in that remark turns my stomach. I have an Ivy League education (and my parents were Ivy Leaguers), wide and deep connections in the leadership cadres of the USA and beyond and a long resume of potent, self-less, public service both paid and volunteer.

    And I am sneered at liberally for one very simple reason: I condemn “liberation theology,” the source of the ideology of “post-modernism” and its political expression, “progressivism” (aka scientific humanism, positivism, multi-culturalism, socialism, statism, etc.), and I adore the divinity of human nature, the source of liberty.

    Or put another way, I hate liars and I love truth-tellers. That is why I, after a long life, and now at the pinnacle of respectability in any sane society, am sneered at by the criminals who think they run this one from their Ivy League offices, their Mafia resorts, their Caribbean cannibalisms and their lubricity.

    I want a leader to be educated, I do not care about their credential attesting seat time (and most likely, suck time). I assess their character. The end of education is love. Love is truth and truth is peace. That’s what I look for.

    Sarah Palin is among the most educated people I have seen. She knows herself, she loves her country, she admires her fellow citizens, especially the honest ones, and she knows the dishonest ones, most of them, can be honest if inspired to it. The rest she’s willing to put away or down, and that’s good, that’s part of the punitive authority of leadership.

    All that is enough to make a leader big of small. The rest is the normal hubbub of life, and we’ll see where that leads, guided as always from within by divine wish.

    But to think that someone is qualified by whether or not criminals dressed in doodads beating fellow creatures over the head with their rank or position approves them or sneers is insane. Moreover, it is servile, neither classical nor liberal. Sarah Palin is the perfection of a Classical Liberal.

  3. 29 November 2010 @ 23:04 23:04

    I love Sarah Palin, and I love Charles Krauthammer. That being said, there’s a small part of me that has concern for conservatives placing all their apples in the Palin basket. Sure she scares the left. But that shouldn’t constitute her being behind the mahogany desk. She’s got alot more to show from now until 2012 to fully convert me. Until then, there’s a part of me that agrees with CK to a small, but pointed degree.

    Then again, CK is likely one of the most intelligent, well-versed and well-thought individuals on earth, IMHO. Perhaps he is raising the bar on Sarah so that she will reach a little higher? In other words, I would rather my team believe that they have a chance to lose, versus hitting the field thinking its all in the bag. Otherwise, what are goals for? Sarah has my love, but she’s still got quite a bit of work to do.

  4. largebill permalink
    29 November 2010 @ 23:21 23:21

    Who says Krauthammer’s education at Harvard is better than Palin’s more diverse education? Oh, that’s right diversity is only to be applauded when discussing demographic quotas not when discussing diversity of experiences exposed to while living life and getting a well-rounded education. I’ve listened to Krauthammer over the years and I’ve listened intently to Palin in recent years. He is right 60+% of the time. She is IMO correct at a much higher percentage. If I had to choose a president between the two of them I wouldn’t hesitate to choose her over him. There are dozen of others I can think of who I’d prefer to him. Actually, since Krauthammer is in favor of abortion on demand there are probably more than a hundred million people more ethically qualified.

  5. 30 November 2010 @ 00:05 00:05

    Great article, and comments as well. What kills me here is that we end up looking anti-intellectual when it comes to bashing the left, even though we revere many of the greatest intellectuals (in terms of the founders).

    Many of the truths that we espouse are based in observable reality, and they don’t take a library of books to describe or observe. For that, we are attacked as the “stupid class,” or the “under informed.”

    It isn’t where we are educated, and it isn’t how we are educated. It is, instead, the content of that education, and how the individual then applies that education. In other words, there is theory, and there is practice. If we follow the content and, more importantly, the application, we will know any candidate.

  6. David R. Graham permalink
    30 November 2010 @ 02:48 02:48

    “What kills me here is that we end up looking anti-intellectual when it comes to bashing the left, even though we revere many of the greatest intellectuals (in terms of the founders).”

    Get a grip, you’re giving “the left” the status of being intellectual. If they were they couldn’t be “the left.” Don’t you understand the game? Don’t play it, it’s rigged against the truth! Intellect is examination and acceptance of truth. “The left” hates truth. Sarah knows that it does and that’s a sign of her highly sophisticated education.

    “For that, we are attacked as the “stupid class,” or the “under informed.””

    Why do you care about that? You let malingerers and liars make your day, tell you who you are? You’re spineless, dreadful. Be who you are, an expression of divine will, and leave off cringing. Whom should you fear? Whose criticism can possibly touch you? Stand, damn it, stand! You’re human, which means you’re divine!

    “It is, instead, the content of that education, and how the individual then applies that education.”

    No, the critical element is the content of the character, which is due to (1) to the *nature* (which is only *partly* the content) of the education, (2) to the inner necessity of the student, which structures their being from before their birth, and (3) the intermediacy of Transcendent Grace. Don’t forget transcendence!

  7. 30 November 2010 @ 08:08 08:08

    David,

    My point – assuming you were refering to me with the term “smug conceit”– was that I would rather have a debate on the issues versus one on whether or not Palin is qualified. Her resume is weak. Better than Obamas but weak nonetheless.

    If Sarah Palin is nominated we will be debating whether she is qualified (education, life experience and resume) for the role in a way we never did (but should have) with Obama.
    Judging from your post – you know the devotees of PoMo (Post-Modernism), the pseudo-defenders of rationality, that we’re going to have to debate in the 2012 election cycle.

    Given my choice (which of course is determined by the available candidates) I would have a Sarah Palin with 2 full terms as Governor and preferably some Washington or international experience. That way the debate focuses on the issues as there is no question about her resume (her political experience will trump “only” having a BA and her “folksy” mannerisms.)

    But if my choice is Sarah Palin as she is or Romney – then I choose Palin in a heart beat.

  8. bobbelvedere permalink*
    30 November 2010 @ 09:05 09:05

    All: I love it when the Comments Section gets lively – thank you all.

    A few comments, if I may…

    David: ‘Shotgun’, ‘Rifle’ – who cares as long as she uses it to blow the heads off the Bolshes.

    Jake: I share all of your concerns. I’ve noticed that she’s gotting better at talking without a written speech and she seems to have been boning up on a good number of issues. Certainly her Facebook and Twitter messages have often been impressive.

    Largebill: My chief reason for not voting for Mr. K. would be that he has been captured by the Establishment and willingly embraces their view of many things. I say let him stay in the current job which he is most suited for. How about we change The Constitution and elect Mark Steyn! [the musicial performances in The White House would be top notch]

    TheCL [regarding your last comment]: I would have like to have seen that scenario play out for Mrs. Palin, but I this Professor Jacobson is right – let’s have at it with the Bolshes in 2012, full-bore, full metal jacket.

    All: David Graham has asked that he now be called Vince David Lombardi – man, talk about tough love!

    David’s like me: very passionate about all of us on the Right understanding the philosophical underpinnings, the buried roots, of what we believe. I feel his frustration and that sometimes leads us to seem harsher on our friends than we intend to be. I can tell you that he does it our of a love for his fellow man and The West and God. Oh, and let us not forget that he is a man of the cloth [cue fire and brimstone CGI and live dancing gals].

  9. 30 November 2010 @ 15:01 15:01

    I’d love to see Palin as our country’s president in 2012.

  10. largebill permalink
    30 November 2010 @ 19:52 19:52

    Red,

    You’ll have to wait at least until 21 January 2013. I’m anxious to see the current occupant of the White House evicted, but we can’t change the schedule.

  11. 02 December 2010 @ 10:28 10:28

    “You’ll have to wait at least until 21 January 2013. I’m anxious to see the current occupant of the White House evicted, but we can’t change the schedule.”

    Now thats funny! LOL

Trackbacks

  1. You want a perfect summation of the RINO? « Blog de KingShamus
  2. Charles Krauthammer suffering from Stockholm Syndrome? | THE BUSTED NUT
  3. Wisdom De King Shamus « The Camp Of The Saints

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: