Dealing with Palin

Andrew Sullivan writes:
This is only the second time in its nearly ten-year history that the Dish has gone silent. The reason now is the same as the reason then. When dealing with a delusional fantasist like Sarah Palin, it takes time to absorb and make sense of the various competing narratives that she tells about her life. There are so many fabrications and delusions in the book, mixed in with facts, that just making sense of it - and comparing it with objective reality as we know it, and the subjective reality she has previously provided - is a bewildering task. She is a deeply disturbed person which makes this work of fiction and fact all the more challenging to read. And the fact that she is now the leader of the Republican party and a potential presidential candidate, makes this process of deconstruction an important civil responsibility. We take this seriously as we always have. We want to be fair to her, and to her family, and to the innocent people she has brought into the spotlight. And we are not reporters. We are merely analysts trying to make sense of evidence already in the public domain, evidence that points in all sorts of directions, only one of which can be true.
Emphasis mine. I understand where the guys at the Dish are coming from. It is, in fact, the reason why this blog has gone silent on many national political topics.

Back in my younger blogging days, I routinely drew attention to the idiocy of George Bush, Fox News and conservative pundits who seemed so obviously delusional that perhaps even they themselves knew it. Then I started wondering if it was all part of the game...

When it comes to Sarah Palin, I honestly question if the liberal blogosphere and the mainstream media wouldn't do the most damage by simply shutting up and talking about something else for a while. Drawing attention to every sentence Palin makes merely rationalizes the idea that she is the leader of the Republican Party, and eventually it will become a self-fulfilling prophesy. Even otherwise rational thinkers on the right could eventually get sucked in to the hype and believe that she is running the show.

I don't often agree with David Brooks, but he makes a somewhat compelling case that guys like Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck are actually not very influential; but it seems like it because every time they inevitably say something outlandish, the liberal blogosphere flips out and draws undeserved attention to them. I fear the same is happening with Palin too.


    Truly. There are far too many liberal pundits who lose their shit everytime Palin says something provocative but they really don't have to. She doesn't matter at all.