Vitriolic and Envious Columnists

If you have been reading the columnists,especially most of the New York Time´s cadre, you have seen and or felt a meanness rolled in envy that is almost fanatical. Of course the question arises why anyone would react with such venom to anything like Sarah Palin et.al. The answer is really rather simple but subtle. It has to do with the stance that has been taken by these "elite" publication´s writers and their disappointment that what they called for is being highjacked by the party they detest. They wanted a woman on the ticket and were not totally enthralled with Hillary but at least she was a Democrat ( which they believed to be closer to their ideal of unnamed socialism). What they got instead was a Sarah Palin who actually had some experience ( which they would have drooled over if it had been Hillary's) and a likability that Hillary could never generate. All this in a Republican candidate was and is too much for the expectations of those who specialize in making innuendo a habit.

Columnists have a vast degree of freedom in expressing their attitude and often they reveal too much of their true feelings. When you have the ear of the nation you assume that what you have been doing is the reason for your readership. Temporarily this may be true but after establishing a readership going off on a tangent may just tip your hand. For example consider the likes of Maureen Down or Gail Collins and the venom they have tossed Sarah´s way. Snideness is hard to hide and especially if you take pride in it. Sarah Palin certainly has policy flaws and naive notions of economic solutions but these two hacks are not fountains of financial advice by a long shot.

The reason I suspect they are so upset is they had plans to be the insider in the next socialist regime and now find the Republicans may end up running it. This is a bitter pill for them to swallow. You could surmise that they are just disappointed that someone the polar opposite of them has a following and more attention. That wouldn´t explain the degree of vileness that has adorned their columns.

You see when ideas disappear the subject turns to personalities. This is why the campaign has deteriorated to the extent it has. There is now more media interest in the background of the candidates than any solutions they might offer. Since they have no solutions to offer this might explain it. Of course it is not enough to just mention differences in personalities or even draw contrasts. Drawing from the tabloids it draws bigger readership to pursue the gossipy version of a person´s background than to simply report information. Taking a factual incident and embellishing it to asteroidal prominence also works to get attention. You certainly don´t want a person you despise getting more attention than yourself.

Since many prominent Op-ed columnists live in a dream world of their own delusions when that world is upset by a real world anomaly ,that must be attacked and defused. Trouble is reality trumps delusionist´s dreams. Thus the writer reveals emotional distress through an attack on that which doesn´t fit their projection. Much like a painter reveals a sour outlook by painting graffiti on sacred objects so too a columnist waves the flag of hatred to stir like minded readers to respond. The satisfied smirk of cattiness is the cheap reward they are satisfied with. It is the ugly step sister syndrome that cannot be contained. Evidently their editors think it a style quirk and dismiss it as harmless.

In a free country with a free press ( which is rapidly disappearing) we expect droll writers and those who channel their abilities in the direction of criticism. It is hard to criticize the critics without a hint of hypocrisy. Need we expect back alley degradation as a substitute for an honest evaluation? A quaint approach would be to point out the good with the bad so in line with that I interject the following. The aforementioned writers don´t always get it wrong and sometimes they are quite entertaining. That being said it wouldn´t hurt if they were only slightly less bitchy.