This has to be the funniest thingI’ve read in a long time. In fact, I can’t even think of anything to say I’m laughing so hard. But that’s OK since this latest drivel from our old Palin-Deranged friend, Kathleen Parker, speaks for itself. While you read, I’ll grab some paper towels and wipe up the Coke which spewed out of my mouth and onto my screen and keyboard, startling my kids.
Literature often reveals what life occludes, and the man with a limp provides clues to why people are so reluctant to support Mitt Romney despite his picture-perfect résumé of skills and accomplishments. We keep hearing that he’s “too perfect” and that so-called “ordinary Americans” can’t identify with him. Indeed, there is something vaguely unfamiliar about Romney.
Handsome, rich and successful, he is happily married to a beautiful wife, father to five strapping sons and grandfather to many. At the end of a long day of campaigning, his hair hasn’t moved. His shirt is still unwrinkled and neatly tucked into pressed jeans. He goes to bed the same way he woke up — sober, uncaffeinated, seamless and smiling in spite of the invectives hurled in his direction.
What’s wrong with this guy? Nada. Which is precisely the problem. Romney could use a limp.
To humanize him, helpful critics have suggested that he smile less during debates and try to show a little anger. Thanks to a new coach, he has become more aggressive and has begun punching back. Even so, audiences know instinctively that this is not the real Mitt. He’s just not that mad, and why should he be?
He has earned enough money never to have to work again. His investments produce multiples of millions in barely taxable income. When he looks in the mirror, he gets to rest his eyes on a relentlessly handsome face.
Heh! This, my friends, is what passes for journalism at the Washingtion Post.
Update: KP’s colleague at the Post, Jennifer Rubin, agrees:
None of this is to say there isn’t strong and valid opposition to Romney in the conservative press. (Michelle Malkin, who recently endorsed Santorum, and staunch critics of Romneycare certainly fit this description.) But it’s hard to ignore the conclusion that for some in the conservative press there is an element of anti-Romney animosity that is not quite grounded in reason or ideological consistency — it is personal. And other than Romney’s being “handsome, rich and successful,” as Kathleen put it, it’s really hard to fathom where it comes from.
So, Jen allows, maybe there are a precious few conservatives who have legitimate reasons for opposing Romney (she mentions Michelle Malkin), but most of his opposition is baseless. Conservatives’ stated reasons for opposing Romney (e.g. his incessant flip-flopping, Social Security demagoguery, and long history if liberal positions on such important issues as cap and trade, ethanol subsidies, government health care mandates, appointing liberal judges, and man-made global warming, to name but a few), are really just components of a complex smokescreen. But Jen, sharp as a marble that she is, sees right through that subterfuge and recognizes it for the ruse that it is. She knows the real reason conservatives oppose His Mittness: We’re jealous because he’s so ”handsome, rich and successful.” Jen and KP have more than the same employer in common, it would seem.