Self-spiting liberalism

Roger Ebert doesn’t like Sarah Palin. Among other things, he says “I trust the American people will see through Palin, and save the Republic in November. The most damning indictment against her is that she considered herself a good choice to be a heartbeat away. That shows bad judgment.”

At one level, his reaction is entirely predictable. As a member of the liberal establishment, he mirrors the groupthink of his social circle. Indeed, there seems to be a roll call vote underway, in which members of the liberal establishment must renew their membership and reaffirm their liberal bona fides by the ritual stoning of Sarah Palin.

But at another level his reaction is deeply ironic. Of course, the irony is lost on him. Ironic, I say, because—for the last several years—Ebert has suffered debilitating complications from thyroid cancer. And he recently broke his hip.

If the eugenic culture which targets Terri Schiavo and little Trig had its way, people like Ebert would be weeded out.

Of course, if you swear by liberal orthodoxy, and you’re rich enough not to be a “burden” on anyone (e.g. Robert Ebert, Christopher Reeve, Michael J. Fox), then the liberal establishment will turn you into a posterboy for its eugenic agenda (e.g. stem cell research). But once the eugenic regime is firmly ensconced, even defective celebrities will lose their market value.

(Incidentally, one wonders how dependent Ebert may already be on the kindness of Catholic doctors and nurses who will be voting for Palin.)

A man in Ebert’s condition should be gratified to have someone like Palin a heartbeat away from the presidency.