David Brooks is so right on in this article. What strikes me is his point that it's the liberal reaction to Palin: hatred, fear, snobbery, and condescension that is hurting us. The McCain Campaign will stretch this faux-populism as far as it can go, snatching in independent voters who have been offended by liberal condescension to Palin, who they view as a "regular person".
Sarah Palin has many virtues. If you wanted someone to destroy a corrupt establishment, she’d be your woman. But the constructive act of governance is another matter. She has not been engaged in national issues, does not have a repertoire of historic patterns and, like President Bush, she seems to compensate for her lack of experience with brashness and excessive decisiveness.
The idea that “the people” will take on and destroy “the establishment” is a utopian fantasy that corrupted the left before it corrupted the right. Surely the response to the current crisis of authority is not to throw away standards of experience and prudence, but to select leaders who have those qualities but not the smug condescension that has so marked the reaction to the Palin nomination in the first place.
Full article on nytimes.com after the jump.