I'm glad Arnold called our attention to this piece on Palin by Jennifer Rubin. I thought Rubin nicely explained the visceral reaction many Jews, including one woman I'm very close to, have to Palin. I'm not a Palin fan and I don't even think she's a conservative, let alone a libertarian. I think she's a populist and I thought Joe Biden's only good moment in the whole campaign was during the debate, when he pointed out that he and Obama wanted to do to oil companies on the national level what she had done to them on the state level. But I hate that visceral reaction because it's so unfair.
Rubin makes clear just how unfair it is and, in the process, gives evidence against Bryan's view of the effect of education on opinions. Assuming I understand his view correctly, it is that the more educated you are, the more clearly you think about political issues. I think Bryan has the evidence to show it. But Rubin presents evidence the other way. Notice that, according to her, many American Jews credulously believed what they were handed about Palin and seemed to have zero curiosity to make them look further.
Arnold sees no downside to kicking the elites out of Washington, but I think he goes too far. I think this is the first instance where I have agreed with SydB, who commented on Arnold's post.
Tragically, Rubin points out a way for Palin to reduce the upset American Jews have with Palin, writing:
Certainly her willingness to speak in favor of the special relationship America has with Israel could mitigate some of the damage done to her reputation, once news of her support for the Jewish state and opposition to the administration's effort to put "daylight" between the U.S. and Israel finally gets through to the Jewish community.
In other words, the way in for Palin is to identify even more closely with one of the first foreign-policy stances--almost-complete lack of criticism of Israel--that the U.S. government has had.