A couple months back, at the height of the collective Obamagasm, the Times's Judith Warner wrote a column, without a whiff of irony, discussing the widespread (she assured us) phenomenon of fully mature, responsible women having sex dreams about Obama
But today's column
* is Exhibit A in what's wrong with punditry today. Her thesis?
[T]he fact that our country’s resentment, and even hatred, of well-educated, apparently affluent women is spiraling out of control.
Note that she's not wondering if
blah blah blah...no, she's stating it as a fact
And her evidence? First, in June 2007, a (female) college professor left 3 young children (ages 3, 7 and 8) with two 12 year-olds at the mall.** The 12 year olds left the youngsters by themselves, the cops were called, and the woman was charged with child endangerment. The woman, you see, was well educated, and the overzealous prosecutor (gee, not many of those
around) made some comments about not letting her get away with it just because she was a college professor with money.***
The rest of her argument? Well, what more proof do you need than: Sarah Palin! Of course, it's always about Palin. Because she's not all that well educated, and argues against the elites, and because people like her
, she is proof positive of "the fact that our country’s resentment, and even hatred, of well-educated, apparently affluent women is spiraling out of control."
And that's it. Go ahead, read the article, if you must (it's pretty painful), or just trust me - that's it
There's a very revealing correction notice at the bottom of the article:
An earlier version of this column misstated the date that Bridget Kevane had taken her children to the mall. It was in June 2007, not “a few weeks ago” as the column had originally stated.
You see what happened here? She came upon this story, perhaps emailed to her by one of her Obama-sex-dreaming acolytes, and thought it was a recent story and therefore topical. That explains why a story from 2 years ago is being presented as evidence that this alleged phenomenon is now reaching dangerous levels. So, armed with what she thought was a newsy item (and of course the always reliable Sarah Palin) she conjured up this fanciful tale about an anti-intellectual-woman pogrom sweeping the nation.****
If she wanted a real newsworthy item of controversial child endangerment charges, there was the case - which actually did occur three weeks ago - of the young mother breastfeeding her child while intoxicated
(ironically one state over - in North Dakota). She did this in front of the police during a search of her home, and they arrested her. She was charged, pleaded guilty and her child wazs taken from her. She now faces up to 5 years in prison, despite there not being any scientific evidence that breastfeeding while intoxicated poses any real danger. But this woman is not well educated and certainly not affluent - she's low class - white trash is the usual epithet - and would not fit Warner's thesis. In fact, it directly contradicts it.
* Ok, the Times calls it a "blog" - but it looks and is presented just like a column. She does get hammered pretty hard in the comments, though.
** Only three of the children were hers - I'm presuming two of the younger ones and one of the 12-year olds. I agree that 12-year olds should be expected to be more responsible, but overzealous prosecution of child endangerment is nothing new.
*** One of the outcomes that apparently irks Warner is that the woman was compelled to attend a "parenting class." Ah, so all of a sudden "classes" are annoying and designed to humiliate, not educate? I wonder how Warner feels about those "sensitivity", "diversity" and "anger management" classes that people are sometimes compelled to take?
**** Some annoying reader no doubt pointed out it's rather creaky pedigree, pretty much nullifying her Exhibit A. Oh well. I've done that before myself - hit upon something I thought was new, started to blog about it, but then saw it was actually an old story, and so dropped the post. But that's just my little blog - we can't expect such responsible journalism from the Times.