Aristocratic liberalism

As the debate over whether or not Caroline Kennedy is qualified to be appointed to take Hillary Clinton’s Senate seat rages on, Victor Davis Hanson tackles a related debate on the comparisons that have been made between Kennedy and Gov. Palin in terms of the treatment received by both from the mainstream media, and nails it:

But, no, the real embarrassment proves to be the media itself that apparently can’t see this weird unfolding self-incriminating morality tale: It is not just that Palin is conservative, Kennedy politically-correct (e.g., pro-abortion, gun control, gay marriage, etc), or Palin a newcomer to public attention, Kennedy a celebrity since childhood. Rather it is the aristocratic value system of most NY-DC journalists themselves who apparently still assume that old money, status, and an Ivy-League pedigree are reliable barometers of talent and sobriety, suggesting that the upper-East Side Kennedy’s public ineptness is an aberration, a bad day, a minor distraction, while Palin’s charisma and ease are superficial and a natural reflection of her Idaho sports journalism degree.

A few generations ago, Democrats would have opposed Palin but appreciated her blue-collar story, and applauded a working mom who out-politicked entrenched and richer male elites. But now the new aristocratic liberalism has adopted the values of the old silk-stocking Republicans of the 1950s—and so zombie-like worship rather than question entitlement.

Read the rest here.

I should note that, although the NYT was initially cold to Caroline Kennedy’s candidacy, they seem to be warming up a little, unlike the NY Daily News.