Saturday, December 20, 2008

“Red State” Picks up “Camelot Barbie” Nickname

by W. T. Howes

Men for Palin coined the nickname “Camelot Barbie” for Caroline Kennedy as she begins her quest for the United States Senate.  The point of the nickname is obvious.  Kennedy has absolutely no qualification for high office, other than high name identification.  Her name identification is from an accident of birth that made her the daughter of a great American, Jack Kennedy, whose short presidency was dubbed “Camelot”.  Apparently the good people at Red State liked the appellation, and has spread it around through their site.  Remember, you heard the nickname “Camelot Barbie” here first.

Thursday, December 18, 2008

Camelot Barbie Chronicles: Why Libs Love Their Royalty

by W. T. Howes

Democrats everywhere are drooling over the coming ascension of Caroline Kennedy to the United States Senate.  Despite her total lack of relevant experience, “Camelot Barbie” is going to begin her career near the top.  How can someone with no objective qualification for statewide office begin her career with statewide office in one of the most powerful states in the Republic?  It is because her party love political royalty.  And liberals love political royalty because it helps them rationalize their defeatist worldview.

She was my first long-distance crush.  When I was five, my family had coffee table books about JFK and his family.  When at six I wrote my first short story, it was about a rendez-vous with Caroline.  Caroline Kennedy was the princess of Camelot.  I never met her.  She was only an image to me.  Over the past forty years, I have gotten over my crush on Caroline.  While I respect her father, I do not worship her political family.  In fact, I have come to detest what they stand for.

Liberals across the Republic love the Kennedys.  Liberals across America allow the Kennedys to retain power, and allow Kennedys to ascend to power before they have any experience.  Why?

It is very simple.  Their concept of the existence of an exclusive class structure and a political aristocracy helps them rationalize their defeatist world view.  At the core of their defeatist world view is their egotistic notion that they are under compensated and under appreciated.  (If I had a quarter for every liberal who thought that they were paid less than they are worth, then I would be paid what I am worth!) That notion is based on the premise that they are smart.  And thanks to the Self-Esteem Revolution, so many people are taught - either by their parents or by a teacher - that they are smart in order to boost that self-esteem.

These liberals who walk around thinking that they are really, really smart quite often don’t have jobs, titles, income or any other indicator of intelligence.  As such, these liberals come to believe that there is a rigid class structure in which talent can not rise.  They believe this because if talent could rise, then wouldn’t they be richer or more powerful?

Therefore, they embrace the political royalty, and in that embrace, they are safe in the delusion that they are hidden geniuses.

So many liberals think that they are smart that the words “smart” or “intelligent” or any of their many synonyms now have no objective definition.  “Smart” can be self-defining.  That is, a person can walk around thinking that they are smart because others do not understand what they understand.  A person can walk around thinking that they are smart without any objective proof that their intelligence is anything but average or above-average.