I generally like Gail Collins. I agree with her most of the time and I think she did an excellent job as the editor of the New York Times’s editorial page. But she’s got a touch too much Maureen Dowd in her. Today’s piece on Levi Johnston and Sarah Palin is just dripping with condescension, and it is guilty of the very thing it deplores. The occasion is an upcoming tell-all article in Vanity Fair, wherein Levi dishes a lot of dirt from inside the post-election Palin household. Here’s Collins:
For the first time in my life, I feel sympathy for Sarah Palin.
Levi Johnston — you will remember him from his featured role as the father of Bristol’s baby at the Republican convention — has written an article for the new issue of Vanity Fair. It’s his take on the Palin home life, which Johnston says was “much different from what many people expect of a normal family.”
My first problem with this piece is that it was written at all. Doesn’t our country have more interesting and urgent things to debate? But, okay, we can’t be serious all the time, so…
What is Collins’s take?
Given the fact that Johnston is a 19-year-old high school dropout whose mother was arrested last year on six felony drug counts, it is conceivable that he is not the perfect arbiter of normal families. But even if he were an Eagle Scout with a scholarship to Harvard, can you imagine anything worse than discovering your daughter’s teenage ex-boyfriend has been given a national platform to discuss his impressions of her mom’s parenting skills?
Yeah, I kind of agree that it would suck to be Sarah Palin in this scenario. Among other things, Levi divulges that the Palins don’t cook, leaving that job to their children. It must also suck, however, to have Gail Collins writing about your mother’s drug conviction. No? And if you are in any doubt that Collins sees Levi as white trash, read on.
It’s hard to totally resist an article that has sentences that start with: “In early August, before I went hunting and Sarah was picked, Bristol and I were at a tattoo parlor in Wasilla. …” Or information like the fact that baby Tripp’s middle name is Easton in honor of “my favorite hockey-equipment company.”
But somehow I have a feeling that even the most ardent Palin-haters are not going to be able to work up much sympathy for Levi’s complaint that Sarah made him cut off his mullet before his appearance at the Republican convention. Or that when she moved to Juneau after being elected governor, she tried to take Bristol with her in order to break them up.
In fact, trying to separate her daughter from Johnston could be filed away in the rather slim folder titled “Sarah Palin’s Good Ideas.”
It’s pretty clear that Collins has a low opinion of hockey, mullets, and tattoos. That’s the kind of elitist attitude that feeds the know-nothing backlash of Palinism and creates an appetite for Fox News. It’s not that I disagree with her larger point. Most parents don’t want their daughter getting tattoos, let alone getting pregnant before they’ve graduated from high school. Trying to pull her daughter out of that relationship is fully understandable, especially in retrospect. But I thought this editorial was about the great injustice of passing judgment on the intimate private lives of public persons.
Collins says that Levi is untrustworthy, but she provides no examples.
It’s too bad Johnston is untrustworthy about every subject not covered by Field & Stream. Otherwise, this article might be fair payback for the Levi-Bristol convention appearance.
She refers to him as a “semi-delinquent,” too.
Besides selling a fantasy about how easily a semi-delinquent, unemployed father-to-be could be turned into Prince Charming, Palin also spent her campaign trying to give the impression that running for vice president and taking care of five children, the youngest a baby with special needs, was as easy as falling off a snowbank.
If the issue is the unfair portrait of Sarah Palin painted by her grandson’s father, it’s a little ironic for Collins to complain about Palin running for vice-president while simultaneously being a mother. What did Collins expect? That Palin would try to convince everyone how overwhelmed she would be in the job?
If you want to waste precious NYT’s editorial space on such trivial matters, the least you could do is avoid rank hypocrisy. Collins takes the opportunity of Levi’s dirt-dishing to dish more contempt on the Palin and Johnston families. That is at least as contemptible as anything that Levi did.
I’m now living with my third 19 year old boy (okay settle down)…and you know what? they’re still kids and they like to feel important and they like money. His actions are totally understandable and the sad thing is that he comes off with more credibility than anyone else in that family.
The whole “let’s not tell anyone else about the pregnancy and then Todd and I will adopt it” seems to lend credence to certain other gossipy theories, but I’m not going to say anything. 😉
Completely agree with your comment.
Who the hell knows who to believe in the Johnson-Palin saga? Sarah Palin has already labeled everyone in Alaska with a critical word a liar, so the same thing about Levi carries no weight…and, of course she’s a serial liar herself…also.
And it’s not like Johnson doesn’t have plenty of motive to lie himself.
Collins should just break out the popcorn like the rest of us, and keep her judgments and opinions to herself. She can’t relate, and shouldn’t try.
Ya’know, Levi is a somewhat good-looking boy. He didn’t go into his relationship with Bristol expecting to be thrust into the national spotlight and then cast aside when no longer useful. He has extremely limited prospects in rural Alaska so I don’t blame him one bit for grabbing the opportunities that are coming his way. Hey, they PAY those demi-celebrities to be on faux-reality shows, don’t they?
No matter how I look at it, the Palins have treated him badly and he’s entitled to a little revenge. He’s probably not out-right lying or exaggerating too much about the Palin household. His observations don’t seem that outrageous or improbable.
Now, I’m going to make more popcorn to prepare for Sarah-Diva’s reaction…
I had the same reaction when I saw all the Levi haters out there . . .
And I can’t say Levi is an upstanding young man . . . he’s only a teenager . . . but as you point out, he hasn’t done anything really wrong except get on Sara’s bad side for the inconvenient fact he’s the daddy of her grandson (whoa, and talk about timing–Sara ain’t no graceful lady and she doesn’t handle shocks too well).
But there’s something about the underdog that attracts me to Levi. Everyone has jumped on him as the bad boy in a way that I imagine a young single mother would have been roundly mocked (there is still prejudice against single mothers but it is no longer acceptable to openly mock single mothers in newspapers–imo).
And I got to say that seeing an average bloke like Levi just take his 15 minutes of fame and whatever paycheck comes with it, without much thinking involved and standing his ground, is great. Sara and her daughter couldn’t handle the pressure. Levi has less to hide so he’s more comfortable having his hillbilly life investigated.
I can’t see how Palin deserves any sympathy over this. Levi, on the other hand, is just a dumb kid who hooked up with another dumb kid with a psycho mother. What bothers me about Collins’s treatment is her attempt to make the Johnsons the “trailer trash” cliches. Levi is just grist for the trash mill that keeps the media, including the Times, going. There’s no reason except elitist Beltway snobbiness to conclude that Johnson somehow was too low for Palin’s offspring — except that Palin is rich and the Johnsons are not. On the grounds of pure morality and intellect the comparison does not define any clear winner between the two families.
I respectfully disagree, Dave. I can understand what Johnson is talking about when he speaks or writes. Caribou Barbie, on the other hand, is always incoherent. She’s just flat stupid.
I’m not sure I agree that the NYT editorial space is too important to waste on such trivial matters; I could probably be persuaded either way.
But frankly, I thought Collins’ column was very amusing, as she often is. Brought a smile to my face.
Maybe this means I’m also guilty of being a snob?
Trivial distraction. Again.
I dunno, Boo. It strikes me as fairly typical of Gail Collins’s shallow columns.
We can only hope that Palin is being groomed for a run at the presidency in 2012 and wins the Republican primaries.
Not that I feel sorry for “effing rednecks” of any age, but I’m sympathetic to the idea that “turnabout is fair play.” He didn’t ask to be shoved in the limelight, but that +/- 15 minutes that they both wish they could take back is now a part of history, making him the most (in)famous teenaged baby daddy ever.
I can’t imagine how he and his family were stage-managed by a national campaign, and add to that his family’s troubles…wow, it’s really unfortunate.
I should actually take bets to see if Palin will actually keep her ish together to not respond to the article.
Other than that, I’m just struck that he’s more articulate than she is–a former governor.
Most people have a thing against mullets. That’s not elite, it’s just common sense.
Otherwise you’re right though.
Levi Johnston is white trash. If that’s elitist, I’m okay with that. Observing equality before the law doesn’t mean that there is no such thing as merit. People who are actively proud of their ignorance and non-contribution to society deserve to be looked down upon.
Being ignorant when you have the opportunity to reduce your ignorance through education makes you a bad person. Not “just” a redneck, but an actual harmful presence in a democratic society.
you can be as elitist as you want to be. but even you probably agree that that is not the message you want to send as a political party or as an opinion outfit that hopes to positively effect public policy.
I don’t know about that. There has been a strong anti-intellectual current in our society that has lionized simple-mindedness — Forrest Gump, for example — while denigrating intellectual achievement as the empty exercises of what Rush Limbaugh likes to call “pointy-headed academics”. It is for this reason that our educational system lags behind the entire first world and some parts of the third world in science and mathematics, and we ended up living under Chimpy for eight years.
The simple fact of the matter is that if the United States wishes to remain a prosperous and influential country, it will only be through expanding intellectual achievement. Just as agriculture became a niche employer with the rise of industrialism, so industry is rapidly becoming a niche employer with the rise of the information age. Those jobs are mostly overseas already, but even that is a temporary state of affairs: most of us will live to see the day when virtually all unskilled and semi-skilled labor, industrial or otherwise, is replaced by robotics. The only jobs that will be left for people without fairly extensive educations will be mostly low-paying service sector jobs.
Frankly, I think it’s irresponsible — bordering on being callous and immoral — to tell people, especially young people, that they can expect anything other than to be part of a permanent underclass if they fail to excel academically. From the standpoint of the long-term prospects of progressive politics, it’s suicide: we definitely don’t want a large, angry, resentful, ignorant social class that lacks the education to see through the propaganda coming from the right-wing demagogues who will seek to use them as their base. If you think they’re bad now, when they can actually avoid total destitution working in factories, wait until they’re actually hungry.
If that’s elitism, like I said, I can live with that. But I think it’s just realism. There is no future — or no future worth living — in America for people like Levi Johnston. Nor am I willing to sell lies about a bright and equitable future to people who have been encouraged by right-wing anti-intellectualism to engage in deeply self-destructive behavior. There just aren’t enough janitorial and fast-food jobs to go around.
that’s fine as your personal opinion, but put those same words in the mouth of a politician and you can see the immediate FAIL.
That’s quite depressing. If our politicians can neither lead nor tell uncomfortable truths and are limited to dishonest populism, that does not bode well for us.
welcome to politics.
Levi Johnston is a grim and ominous reminder of all that might have been….
“President Gidget von Braun”
Can you even imagine?
“The America that I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s “death panel” so his bureaucrats can decide, based on subjective judgment, of their “level of productivity in society”, whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.”
Sarah Palin
from her Fascism….I mean, “Facebook” page.
It’s amazing. That an imbecile like this failed ex-governor can mention something as idiotic as “Death Panels” and in the next instance it is a serious part of the national dialogue. Why are the American people so susceptible to such blatant propaganda? I have a theory if you’re interested in hearing it:
We’re idiots.
I don’t know about you, but I’m loving the Sarah Palin/Levi Johnson saga/soap opera. And to think that only one year ago, the geniuses on the Republican National Committee deemed her to be the best choice to be “a seventy-two-year-old heartbeat away from the presidency”.
Are you surprised that the “party of Lincoln” is imploding? Are you stunned that America has become the laughingstock of the industrialized world? You shouldn’t be. You really shouldn’t.
http://www.tomdegan.blogspot.com
Tom Degan, Goshen, NY