Douthat's Palin Fallacy

Quite a lot of American politicians have become great success stories without graduating from Columbia and Harvard. Even Republican politicians.

Ross Douthat draws a distinction between "meritocratic" leaders like Barack Obama and "democratic" leaders like Andrew Jackson and Sarah Palin:

Our president represents the meritocratic ideal — that anyone, from any background, can grow up to attend Columbia and Harvard Law School and become a great American success story. But Sarah Palin represents the democratic ideal — that anyone can grow up to be a great success story without graduating from Columbia and Harvard.

Actually quite a lot of American politicians have become great success stories without graduating from Columbia and Harvard. Even Republican politicians. How about Richard Nixon?  He had a lot of, um, issues, but being incompetent and not knowing what he was talking about wasn't one of them.  Liberals didn't hate him because he went to Whittier College, after all, and they certainly didn't think he was a fool!  He frightened them because he wasn't a fool. Or Colin Powell of City College?   Again, not without his flaws, but nobody criticizes him for incompetence, lack of preparation, lack of command and public policy knowledge. And then there was this guy named Ronald Reagan, graduate of Eureka College… Palin's critics -- left, right, and center -- don't have a problem with her educational background, etc. etc.  They had a problem with the fact that she was manifestly unqualified to serve as vice president, or, if need be, President of the United States.   And then she showed she -- like Nixon and McCain, to a lesser extent -- was thin skinned about legitimate criticism.  Which, in turn, made her even less qualified.