In a dispatch from the far reaches of right-wing punditry, Kathleen Parker tells us that she has been scratching her chin and wondering how McCain could possibly have chosen Palin. Her conclusion: his mind was clouded by “sexual attraction”:
One does not have to be a psychoanalyst to reckon that McCain was smitten. By no means am I suggesting anything untoward between McCain and his running mate. Palin is a governor, after all. She does have an executive résumé, if a thin one. And she’s a natural politician who connects with people.
But there can be no denying that McCain’s selection of her over others far more qualified — and his mind-boggling lack of attention to details that matter — suggests other factors at work. His judgment may have been clouded by . . . what?
Science provides clues. A study in Canada, published by a British journal in 2003, found that pretty women foil men’s ability to assess the future. “Discounting the future,” as the condition is called, means preferring immediate, lesser rewards to greater rewards in the future.
I don’t know if we really need science to “provide a clue”. Let’s face it. A beautiful woman can cloud one’s mind. However, I think I prefer a candidate who flirts with, perhaps even has sex with, the source of his clouded mind—rather than appoint her to a high position in government. Maybe that’s the point of Parker’s column. Or maybe she’s saying only women should be in positions of authority, since they apparently don’t have this problem. I don’t know. The column is kind of cloudy.