No, really - Sarah Palin *is* stupid

[Kevin R Brown]

stu-pid

–adjective
1. lacking ordinary quickness and keenness of mind; dull.
2. characterized by or proceeding from mental dullness; foolish; senseless: a stupid question.
3. tediously dull, esp. due to lack of meaning or sense; inane; pointless: a stupid party.
4. annoying or irritating; troublesome: Turn off that stupid radio.
5. in a state of stupor; stupefied: stupid from fatigue.
6. Slang. excellent; terrific.


Sarah Palin meets definitions 1, 2, 3 and 4 rather well. I don't know why Mr. Dunning feels that her winning a governor position in Alaska suggests anything favorable about her intelligence; she could've slept her way to the position with tremendous ease, and is otherwise immensely popular amongst naive & terrifyingly ignorant religious fanatics (and there are plenty of those in Alaska). It's not an ad hominem, either - it's just an insult. An ad hominem would be dismissing any argument she makes just because she's stupid, rather than addressing the argument itself.

[Skeptic]

I don't know why Mr. Dunning feels that her winning a governor position in Alaska suggests anything favorable about her intelligence; she could've slept her way to the position with tremendous ease,Accusing Palin of "sleeping her way" to becoming governor or mayor and therefore lacking in intelligence is a new 'un on me, but, in rebuttal, it is :

a). Rash, since there is not the slightest evidence for her sleeping her way to any of her positions.

b). Illogical, since governor, like mayor, are elected positions, not appointed ones, so even if that was her goal she would have to sleep with thousands of people (at least), the voters.

c). Chauvinistic, since it implies successful female politicians (well, good-looking ones, at least) are not in their position due to their ability but due to "sleeping around".

d). A non-sequitor, since even if she did (despite (a) and (b) above) somehow manage to "sleep her way" to governor and mayor "with tremendous ease" that would certainly not prove she is lacking in intelligence -- if anything, it would show she is a very shrewd person.

e). Irrelevant, since the mere fact that she could have theoretically "slept her way" to governor (which is doubtful) is meaningless to the discussion of whether her being governor without so doing -- the obvious truth -- is evidence for her intelligence or not.

f). Hypocritical, since "she slept her way to the top, the whore!" is precisely the sort of chauvinistic accusation liberals claim conservatives are making in their alleged attempt to keep women down; and finally,

g). Condescending, for obvious reasons.

It isn't often that one can find people making a political statement that manages to combine (a)-(g), but you've managed... I think you're suffering from a rather severe case of "Palin derangement syndrome". Take two copies of the National Review and call me in the morning...

[One Skunk Todd]

Accusing Palin of "sleeping her way" to becoming governor or mayor and therefore lacking in intelligence is a new 'un on me, but, in rebuttal, it is :

b). Illogical, since governor, like mayor, are elected positions, not appointed ones, so even if that was her goal she would have to sleep with thousands of people (at least), the voters.

One could imagine a situation where a candidate exchanges sexual favors with one person or a small group of people, in return for support in the form of financial contributions, public endorsements or introductions to a larger group of people from whom he or she might get benefit.

Your other points are all quite valid of course.

Edited for clarification

[Skeptic]

I see your point, but... "if you'll sleep with me, Ms. 18-year-old naive youngster, I'll make you a star!" is one thing; "If you sleep with me and all my associates, Ms. 40-year-old mayor, I'll make you governor!"? I dunno...

[Kevin R Brown]

I'll concede the point about her sleeping her way into an influential position (becoming the forerunner for Governor in a state is not simply about earning votes, but we'll put that aside; I do not having anything other than my own rather biased suspicions to go on, though I'd call you a naive fool if you don't think she's been using her sex appeal for political & financial favors. It's not chauvinism, either - some women do trade sexual favors for financial or political favors, and I think Sarah Palin is one of those women. I hardly think every woman does this):

If you're contesting the notion that she is stupid, can you explain to me why it is that she doesn't appear to know anything about foreign affairs, rudimentary science or basic history, cannot conduct interviews even of an extremely simplistic nature without writing a cheat sheet in the palm of her hand, felt it necessary to endorse witch hunts overseas, cannot form grammatically sound sentences, even verbally, while talking to crowds or interviewers, etc?

That is the definition of 'stupid'. Unless you want to make a special case for Palin for God knows what reason and tinker with the definition to win a semantic victory, I'd say Mr. Dunning is in error here.

[Whiplash]

Some of you are actually making me wish that she runs and wins, by your hateful and vitriolic attitudes. Why you don't understand how badly this whole thing can (and will) backfire on you, is beyond me.

[Skeptic]

I do not having anything other than my own rather biased suspicions to go on

You don't say.

[Skeptic]

Some of you are actually making me wish that she runs and wins, by your hateful and vitriolic attitudes. Why you don't understand how badly this whole thing can (and will) backfire on you, is beyond me.

I am not fan of Palin, or of Obama. But just like there was a small devil on my shoulder that wanted Obama to win just out of curiosity about what the KKK would do, a small devil on my other shoulder wants her to run and win just to see what the "Palin derangement syndrome" folks would do.

[Drudgewire]

stu-pid

–adjective
1. lacking ordinary quickness and keenness of mind; dull.
2. characterized by or proceeding from mental dullness; foolish; senseless: a stupid question.
3. tediously dull, esp. due to lack of meaning or sense; inane; pointless: a stupid party.
4. annoying or irritating; troublesome: Turn off that stupid radio.
5. in a state of stupor; stupefied: stupid from fatigue.
6. Slang. excellent; terrific.


Sarah Palin meets definitions 1, 2, 3 and 4 rather well. I don't know why Mr. Dunning feels that her winning a governor position in Alaska suggests anything favorable about her intelligence; she could've slept her way to the position with tremendous ease, and is otherwise immensely popular amongst naive & terrifyingly ignorant religious fanatics (and there are plenty of those in Alaska). It's not an ad hominem, either - it's just an insult. An ad hominem would be dismissing any argument she makes just because she's stupid, rather than addressing the argument itself.


The argument could easily be made that both 2008 VP candidates qualify.

[Whiplash]

And Al Gore.

Skeptic: Exactly. I don't exactly love her, but I'd love to see the fallout.

[Kevin R Brown]

The argument could easily be made that both 2008 VP candidates qualify.

Really? Could you provide examples of Mr. Biden dismissing field of research out of hand, writing down a cheat sheet on his palm, riling-up a crowd to use violence to overthrow a new incumbent and/or supporting a witch hunt?

I don't doubt that Mr. Biden isn't a scientist, but he is not unintelligent or dangerous on the same level as Ms. Palin.

[Kevin R Brown]

I am not fan of Palin, or of Obama. But just like there was a small devil on my shoulder that wanted Obama to win just out of curiosity about what the KKK would do, a small devil on my other shoulder wants her to run and win just to see what the "Palin derangement syndrome" folks would do.

So you're just an apathetic cynic, then? So, why bother piping-up at all?

[applecorped]

So you're just an apathetic cynic, then? So, why bother piping-up at all?


Why do you bother?

[LTC8K6]

That definition would fit Barack Obama as well, imo.

[Drudgewire]

Really? Could you provide examples of Mr. Biden dismissing field of research out of hand, writing down a cheat sheet on his palm, riling-up a crowd to use violence to overthrow a new incumbent and/or supporting a witch hunt?

I don't doubt that Mr. Biden isn't a scientist, but he is not unintelligent or dangerous on the same level as Ms. Palin.


You're now pigeonholing your terminology. It's not a matter of who is more stupid, but whether they both qualify by the definition you provided.

The fact there's a word called "Bidenism" gives my argument credence (http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/joebiden/a/bidenisms.htm)

[Kevin R Brown]

You don't say.

I do say it, actually, and quite loudly: Sarah Palin is dangerously stupid and fanatical. She will gut fundamental science funding and she will only expand upon invasive programs that were started by Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney.

She's running in 2012, so if you want to be apathetic and just watch your own country get torn apart, or naively believe that it couldn't possibly happen, have fun I guess.


It's funny that your signature implies that Fox News is in parity with other news organizations; while I'm not a fan of CNN by a large margin, the gulf between what is clearly a Republican propaganda platform populated by fundamentalist Christians & Creationists (Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, the entire cast of 'Fox and Friends', etc) and a superficial 24 hours news network is quite wide.

[Kevin R Brown]

You're now pigeonholing your terminology. It's not a matter of who is more stupid, but whether they both qualify by the definition you provided.

It's not my definition - it's Random House's.

In any case, my point was that I can provide many examples of Ms. Palin saying things that are just plain ignorant and doing things that demonstrate a lack of any foresight (or perhaps care). Can you do the same for Mr. Biden, in order to back up your assertion that he also meets the definition?

That definition would fit Barack Obama as well, imo.

Alright then - so demonstrate it. Provide examples of Mr. Obama doing and/or saying things that crowd him beneath that definition.

[joemailman]

The accusation could go either way. If she actually did get elected based upon her political savvy, intelligence, or shrewd political and/or economic manipulation of any caliber then the politician who ran against her coupled with those who voted for her must be dumb as a box of rocks and twice as stupid. This would have to include the rest of the Alaskan population as you can be sure that anyone, and I do mean anyone with a grain of intelligence, could convince this simple-minded population to vote for them. Since it is unlikely that there is a totality of morons in Alaska she probably slept with one of two of the big boys who in turn funneled money into her campaign to convince the majority of boneheads that she has what it takes to govern. Sex in high office in this country is very commonplace and it should be no wonder that she used it to gain access. Just look at her history of interests and education and I'm sure anyone with half a brain could and would deduce that she screwed her way to the top of Alaska's governance. There's even a rumor out there that she screwed McCain to gain the nomination. I sure wouldn''t doubt it. :eye-poppi :eye-poppi :eek: :eek:

[Drudgewire]

I don't think either Gore or Obama fall under the heading. This isn't a partisan thing, both Al and the Prez usually present themselves as exceedingly intelligent (even Gore's "I invented the Internet" is much more of a case of false bravado than abject stupidity).

But the fact is both Palin and Biden are at risk of delivering a comically dumb soundbyte every single time they are near a microphone.

[applecorped]

so if you want to be apathetic and just watch your own country get torn apart, or naively believe that it couldn't possibly happen, have fun I guess.




I thought it was happening now?

[Skeptic]

If you're contesting the notion that she is stupid, can you explain to me why it is that she doesn't appear to know anything about foreign affairs, rudimentary science or basic history, cannot conduct interviews even of an extremely simplistic nature without writing a cheat sheet in the palm of her hand, felt it necessary to endorse witch hunts overseas, cannot form grammatically sound sentences, even verbally, while talking to crowds or interviewers, etc?

Mostly because none of these things are true.

For example, she can, and does, of course, form numerous "grammatically sound sentences" -- but the Palin-haters forget them all and concentrate on the sentences she flubbed; while, on the other hand, when Obama speaks of the Marine "Corpse" or says that America is "on the precipice" of health care reform, that is forgotten by you. Or the media goes nuts over the fact that she scribbled a few notes to help her remember subjects to speak about on her hand; but Obama using a teleprompter is fine.

Did I just prove Obama is stupid? Of course not! But if Obama were the right-wing popular politician and Palin the left-wing president, you'd be using his teleprompter use and "Marine Corpse" flub to "prove" he "fits the definition of stupid", his origin in Chicago politics as "proof" he just has to be "corrupt", and so on (because we all just "know" Chicago is terribly corrupt and evil, just like you now "know" how "terrifyingly ignorant" stupid everybody in Alaska is); etc.

When you only remember those factoids that fit with your bias, it's easy to "prove" anything you want.

[Skeptic]

That definition would fit Barack Obama as well, imo.

It would fit anybody if one remembers only their screw-ups and not their achievements.

[Kevin R Brown]

I thought it was happening now?

...I presume this is some kind of joke? As a Canadian and a Trotskyist I find a lot of American policy strange, and I disagree with a lot of the political strategy and legislation being passed by Obama, but America is a very far cry from North Korea or Ba'athist Iraq right now.

If you want to test your luck with someone who is clearly a fascist and a lunatic - Ms. Palin - as I said before, have at it.

[Kevin R Brown]

Mostly because none of these things are true.

Really? Well, when she was asked in a televised interview, in very simple terms, about one of her positions regarding her foreign policy knowledge while on the campaign trail (that her mere proximity to Russia gave her insight into Russian politics), she was unable to do so, simply repeating the position. When, in that same interview, she was asked about her opinion the doctrine of preemptively removing threatening despots overseas, she was likewise unable to answer the question.

Her comment regarding fruit fly research is so infamous by now that it's hard to believe you haven't heard it. You can watch Thomas Muthee standing right in Sarah Palin's chruch, praying over the woman and receiving her verbal praise. You can hear her on camera praising the Iraq conflict as a divine 'mission from God'.

Writing down talking points on your hand is quite different from reading off a well prepared speech from a teleprompter in a number of different ways; for starters, one is aesthetically professional and the other is sloppy. Secondly, it's unreasonable to expect anyone to be able to read an entire prepared speech from memory, while it is hardly unreasonable to expect someone to be able to recall their own opinions on given topics from memory. Thirdly, it is apparent from Mr. Obama's books that he has an excellent grasp of the english language and general history - while the same simply isn't true of Ms. Palin's own work.


None of that is a lie at all.

[Kevin R Brown]

It would fit anybody if one remembers only their screw-ups and not their achievements.

Very well - name a speech that Sarah Palin has made or a chapter in her book that you think is particularly worthy of acknowledgement as an achievement.

[Skeptic]

I do say it, actually, and quite loudly: Sarah Palin is dangerously stupid and fanatical.

Yes, but since, as you yourself say, you only have your "rather biased impressions to go on", why should I care about this pronouncements? Not to mention that, whatever credibility your views about Palin might have retained despite your admittance of bias, you lost that credibility when you claimed Palin could have with "tremendous ease" slept her way to the governor's mansion.

Besides, didn't you -- or people like you -- say exactly the same thing about every candidate or even potential candidate? Wasn't Reagan supposed to start WWIII? Wasn't G. W. Bush supposed to declare himself dictator? Didn't Obama turn the country to the UN by now and abolished the Constitution? It's hard to get all excited about someone being declared the 53rd "dangerously stupid and fanatical" politician when the same was said about the previous 52.

There is a rather well-known fairy tale, "The Boy who Cried 'Wolf'". You might want to read it before you accuse people of cynicism and passivity, since it is precisely your sort of overheated rhetoric that causes this cynicism and passivity in the first place.

[applecorped]

Very well - name a speech that Sarah Palin has made or a chapter in her book that you think is particularly worthy of acknowledgement as an achievement.

Quick! Recall an Obama speech and quote it here!!


I'm timing you.

[Skeptic]

...I presume this is some kind of joke? As a Canadian and a Trotskyist...Oh.

Well, never mind what I wanted to say -- there's no point arguing with Trostskyists about politics, much like there's no point in arguing with homeopaths about chemistry or with flat-earthers about geology.

But it's ironic in a rather delicious way to see a Troskyist accusing others of "fanaticism" and "lack of understanding of basic history". One also wonders what, exactly, does someone who is one of the world's last 0.1% or so of communists have against North Korea.

[Kevin R Brown]

Besides, didn't you -- or people like you -- say exactly the same thing about every candidate or even potential candidate? Wasn't Reagan supposed to start WWIII? Wasn't G. W. Bush supposed to declare himself dictator? Didn't Obama turn the country to the UN by now and abolished the Constitution? It's hard to get all excited about someone being declared the 53rd "dangerously stupid and fanatical" politician when the same was said about the previous 52.

Well, alright then: wasn't it people like yourself who stood beside Neville Chamberlain while he pompously declared that Adolf Hitler was not a danger and was 'under control'?

I didn't demagogue Mr. Bush or Mr. Cheney as dictators while they were in power (though they certainly did run roughshod over your constitution a few times), and certainly did not think that either would attempt to become dictators; Bush, for starters, was clearly much more at home in his Ranch and family pressures to conform to.

Mr. Jones of InfoWars.com and his 'Truther' movement did that bit of harm on their own.

I haven't demagogued Obama at all, either. So don't put words in my mouth, thanks.


It's not a matter of 'crying wolf' just because you happen to think (or so I get the impression) that anyone who sees the obvious problems with Sarah Palin's frame of mind must've been in the InfoWars camp.

If you can't see what might be iffy about a campaign run on the back of crowds who were shouting, "Kill him!" or "Bomb Obama!" or "He's an ARAB!", you're morally blind.

[SonOfLaertes]

It would fit anybody if one remembers only their screw-ups and not their achievements.

I don't think that Ms. Palin is stupid; she appears to have some common-sense type intelligence as well as the ability to identify and effectively manipulate her core constituency.

However, for some strange reason I do prefer candidates who demonstrate above average knowledge and background in areas like history, foreign affairs, economics, etc. ( or some combination thereof ). One only has to watch a few of the one-on-one interviews with Ms. Palin to realize that she is basically bereft of such knowledge. Embarrassingly bereft. Her stuttering replies and backpedalling to Golly Gee-isms were very telling.

Now I understand that this is just me, and that many people pooh - pooh the need for a leader who has spent his/her life being, for want of a better word, curious. She strikes me as someone who has made no effort to investigate the other side of any issue, someone who has put on blinders and simply accepted that her small slice of perception is all she needs to know.

And she therefore appeared almost shocked at some of the softball questions lobbed her way in various interviews. One could almost read her mind - "I need to know things about Russia? Why, for heavens sake - it's not America!"

Learning politics on the job, like Obama is doing, is one thing - and a common thing in America. Trying to learn all about extremely relevant players in the global game like China and Russia while on the job is, well, an impossible thing.

Even if she can see Russia from her front yard.

[Skeptic]

I see your point, but to clarify, I am not saying all candidates are equally intelligent. I'm saying the method of "proving" someone stupid by merely selecting their "misses" would "prove" everybody is stupid, thus being meaningless as a way to evaluate intelligence.

[Kevin R Brown]

Oh.

Well, never mind what I wanted to say -- there's no point arguing with Trostskyists about politics, much like there's no point in arguing with homeopaths about chemistry or with flat-earthers about geology.

But it's ironic in a rather delicious way to see a Troskyist accusing others of "fanaticism" and "lack of understanding of basic history". One also wonders what, exactly, does someone who is one of the world's last 0.1% or so of communists have against North Korea.

*Sigh*

I rather doubt you know much about Trotsky or Marx. North Korea, for starters, isn't a communist (and certainly not a Trotskyist) regime; it's a fascist theocracy. Trotsky himself was a dialectical materialist (I disagree with dialectical history myself, and I think one ought to keep in mind the zeitgeist in the Soviet Union at the time Trotsky's ideas were forming with regards to his adoption of dialectical reasoning); he would hardly have approved of a government whose official head of state has been dead for over a decade.

In what way do you feel that Trotsky was a fanatic? He was among the staunchest opponents of emerging fascism in Germany and Stalin's Troika, ultimately being hunted down and assassinated in Mexico by an NKVD agent after several forced relocations and the censorship of his works.

He was also one of the few voices in Eastern Europe who tried desperately to warn of the dangers of the gathering storm that was the Nazi party.

His politics were quite sound; he was instrumental in keeping Petrograd in the hands of the Bolsheviks during the Russian civil war and maintained an excellent standing in the Kremlin until the Troika finally overwhelmed all of it's opponents (though, unlike so many, Trotsky did not capitulate to Stalin).

[Skeptic]

Well, alright then: wasn't it people like yourself who stood beside Neville Chamberlain while he pompously declared that Adolf Hitler was not a danger and was 'under control'?

The problem is that just because people underestimated the damage Hitler could do hardly means every politician since 1938 is a potential Hitler. Some were, or are: e.g., most communist leaders, who never had the least problem genociding millions in police states, or the Iranian mullahs with their apocalyptic kill-the-Jews-with-nukes ideas. But certainly something more than merely being a politician you don't like is needed.

[Michael Redman]

I see your point, but to clarify, I am not saying all candidates are equally intelligent. I'm saying the method of "proving" someone stupid by merely selecting their "misses" would "prove" everybody is stupid, thus being meaningless as a way to evaluate intelligence.

If people were only pointing to misstatements as evidence, as is the case with, say, Biden or Quayle, then I would agree with this. However, most critics are not calling Palin stupid because she messes up a few words here and there. They are calling her stupid because, as a candidate, she was asked obvious, relevant questions in scheduled interviews, and she doesn't even have the broad framework of background knowledge necessary to fake a plausible answer.

Personally, I don't call her stupid. I wouldn't hazard a guess as to her IQ. I would call her ignorant, misguided, and self-righteous, not to mention rich and popular. But not stupid.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

Accusing Palin of "sleeping her way" to becoming governor or mayor and therefore lacking in intelligence is a new 'un on me, but, in rebuttal, it is :

a). Rash, since there is not the slightest evidence for her sleeping her way to any of her positions.

b). Illogical, since governor, like mayor, are elected positions, not appointed ones, so even if that was her goal she would have to sleep with thousands of people (at least), the voters.

c). Chauvinistic, since it implies successful female politicians (well, good-looking ones, at least) are not in their position due to their ability but due to "sleeping around".

d). A non-sequitor, since even if she did (despite (a) and (b) above) somehow manage to "sleep her way" to governor and mayor "with tremendous ease" that would certainly not prove she is lacking in intelligence -- if anything, it would show she is a very shrewd person.

e). Irrelevant, since the mere fact that she could have theoretically "slept her way" to governor (which is doubtful) is meaningless to the discussion of whether her being governor without so doing -- the obvious truth -- is evidence for her intelligence or not.

f). Hypocritical, since "she slept her way to the top, the whore!" is precisely the sort of chauvinistic accusation liberals claim conservatives are making in their alleged attempt to keep women down; and finally,

g). Condescending, for obvious reasons.

It isn't often that one can find people making a political statement that manages to combine (a)-(g), but you've managed... I think you're suffering from a rather severe case of "Palin derangement syndrome". Take two copies of the National Review and call me in the morning...

Exceptional post!! BRAVO!


As for Sarah's intelligence...well, she is not well educated. She isn't exactly an intellectual. She might very easily be called ignorant.

Intelligence, however...she actually seems like a pretty shrewd woman.

And she is articulate and well spoken enough. She doesn't seem dumb- except by choice. She pretends to be folksy and daffy to be cute, like many Hollywood bimbo starlets do (all of whom are actually smart- or way less stupid than they pretend to be, anyway).

Yes, I'm actually saying Sarah Palin is articulate and well spoken enough. Yes, really. She is. She can hold her own in a debate. She doesn't stammer and bumble in her public appearances like George Bush Junior did. She can express herself. She doesn't have much of substance to express but she can talk.

[Skeptic]

I rather doubt you know much about Trotsky or Marx.I don't want to make this thread about Marxism, so this will be my only reply here on the subject. In brief, the problem is that I do. Members of my family, many friends and acquaintances, and a large number of people in my home country are emigrants form various ex-communist countries. I know quite well the horrors Marxism caused from their stories.

It's not the dungeons or the gulags, or the mass murders, horrible as they were, which were their most important experiences. People knew such things existed, but didn't talk about hem much in daily life.

It was the inability to leave or travel, the life in a huge prison guarded by barbed wired -- not to keep enemies out, but to keep people in.

It was the constant crude lies by the government as "news" which must be read with the understanding that just about in anything, the opposite is closer to the truth by far. It's the constant brainwashing: a friend of mine, who studied German in a soviet textbook as a child, recalled that most exercises involved translating things like "The commissar is looking lovingly at the happy workers", etc., instead of anything that would actually be useful.

It's also the drab, pathetic, uncomfortable existence: the inability to get a decent light bulb, let alone car or television; the wait in interminable lines for getting a little bread; the chocolate that isn't really chocolate, the coffee that isn't coffee, and so on. (The East Germans, I am told, had a East-German made car that they nicknamed the "Luther" -- after Martin Luther's famous saying that he "Cannot move from his position".)

As the old joke during communist times had it, Marxist economic wonders will soon let every Soviet citizen have his own airplane. And why would everybody need that? Well, you hear there's a line for matches in Kiev, and you fly there; the next day you hear there's milk being distributed in Moscow, so you fly there.

You never stood in a line on the street for one's government-determined ratio of toilet paper in sub-freezing temperatures in gloomy, darkening streets (40 watt bulbs, and few of them, were the standard in the paradise of the workers, I am told). That sort of thing tends to rather bias one against Marxism, my acquaintances tell me.

[Kevin R Brown]

I don't want to make this thread about Marxism, so this will be my only reply here on the subject. In brief, the problem is that I do. Members of my family, many friends and acquaintances, and a large number of people in my home country are emigrants form various ex-communist countries. I know quite well the horrors Marxism caused from their stories.

It's not the dungeons or the gulags, or the mass murders, horrible as they were, which were their most important experiences. People knew such things existed, but didn't talk about hem much in daily life.

...And what would Stalin's gulags have to do with Karl Marx anyway, by chance? Neither Marx nor Trotsky were actively involved with the Soviet Union after Stalin seized power and killed his opponents in the purges; Marx had been long dead (he died in just prior to the turn of the 1900s) and Trotsky had been exiled alongside his family (he fled first to France, then Norway, then finally Mexico, where Stalin finally managed to accomplish the task of killing him).

Neither Marx nor Trotsky championed a police state or did anything to help tyrants get afoot.

It was the inability to leave or travel, the life in a huge prison guarded by barbed wired -- not to keep enemies out, but to keep people in.

It was the constant crude lies by the government as "news" which must be read with the understanding that just about in anything, the opposite is closer to the truth by far. It's the constant brainwashing: a friend of mine, who studied German in a soviet textbook as a child, recalled that most exercises involved translating things like "The commissar is looking lovingly at the happy workers", etc., instead of anything that would actually be useful.

It's also the drab, pathetic, uncomfortable existence: the inability to get a decent light bulb, let alone car or television; the wait in interminable lines for getting a little bread; the chocolate that isn't really chocolate, the coffee that isn't coffee, and so on. (The East Germans, I am told, had a East-German made car that they nicknamed the "Luther" -- after Martin Luther's famous saying that he "Cannot move from his position".)

You're describing East Germany and the greater Soviet Union under Stalinist fascism; again, this has nothing to do with Marxism or Trotskyism. The underpinning economic idea of Marxism is giving control of the means of production to the Proletariat, thus (in theory) eroding away the stratification of classes (In Marx's view, this would cure the world of most, if not all, of it's problems, in accordance with his dialectical model. I find this to be a simplistic and foolish line of thinking, though I agree with the basic premise that handing over the means of production to the working class is a sensible idea that will cure a lot of strife).

No self-proclaimed 'communist' regime, from Mao to Hoxha, has ever actually put the means of production into the hands of the Proletariat.

As the old joke during communist times had it, Marxist economic wonders will soon let every Soviet citizen have his own airplane. And why would everybody need that? Well, you hear there's a line for matches in Kiev, and you fly there; the next day you hear there's milk being distributed in Moscow, so you fly there.

You never stood in a line on the street for one's government-determined ratio of toilet paper in sub-freezing temperatures in gloomy, darkening streets (40 watt bulbs, and few of them, were the standard in the paradise of the workers, I am told). That sort of thing tends to rather bias one against Marxism, my acquaintances tell me.

And again, the Soviet Union did not reflect the ideas of Marx or Trotsky. Ioseb was, for all intents and purposes, a clever bank robber and little more. His economic policies weren't merely 'bad' or 'failed' - they were deliberately engineered to cause death and despair (and, in the case of the Ukrainians, genocide). There was no active effort on the part of Moscow to serve the needs of it's population.

If I were to hold up the wiretapping program implemented by Mr. Cheney or the abuses in Abu Ghraib as 'proof' that Thomas Payne was a monster, you'd probably call me an idiot and rightly so. You're doing, essentially, the same thing here.


And I haven't been calling every politician since the conclusion of the 2nd World War a fascist - I'm very specifically pointing out Sarah Palin. Look over the McCain/Palin campaign and see how it compares with the Bush/Cheney campaign, for goodness sake: did Bush/Cheney gather crowds that literally screamed for their opponent's blood at nearly every rally? On the other side of the political fence, did the democrats ever assemble marches of armed, threatening protesters (granted, most of the 'Tea Party' are too cowardly to do anything anyway, even if they do haul along their assault weapons to the capital) on the White House lawn while Bush/Cheney were in power?

This is a very, very different thing that is being seen right now. I despise Richard Cheney for his profiteering at the expense of the Iraqis and his disregard for human rights, but he clearly had little interest in driving America into some hideous oblivion (for starters, he's a fairly successful businessman and very clearly a financially driven individual; he wouldn't have anything to gain and plenty to lose from the destruction of your economy). Contrast that with Sarah Palin, who does not have any history of business savvy and who's financial success is largely a product of her charisma and political track, rather than the more typical reverse situation, and who has repeatedly expressed a desire to return America to back to some Christian 'Golden Age' which never existed. She attacks academia and science as 'elitism' and claims to speak for the 'heartland' of America (which is very strongly suggestive of believing in some 'real' or 'superior' Americans who aren't currently being recognized, in her own eyes. Does that sound at all familiar?) which, apparently, has no interest in skeptical inquiry or playing with bugs in a lab - preferring 'common sense' solutions and intuition.

If you're not buying it I guess you're not buying it, but I can't say it much better than Leon Trotsky did in Whither France?:

These [Fascist] demagogues shake their fists at the bankers, the big merchants and the capitalists. Their words and gestures correspond to the feelings of the small proprietors bogged up a blind alley. The Fascists show boldness, go out into the streets, attack the police, and attempt to drive out parliament by force. That makes an impression on the despairing petty bourgeois. He says to himself: “The Radicals, among whom there are too many swindlers, have definitely sold themselves to the bankers; the Socialists have promised for a long time to abolish exploitation but they never pass from words to deeds, the Communists one cannot understand at all – today it is one thing tomorrow another; let’s see if the Fascists cannot save us.”

[Slimething]

She might very easily be called ignorant.

Fully agree with you on this. I don't agree that she's stupid but she is exceptionally and wilfully ignorant. She seems to intentionally avoid learning about the complexity of issues to avoid looking like every other politician. Her supporters are those who believe that there are easy fixes to complex problems (IOW, the ignorant). Anything that would interfere with that commonality would destroy her career.

She can hold her own in a debate.
No, sorry, this is not true. In the VP debate against Biden, she did not know the responsibilities of the office she was running for. She also believed that, as President of the Senate, a standing VP would actually participate in the Legislative Branch. She made other gaffes during that debate but those are the only two I can remember.

There has to be one most-despised conservative politician in any given political system and the same can be said on the liberal side. Ms. Palin is today's flavor on the conservative side, much as George Wallace, Richard Nixon, et al were in their time. The seminal difference is that Palin has limited herself to a 20% slice of the US electorate and has not sought to widen her appeal, making her unelectable. One might think that she is not only ignorant but also egocentric or even sociopathic.

There. Now, I've given enough time to thought of Palin as a serious topic.

Thanks. :)

[stup_id]

Sarah Palin is stupid

stu-pid

–adjective
1. lacking ordinary quickness and keenness of mind; dull.
2. characterized by or proceeding from mental dullness; foolish; senseless: a stupid question.
3. tediously dull, esp. due to lack of meaning or sense; inane; pointless: a stupid party.
4. annoying or irritating; troublesome: Turn off that stupid radio.
5. in a state of stupor; stupefied: stupid from fatigue.
6. Slang. excellent; terrific.



I'm pretty sure i'm not Sarah Palin....


Is this another nightmare???


(well I least I've got nice boobs :D)

[Slimething]

(well I least I've got nice boobs :D)

Evidence, please. :eye-poppi

[stup_id]

Evidence, please. :eye-poppi

sure:

http://www.pijamasurf.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/sarah_palin_5.jpg

jaja I think u didnt get the joke.. I was pretending I was having a nightmare where Im Sarah Palin as a result of the OP-s title, so... I was saying that at least If I was Sara I would have nice boobs...

But in reality I;m a guy with quite hairy chest :P :P

haha

[Skeptic]

Well, I think I will just start a new fascist party, then.

After all, neither Fascist Italy nor Nazi Germany were ever really ruled by the Volk, but rather by a party bureaucracy, so surely those tens of millions of dead are just the result of a big misunderstanding about what the good and wonderful true Fascism would be like.

Anyway, back to Sarah Palin, perhaps the mods should merge all the various Palin threads?

[joemailman]

She actually is a very stupid woman if by stupid you mean without any relevant information. The great majority of Americans can't seem to understand that people who speak in tongues are preposterously inept at much of anything else. Stupid is as stupid does as F. Gump's momma said and the behavior of conservatives and the general population of religious nuts in this country demonstrates the truth of that remark.

[Wildy]

Isn't this thread the very thing that Dunning said not to do?

[Slimething]

jaja I think u didnt get the joke.. I was pretending I was having a nightmare where Im Sarah Palin as a result of the OP-s title, so... I was saying that at least If I was Sara I would have nice boobs...

But in reality I;m a guy with quite hairy chest :P :P

haha

Dammit! Story of my life. :(

[Kevin R Brown]

After all, neither Fascist Italy nor Nazi Germany were ever really ruled by the Volk, but rather by a party bureaucracy, so surely those tens of millions of dead are just the result of a big misunderstanding about what the good and wonderful true Fascism would be like.

Hey, you're the one apologizing for Ioseb, not me. You claimed that it was the underlying Marxist concept that incidentally killed so many people - I said it was a deliberate effort on the part of Moscow.

[Zep]

To the OP: Yes, Pallin is likely under-endowed with cranium-filler, based on how she has used it so far. But then again, she's hardly Robinson Crusoe on that front. There's dumb-heads always cropping up all over the political world.

[imjohn]

I'd call you a naive fool if you don't think she's been using her sex appeal for political & financial favors. It's not chauvinism, either - some women do trade sexual favors for financial or political favors, and I think Sarah Palin is one of those women. I hardly think every woman does this)

Using sex appeal is very different from trading sexual favors. Ms Palin may be using sex appeal, buy I doubt that she has traded sexual favors and as far as I know there has never even been a suggestion that she has done so.

I'm no fan of Ms Palin, but really what you are saying here is irresponsible.

[John Albert]

Maybe Howard Gardner ought to add "secksayness" to his Theory of Multiple Intelligences?

I really do lean toward the explanation that Sarah Palin is, for all intents and purposes, pretty stupid when it comes to matters of state.

[thaiboxerken]

Palin may "sound" articulate in her speeches and debates, but she ultimately delivers well-dressed word salad. Remember the speech she gave when she quit on Alaska?

[Bill Thompson]

Did she REALLY say the things she has been accused of saying?
Did she REALLY say she did not know what countries were in NAFTA?
Did she REALLY say she thought Africa was a country?

I have not seen any interviews where she says these things. And yet Liberals insist she did. It seems more likely that the Liberals are lying.

She was governor of Alaska. How can someone be governor of Alaska and be that stupid?

I think it is more likely that she has been misquoted and it is the American Public who are stupid enough to think Palin IS Tina Feye's characterization.

I am not a Palin supporter. But I will not judge until I get all facts. And I know how slanted the press is. And I know how much the Lib Dems BS. Remember that "vast right-wing conspiracy"?

[Wowbagger]

I don't know if Sarah Palin is stupid or not. But, I know she is not, exactly, known for her smarts. There is a difference.

[Slimething]

Did she REALLY say the things she has been accused of saying?
Did she REALLY say she did not know what countries were in NAFTA?
Did she REALLY say she thought Africa was a country?

I have not seen any interviews where she says these things. And yet Liberals insist she did. It seems more likely that the Liberals are lying.

Those allegations came from campaign insiders (http://foolocracy.com/2008/11/palin-didnt-know-nafta-countries-or-that-africa-isnt-a-country/). Who knows? They could have been liberals. :rolleyes:

She was governor of Alaska. How can someone be governor of Alaska and be that stupid?
Alaska has a population less than 700,000 people and who knows how many actually vote. Weird things happen when the sampling rate is low.

I think it is more likely that she has been misquoted and it is the American Public who are stupid enough to think Palin IS Tina Feye's characterization.
Interesting. Why do you think she was misquoted? She made statements just as stupid as the ones you are denying on camera. Those accreditations are not inconsistent with statements we know she made.

I am not a Palin supporter. But I will not judge until I get all facts. And I know how slanted the press is. And I know how much the Lib Dems BS. Remember that "vast right-wing conspiracy"?
So, go get all the facts and let us all know what you find. As for the other stuff, not interested. :covereyes

[Bill Thompson]

What a crappy country we live in! The governor of a major USA state is like this woman. It is pretty sad.

There is also a speech on YouTube where she is in New Hampshire and she is talking about how great it is to be in the American North West.

On the other hand....

And Obama thought there were 57 states.

Maybe Palin was just not thinking when she asked about NAFTA. I am sure she was nervous. Being tapped to be Vice President would do that to someone.

Maybe she is not as smart as the Republicans would like to think but not as stupid as the Liberal Dems think.

Some of your critisms are unfair. Who ARE these unnamed campaign insiders? And the stories become exaggerated when retold and retold and passed along.

[Bill Thompson]

Interesting. Why do you think she was misquoted? She made statements just as stupid as the ones you are denying on camera. Those accreditations are not inconsistent with statements we know she made.


I know she said that there are some high places in Alaska where you can go and actually see parts of Russia.

Tina Feye said "and I can see Alaska from my house".

So, no, some things Feye said was not a direct quote.

[John Albert]

Did she REALLY say the things she has been accused of saying?

Did she REALLY say she did not know what countries were in NAFTA?
It was a McCain campaign insider who reported that one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvJi6mYECZU

Did she REALLY say she thought Africa was a country?
Yes, she said that on national television (on Larry King Live):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNQLBSHckQ8

She was governor of Alaska. How can someone be governor of Alaska and be that stupid?
That's a very good question. Maybe she has some associates in very powerful economic positions. Maybe her appeal has little to do with actual intelligence or political/administrative achievements. Maybe it has something to do with Alaskan culture and demographics?

Maybe it has something to do with this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSdFIDygFwM

...plus the fact that Alaska has such a high ratio of bachelors to available females (114 unmarried men for every 100 women, highest in all 50 states (http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/facts_for_features_special_editions/002265.html)).

American politics is a very whimsical and superficial business. Popular celebrity types are increasingly moving into the political sphere. Apparently, lots of Americans thought it was fine for a movie actor with few political qualifications to become President, a comedian to become a US senator, and a professional wrestler to become a state governor.

Sarah Palin is a pretty lady who exudes a kind of homespun, down-to-earth charm and is good at memorizing party lines and pointedly exploiting hot-button topics and buzzwords in her speeches. She publicly displays a very active lifestyle filled with the kinds of outdoorsy-type activities that are a popular point of pride with Alaskan citizens. It's not surprising that lots of voters might perceive her as a straight-shooter more in line with their interests than some stodgy old guy in a 3-piece suit, regardless of her lack of qualifications.

I am not a Palin supporter. But I will not judge until I get all facts. And I know how slanted the press is. And I know how much the Lib Dems BS. Remember that "vast right-wing conspiracy"?
Ah, yes. The old "Liberal Media" conspiracy. When in doubt, blame the opposing party. Good call on that one.

And good luck in your non-pursuit of "all the facts." As long as you don't bother to look too hard, you can keep denying them for as long as you like, right?

Isn't this thread the very thing that Dunning said not to do?
Yeah, but Brian Dunning is not the boss of me.

[Bill Thompson]

You did not watch the videos that you liked to. If you had you would see that the titles and captions of those videos do not match the content in the video. On Larry King Live, Sarah Palin did NOT bring up the African quesiton.

You lied.

The other video does not mention any person by name. Hearsay is not admissible for a good reason.

If unnamed sources say something, by default we should think it was not said.

On the other hand, we have direct quotes from Biden to judge him to be a loon and a crackpod and a dolt.


Ah, yes. The old "Liberal Media" conspiracy. When in doubt, blame the opposing party. Good call on that one.


What exactly are you talking about? That does not make any sense.

It is a fact from media watchdog groups that the press of the Democrats in the last election was overwhelmingly positive and ignored negative stories. It is also a fact from media watchdog groups that the press of the Republicans in the last election was overwhelmingly negative. "Liberal Media" conspiracy? Those are your terms, not mine.
vlIpCZOLQEM

[sesshin]

And Obama thought there were 57 states.

Obama didn't think there were 57 states, he had been to 47 states (http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/57states.asp) and misspoke. That's not being stupid, it's being tired. If you had campaigned in 47 states straight you would probably be apt to misspeak as well.

[Bill Thompson]

Dan Quale did not stop Bush Senior from becoming president. The only reason why Palin had the negative impact that she did is because the press made sure it was a negative impact. From the moment she was chosen, the media was digging around Alaska for anything -- any sound byte -- any speech they could disect and take quotes out of context -- any questionable association to exploit. It was all for a good cause. It was to make sure Obama got elected and to deflect the critisim of how many true and clear direct quotes Biden had made over the years that showed him as a virtual retard.

[Bill Thompson]

Obama didn't think there were 57 states, he had been to 47 states (http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/57states.asp) and misspoke. That's not being stupid, it's being tired. If you had campaigned in 47 states straight you would probably be apt to misspeak as well.

Awww, poor baby.

W stumbled over his words later in the day too. But no sympathy for him.

[Slimething]

I know she said that there are some high places in Alaska where you can go and actually see parts of Russia.
So, what you're saying is that you completely missed the presidential campaign. She said lots of stuff on camera, not just that. See if you can dig out the vice presidential debate between Palin and Biden. You'll hear some pretty damning evidence that Palin doesn't even know the role of the VP.

Tina Feye said "and I can see Alaska from my house".
So, no, some things Feye said was not a direct quote.
Why even bring this up? Is anyone here attributing what Tina Faye said to Palin? I haven't seen it. It's called parody and SNL parodies a lot of politicians and celebrities.

If you want to believe that, for some odd reason, that Palin was merely misquoted and slandered by liberals, the press, her own staff, McCain's staff, liberal pundits, conservative pundits and herself, go ahead. That type of dissonance is exactly what we're talking about.

BTW, how is the "getting all the facts" things going? Turn up anything yet?

[Bill Thompson]

No Liberal Media Bias?
Explain how and why did Hillary get a pass for not knowing The National Anthem?

[Bill Thompson]

So, what you're saying is that you completely missed the presidential campaign. She said lots of stuff on camera, not just that. See if you can dig out the vice presidential debate between Palin and Biden. You'll hear some pretty damning evidence that Palin doesn't even know the role of the VP.

It was a sad circus. A real-life Dumb and Dumber. I recall Biden made more mistakes.

[Bill Thompson]

Why even bring this up? Is anyone here attributing what Tina Faye said to Palin?

Even I am not bringing up what Tina Feye said to Palin.

Maybe there is a Starbucks near you and you can have your morning coffee and then go back and reread what I typed.


Why even bring this up? Is anyone here attributing what Tina Faye said to Palin? I haven't seen it. It's called parody and SNL parodies a lot of politicians and celebrities.


Follow the discussion thread. A poster insisted that Feye's parody were direct quotes.

[sesshin]

Awww, poor baby.

W stumbled over his words later in the day too. But no sympathy for him.

It has nothing to do with sympathy. You are completely misrepresenting what happened.

[Chris L]

I have seen nothing from Palin (even in interviews in friendly venues) that would indicate that she is qualified to occupy the Oval Office. According to a survey taken (Google it, I'm just too lazy to) neither does the Tea Party crowd. And yet, they applaud her anyway.

What some people seem to miss is that it is not her they love, as much as it is her critics they hate. They see her critics as mean vicious people who seem to be reacting more on an emotional level than anything else. They also see her critics as using their attacks on her to attack the idea of middle class people being part of the political class.

From what I have observed on this thread, they may not be completely wrong. Right out of the box, you had one poster accusing the lady of sleeping her way to the top (how else would someone from outside the approved political class succeed?), and suggesting that a state full of people are pretty stupid. For some people, democracy only works when their side wins.

[thaiboxerken]

No Liberal Media Bias?
Explain how and why did Hillary get a pass for not knowing The National Anthem?

Source?

[thaiboxerken]

Follow the discussion thread. A poster insisted that Feye's parody were direct quotes.

Much of the SNL skits did include direct quotes from Palin's idiotic ramblings.

[Bill Thompson]

When Obama signed the health care bill into law, Joe Biden was acting like an uncontrollable child with down syndrome shouting out profanity "This is ***** awesome" but he did not say "*****"

It is difficult to believe any governor of Alaska would not know much about Nafta or world geography and yet you fully and completely believe hearsay from unnamed sources. Shame on you.

You suggest there is no liberal bias. Or any "liberal conspiracy". This is the biggest pot of hogwash I have ever heard.

While going after Palin for any tidbit they could find or fabricate, the openly admit looking the other way while John Edwards screwed around and lied.

They look the other way when Hillary Clinton messed up the words when she sang the National Anthem.

They look the other way when the DNC and The Clinton are discovered to have engaged in campaign fraud.

They look the other way when Bi den makes more mistakes than Palin in the VP debates.

It can be argued that both Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden are worse than Palin. They were actually running for president while Palin was a governor. Being unknowing about a subject is a curable problem. Standing before an audience and inventing a war record to look tough (dodging bullets in Bosnia) is another issue. So is saying that your husbands infidelities are fabricated and part of a vast right wing conspiracy.

Intelligence is not linear dispite our confidence in IQ test scores. Palin was the most popular governor in the United States. She must have been a great leader to do that.

If Palin could actually sing the national anthem and get the words right, would that mean she is smarter than Hillary Clinton? It is already clear she is probably a lot more ethical.

[Titanic Explorer]

The woman is a typical right wing Christian zealot- she is a proud anti-intellectual.
When asked to name a founding father, she couldn't think of a name-

[Bill Thompson]

Source?

Why am I not suprised you have not seen or heard of this? This supports my comments about the Liberal Media Bias.

This seems unbelievable but I have proof.

bfZ_gXCHaMw

In case you don't know, it is not “Oh say does our star spangled banner yet wave” it is “Oh say does that star spangled banner yet wave”. It might be a minor point to some. But is it not to me. There may be some characteristics people are looking for in a president and there may be some characteristics that are not important to people who are running for president. Not knowing our national anthem just might be a minor point, but it is something I think should disqualify anyone from running for president. If there was a test of qualifications or even a series of test, knowing the National Anthem should be the first question on the first test in the first elimination round.

Not loving your country enough to know the National Anthem is a bigger flaw than anything I have heard out of any candidates mouth.

[Titanic Explorer]

When Obama signed the health care bill into law, Joe Biden was acting like an uncontrollable child with down syndrome shouting out profanity "This is ***** awesome" but he did not say "*****"

It is difficult to believe any governor of Alaska would not know much about Nafta or world geography and yet you fully and completely believe hearsay from unnamed sources. Shame on you.

You suggest there is no liberal bias. Or any "liberal conspiracy". This is the biggest pot of hogwash I have ever heard.

While going after Palin for any tidbit they could find or fabricate, the openly admit looking the other way while John Edwards screwed around and lied.

They look the other way when Hillary Clinton messed up the words when she sang the National Anthem.

They look the other way when the DNC and The Clinton are discovered to have engaged in campaign fraud.

They look the other way when Bi den makes more mistakes than Palin in the VP debates.

It can be argued that both Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden are worse than Palin. They were actually running for president while Palin was a governor. Being unknowing about a subject is a curable problem. Standing before an audience and inventing a war record to look tough (dodging bullets in Bosnia) is another issue. So is saying that your husbands infidelities are fabricated and part of a vast right wing conspiracy.

Intelligence is not linear dispite our confidence in IQ test scores. Palin was the most popular governor in the United States. She must have been a great leader to do that.

If Palin could actually sing the national anthem and get the words right, would that mean she is smarter than Hillary Clinton? It is already clear she is probably a lot more ethical.



Why are you an apologist for for an opportunist cretin like Palin? She's a semi literate Christian radical-She has betrayed a shocking level of ignorance of science, culture, and American history, such as asserting that Thomas Jefferson was a 'devout Christian'. (Pure B.S) And having quit her governer position, she proved she is not able to handle the stress of public office. And news flash- Both major parties in America are right wing- The Republicans are radical right, the Dems are not far behind them- But the Republicans are totally controlled by the science rejecting Bible thumping Jesus crowd.

Republicans have no credibility btw- They had no problems with Bush's reckless spending and massive expansion of executive powers- I seem to recall Bush's followers denouncing any criticism of Bush as being 'treason'. Only after Republicans were out of power did they suddenly claim to care about being fiscal conservatives and caring about free speech.

I'm not a Dem, both parties are broken, but the Christian zealotry and homophobia of he Republicans makes them my least favorite party..

[quarky]

I'm getting bored with dumb politicians.

When can we have one that is down-right retarded?

[Bill Thompson]

Why are you an apologist for for an opportunist cretin like Palin? She's a semi literate Christian radical-She has betrayed a shocking level of ignorance of science, culture, and American history, such as asserting that Thomas Jefferson was a 'devout Christian'. (Pure B.S) And having quit her governer position, she proved she is not able to handle the stress of public office. And news flash- Both major parties in America are right wing- The Republicans are radical right, the Dems are not far behind them- But the Republicans are totally controlled by the science rejecting Bible thumping Jesus crowd.

Republicans have no credibility btw- They had no problems with Bush's reckless spending and massive expansion of executive powers- I seem to recall Bush's followers denouncing any criticism of Bush as being 'treason'. Only after Republicans were out of power did they suddenly claim to care about being fiscal conservatives and caring about free speech.

I'm not a Dem, both parties are broken, but the Christian zealotry and homophobia of he Republicans makes them my least favorite party..

The woman is a typical right wing Christian zealot- she is a proud anti-intellectual.
When asked to name a founding father, she couldn't think of a name-

Prove it.

It sounds too much like Liberal dogma.

[John Albert]

You did not watch the videos that you liked to. If you had you would see that the titles and captions of those videos do not match the content in the video. On Larry King Live, Sarah Palin did NOT bring up the African question.

You lied.
You're right. She did not make that statement on TV. I apologize for posting that. It wasn't a deliberate attempt to mislead anyone. I actually wrote that post in haste using my phone, while on a train ride. I ought to have watched the entire video before posting it.

Care to address any of the other points I made, besides homing in on a single mistake?

The other video does not mention any person by name. Hearsay is not admissible for a good reason.

If unnamed sources say something, by default we should think it was not said.
Not necessarily. It was a member of John McCain's campaign who reportedly made those statements. The alleged statements were widely reported in the media by many news organizations, including Fox News, which has a well-known history of right-leaning bias when compared with most other major American outlets. Yet even after such wide exposure, McCain's campaign (her own running mate, mind you) made no attempt over the following weeks or months to discredit or deny the allegations of Palin's ignorance. McCain even made numerous statements himself that backpedaled from other allegations Palin had made during the campaign. Given the obtuse nature of some of her other comments and her refusal to directly answer many other questions pertaining to her own civic and political knowledge, together with McCain's obvious distancing of his campaign from hers, I feel it's not unreasonable to accept the statements in question were probably true.

By the way, how come you apply the strictest scrutiny to allegations of Sarah Palin's lack of qualifications, but have no problem believing that Barack Obama (who was a professor of Constitutional Law at one of the top universities in our country before running for president) doesn't know how many states are in the Union, and Hillary Clinton (who was First Lady of the United States for 8 years) doesn't remember the Pledge of Allegiance?

Why the double-standard?

On the other hand, we have direct quotes from Biden to judge him to be a loon and a crackpod and a dolt.

I never mentioned Joseph Biden in my post. Why do you bring him up here? Smells like a red herring to me.

It is a fact from media watchdog groups that the press of the Democrats in the last election was overwhelmingly positive and ignored negative stories. It is also a fact from media watchdog groups that the press of the Republicans in the last election was overwhelmingly negative.
A 'fact' is it, from 'media watchdog groups'? Sounds like an impressive appeal to authority. It also sounds more like 'opinions' than 'facts.' Care to cite any of these?

"Liberal Media" conspiracy? Those are your terms, not mine.
The mainstream media is a business. They make their money by appealing to the greatest possible majority of Americans, because that is the strategy that will earn them the highest ratings, and therefore the greatest amount of advertising revenue. Their commercial interests involve reporting in such a way to inspire confidence and trust in the widest possible audience, while avoiding pissing off their advertisers. This being the case, it is in the commercial interest of the news networks to report a manner that conforms to the accepted politics of the majority of Americans. In other words, in a Centrist manner, likely to appear unbiased to the majority of Americans. Calling the media "Leftist" is actually revealing oneself to be inhabiting an area to the right of the most Americans' politics.

'Liberal' and 'conservative' are relative terms. To somebody who views the political landscape from a vantage of the far left or the far right, any differing opinion is likely to appear biased towards the right or the left, respectively. If I'm a radical conservative, I'm going to feel that the media expresses a leftist bias; if I'm a radical liberal, I'm going to think the media carries a rightist bias. If I believed strongly enough that leprechauns ought to rule the world, I would probably feel that the mainstream media's ignorance of leprechaun-centric views are highly biased. If I felt that werewolves posed the greatest threat to the safety of mankind, then I would no doubt feel that the conspicuous absence of werewolf coverage would mean the mainstream news is irresponsibly ignorant of the werewolf menace. It's all relative.

Claiming a "liberal media bias" on the part of the entire news media industry is a conspiracy theory. Such claims speak more about the lack of objectivity of the person making the claims, than it does about the news media itself.

[John Albert]

I should have realized this would have degenerated into a partisan cluster-****.

[Tatyana]

Why am I not suprised you have not seen or heard of this? This supports my comments about the Liberal Media Bias.

This seems unbelievable but I have proof.

bfZ_gXCHaMw

In case you don't know, it is not “Oh say does our star spangled banner yet wave” it is “Oh say does that star spangled banner yet wave”. It might be a minor point to some. But is it not to me. There may be some characteristics people are looking for in a president and there may be some characteristics that are not important to people who are running for president. Not knowing our national anthem just might be a minor point, but it is something I think should disqualify anyone from running for president. If there was a test of qualifications or even a series of test, knowing the National Anthem should be the first question on the first test in the first elimination round.

Not loving your country enough to know the National Anthem is a bigger flaw than anything I have heard out of any candidates mouth.

Just so I am clear on this, you are stating that Hilary Clinton messed up the words of the national anthem because of one word 'our' instead of 'that'?

And mis-speaking one word = not loving your country enough?

[Elizabeth I]

Just so I am clear on this, you are stating that Hilary Clinton messed up the words of the national anthem because of one word 'our' instead of 'that'?

And mis-speaking one word = not loving your country enough?

I am no fan of Hillary Clinton - in fact, I detest the woman - but even I think that missing one word in the National Anthem is no big deal, and in fact it could be seen as rather touching that she substituted "our" for "that." Claiming it as her own, so to speak.

[thaiboxerken]

In case you don't know, it is not “Oh say does our star spangled banner yet wave” it is “Oh say does that star spangled banner yet wave”. It might be a minor point to some. But is it not to me

I think this says more about you than Clinton. There is a difference between a one word mistake while singing the national anthem, and not being able to name one newspaper one claims to have read. Sorry, but Palin fails.

The reason this Clinton, anthem mistake didn't really make news is because it is not news.

[Bob Blaylock]

Dan Quale did not stop Bush Senior from becoming president. The only reason why Palin had the negative impact that she did is because the press made sure it was a negative impact. From the moment she was chosen, the media was digging around Alaska for anything -- any sound byte -- any speech they could disect and take quotes out of context -- any questionable association to exploit. It was all for a good cause. It was to make sure Obama got elected and to deflect the critisim of how many true and clear direct quotes Biden had made over the years that showed him as a virtual retard.


They did exactly the same thing to Dan Quayle. I remember the 1988 campaign, after Bush had secured the nomination, and attention turned to who he might choose as his running mate. The press immediately focussed on a brilliant young senator from Indiana, a “Robert Redford lookalike”, who they built up to look like some sort of great political prodigy, in the mold of JFK.

As soon as Bush announced that that was who he had selected, the press immediately turned against him, and we got to spend the next eight years being treated to every possible attempt to present Dan Quayle as stupid, immature, incompetent, and whatever.

It was an impressive demonstration of the power that the news media has to shape public opinion, and of their eagerness to abuse this power to promote a partisan political agenda.

[Tatyana]

I am no fan of Hillary Clinton - in fact, I detest the woman - but even I think that missing one word in the National Anthem is no big deal, and in fact it could be seen as rather touching that she substituted "our" for "that." Claiming it as her own, so to speak.


I had the same impression about the mistake.

[dlorde]

If you're contesting the notion that she is stupid, can you explain to me why it is that she doesn't appear to know anything about foreign affairs, rudimentary science or basic history, cannot conduct interviews even of an extremely simplistic nature without writing a cheat sheet in the palm of her hand, felt it necessary to endorse witch hunts overseas, cannot form grammatically sound sentences, even verbally, while talking to crowds or interviewers, etc?

That is the definition of 'stupid'.

No, you already gave the definitions(s) of stupid. The attributes you describe above are of ignorance.

I'm no fan of Palin, but irony amuses me, and your post sails close to what you're accusing her of being...

[Whiplash]

Objectivity? With regards to Sarah Palin?

Never.

[thaiboxerken]

No, you already gave the definitions(s) of stupid. The attributes you describe above are of ignorance.


I think that willfull ignorance is stupidity.

[Chris L]

I think that willfull ignorance is stupidity.

And you know this because?

[Chris L]

To be clearer, how do you know the ignorance is willful?

[thaiboxerken]

To be clearer, how do you know the ignorance is willful?

Because she was running for a very, very major political position in the USA and yet didn't educate herself on the responsibilities of that position.

[Fnord]

Her nickname was/is 'Caribou Barbie' ... there must be a reason for that.

[quarky]

Chew on this:
If Sarah Palin was smart, she'd act stupid.

[shadron]

In case you don't know, it is not “Oh say does our star spangled banner yet wave” it is “Oh say does that star spangled banner yet wave”. It might be a minor point to some. But is it not to me. There may be some characteristics people are looking for in a president and there may be some characteristics that are not important to people who are running for president. Not knowing our national anthem just might be a minor point, but it is something I think should disqualify anyone from running for president. If there was a test of qualifications or even a series of test, knowing the National Anthem should be the first question on the first test in the first elimination round.

Not loving your country enough to know the National Anthem is a bigger flaw than anything I have heard out of any candidates mouth.

This...is just saddening; in fact, the thoughts match the subject of the thread. Bill, do you know the second verse? the third? the fourth? the fifth, and who added it? Do you know the name of the poem? the name of the writer? the circumstances of it's writing? the name of the song it provides lyrics for, and who wrote that? Who and when it was drafted by congress as our National Anthem? I mean without looking them up. If you can honestly say you do, then I salute you as one of perhaps 15 true patriots in the country today. If you don't, then where is your patriotism? Your ability to run for president? Your conscience?

And then the author couldn't always remember the lyrics himself. In a version he hand-wrote in 1840, the third line reads "Whose bright stars and broad stripes, through the clouds of the fight,"

This is another parody, right?


The fruit fly issue:
hQkSwifTAMA
"you heard about the bridges..." Yeah, we did.

Sarah's foreign policy statement:
nokTjEdaUGg

A compendium:
NrzXLYA_e6E&NR

These are all from the campaign. There's lots more. What don't you understand about these?

[shadron]

To be clearer, how do you know the ignorance is willful?

Perhaps it's not. Perhaps it's not.

[dlorde]

I think that willfull ignorance is stupidity.

That's your prerogative. But have you considered that Palin may simply be ignorant of the degree of her ignorance? As in Rumsfeld's 'Unknown unknowns'...

[paiute]

Chew on this:
If Sarah Palin was smart, she'd act stupid.

And if she was stupid, she would act stupid.
And if she was stupid, she couldn't act smart.

It's like the Monty Hall problem all over again.

[thaiboxerken]

That's your prerogative. But have you considered that Palin may simply be ignorant of the degree of her ignorance? As in Rumsfeld's 'Unknown unknowns'...

If she doesn't understand that she should do her homework before running in politics, then she's very stupid. If she hasn't felt embarassed after the Couric interviews, embarassed enough to start doing her homework, then she's stupid. Sarah Palin is an idiot.

[Bill Thompson]

You're right. She did not make that statement on TV. I apologize for posting that. It wasn't a deliberate attempt to mislead anyone.

You just take what you hear as fact without checking them out.

This is what this thread is really all about.

What is more is this. US presidents the highest IQ's (Carter and Clinton) have been some of our worst.

Also, it is not intelligence that is omnipotient.
http://en.thinkexist.com/images/author/2473_1.jpg
“Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful people with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan "press on" has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race”

So says Calvin Coolidge.

It is better to write off someone for being unethical and/or batty (like Hillary and Biden and Edwards) rather than just not knowing something. Maybe Alaska exists in seclusion and it is possible to be governor without knowing much of the outside world. It is still difficult to believe that Palin is really THAT stupid as the hearsay from unnamed sources say.

My theory is this. Palin was picked because she had the highest approval rating of all the governors in The Union. I think she was also picked because she was further right-wing than McCain and he wanted to balance the ticket to make his party happier with him.

I also think that the media wanted to jump on her because since she was not running for president, she would not be prepared to handle them. They were right. I also think that if they did not find anything stupid that she said, they would use selective editing (like they always do with Limbaugh) to make her sound wackier than she is.

As for the posts here that jump back and forth about Feye. The less stupid things she had in her act were the direct quotes. The more stupid things were invented or reworked from direct quotes. Since she was a dead ringer for Palin, liberals would get the feeling that Palin might as well have said it. Politics are all about how the candidate makes you feel.

Quayle did not keep H.W. Bush from winning but that was in the age when we did not have the lines blurred between supposition and fact. And we did not have the relentless parodies posing as real news like "The Daily SHow" and we did not have so many left-wing commentators presenting one side of their argument and presenting mostly supposition rather than fact. I have not met a liberal who could differentiate between supposition and fact.

You noticed that the momment you found a youtube video that claimed that Palin made herself look like a dolt on Larry King you accepted it as fact. Do you have the courage to do some soul searching and consider that you accept most hearsay as fact so long as it is what entertains you and is what you want to believe?

[Bill Thompson]

This...is just saddening; in fact, the thoughts match the subject of the thread. Bill, do you know the second verse? the third? the fourth? the fifth, and who added it?

What are you getting at? It is ok that Hillary is not patriotic enough to know what everyone who loves his/her country knows just because so few people know the other verses? You do not make any sense.

Are you defending Hillary at the cost of not making any sense?

[Chris L]

The gulf between drooling idiot and Presidential material is a very wide one. It happens to be where most of us (including Palin and many of her critics) live. Some may be closer to one side or the other, but the vast majority of the human race inhabit that great middle.

[Cavemonster]

Bill,
So odd that you would quote Calvin Coolidge as a voice of wisdom and inexplicably name Clinton one of the worst presidents in the same post. What an odd man you are.

[Cleon]

I like the way conservatives jump to a conspiracy theory every time one of their heroes looks foolish. Y'know, it might not be the Liberal Media Elite®; sometimes, people really are idiots. Yes, even the ones that manage to become governors of Alaska. :rolleyes:

[shadron]

What are you getting at? It is ok that Hillary is not patriotic enough to know what everyone who loves his/her country knows just because so few people know the other verses? You do not make any sense.

Are you defending Hillary at the cost of not making any sense?

No, actually - I was asking you whether you are, by your own criteria, a real patriot. Hillary is doing her own thing; she doesn't need any help from me.

[Cainkane1]

I'm no fan of Sarah either but I seriously doubt if she slept her way to anything. She isn't actullay stupid in the sense that her IQ is low I feel she has allowed herself to be perceived (rightly) as stupid because of her fundamentlaist beliefs and sometimes absurd statements concerning science. She's a young earther and believes in Genesis. Like Bush who was an insult to his office so would Palin be for the same reasons.

[DDWW]

Anytime I read that someone is saying that a very successful national figure, be it Palin, Bush, Obama, Limbaugh, Colbert, etc. is stupid, I just laugh.

Those that can’t do, whine.


DD(:D)WW

[Chris L]

Like Bush who was an insult to his office so would Palin be for the same reasons.

Not being Presidential material isn't the same as being stupid. There are lots of smart people I know, who can't run a meeting, let alone the executive branch of the US government.

[Cleon]

Anytime I read that someone is saying that a very successful national figure, be it Palin, Bush, Obama, Limbaugh, Colbert, etc. is stupid, I just laugh.

Those that can’t do, whine.

Yeah. It can't be that Palin is actually stupid. It's that everyone who thinks so is whining. It's absolute woo to think that anyone who gets in the public spotlight is anything less than an intellectual giant. :rolleyes:

[thaiboxerken]

Yea, it's like saying Nicole Richie is stupid. If she was so stupid, she wouldn't be so wealthy..........

[DDWW]

It's absolute woo to think that anyone who gets in the public spotlight is anything less than an intellectual giant. :rolleyes:

That is why I didn't say that. But go ahead make yourself feel better by making up stuff. :D (big grin beats rolleyes)

DD (:rolleyes:)WW

[Cleon]

That is why I didn't say that. But go ahead make yourself feel better by making up stuff. :D (big grin beats rolleyes)


Wow, you can type that without any sort of irony whatsoever?

Let me remind you who's making stuff up:


Those that can’t do, whine.

[DDWW]

Wow, you can type that without any sort of irony whatsoever?

Let me remind you who's making stuff up:

Feel guilty? :D

[Cleon]

Feel guilty? :D

Not in the least. I really have no reason to.

Feel silly? 'Cause you really should. :D

[DDWW]

Not in the least. I really have no reason to.

Feel silly? 'Cause you really should. :D

Nope, not in the least! :D:rolleyes:

And stop whining.

DDWW

[Cleon]

And stop whining.

Making stuff up again, I see.

[Bill Thompson]

It would be fun to compare Biden and Palin IQ's.

Biden had been running for president and he made more mistakes during the VP debate. So I would be interested to know if he really is measurably less intelligent than Palin and I wonder what that would mean for our left-leaning society and or media bias.

[Bill Thompson]

No, actually - I was asking you whether you are, by your own criteria, a real patriot. Hillary is doing her own thing; she doesn't need any help from me.

I know the National Anthem's first verse, the one everyone sings since childhood, by heart, yes.

Hillary was doing her own thing? Well, her own thing is not being qualified to lead the country.

I know that this angers liberals for no real reason. Coulter gets lots of things wrong but one thing she gets right is the idea that Liberalism is like a religion. And people get upset for disrespecting their religious leaders, like Hillary.

You do not make any sense. Are you saying that, since so few know all the verses of The National Anthem, Hillary should get a pass on not knowing the first? That is bull.

[thaiboxerken]

A one word mistake or mis-speak doesn't mean she doesn't know the words to the National Anthem.

[Cleon]

I know the National Anthem's first verse, the one everyone sings since childhood, by heart, yes.

Hillary was doing her own thing? Well, her own thing is not being qualified to lead the country.

Yes, mistaking one word for another in the national anthem is good reason she's unqualified. :rolleyes:


I know that this angers liberals for no real reason. Coulter gets lots of things wrong but one thing she gets right is the idea that Liberalism is like a religion. And people get upset for disrespecting their religious leaders, like Hillary.

That's phenomenally silly reasoning.

First, quite a few people here have not been shy about saying they dislike her.

Second, if anyone here is acting like a religious zealot, it would be the person demanding that she get every single word exactly right in a particular prayer anthem.


You do not make any sense. Are you saying that only real patriots would know all the verses of The National Anthem and so Hillary should get a pass because noone knows all the verses? That is bull.

Irony, thy name is Bill.

[AvalonXQ]

I know that this angers liberals for no real reason. Coulter gets lots of things wrong but one thing she gets right is the idea that Liberalism is like a religion. And people get upset for disrespecting their religious leaders, like Hillary.

Accurate statement.

[SonOfLaertes]

You just take what you hear as fact without checking them out.

This is what this thread is really all about. ...



Bill, if that's what this thread is all about, why is it that you haven't replied to Shadron's post with the three videos?

All, or most, of the things that you "couldn't believe " were said by a governor of a US State are right there for your viewing pleasure.

Have you watched the videos? The woman is clearly uninformed and unprepared.

I am curious as to why you haven't responded to these videos which give clear evidence of the things that you expressed doubt about earlier in this thread.

I recall watching the interview with Couric, and I was extremely embarrassed for Palin and for my country. I could have done much better, without any preparation whatsoever, because I have, you know, some curiosity about the world and things like geography and science.

Palin is not necessarily dumb - but she is clearly completely uninformed.

[Cleon]

Accurate statement.


...To people who either weren't around or didn't pay attention to the Obama-Clinton battle for the nomination.

To everyone else, it's ridiculous bullcrap.

[Bill Thompson]

Yes, mistaking one word for another in the national anthem is good reason she's unqualified. :rolleyes:


A Dem would not have been given a pass by the media for that. You think one would?

[Bill Thompson]

A one word mistake or mis-speak doesn't mean she doesn't know the words to the National Anthem.
Dude. Come-on. You are grasping at straws. Any american who loves this country can sing this in their sleep.

[Bill Thompson]

Bill, if that's what this thread is all about, why is it that you haven't replied to Shadron's post with the three videos?

....

Palin is not necessarily dumb - but she is clearly completely uninformed.

Because I have not watched them. I have been responding to his defense of Hillary, tho.

Being uninformed is a temporary thing. Maybe you can be governor of Alaska and, in fact, by her approval rating a good one, without knowing about the outside world. Being kind of isolated geographically might be to blame.

Taking this into consideration, she might make a better leader than others who have proven themselves to be dillusional, corrupt, and dishonest.

I do not defend her because I like her. I don't know much about her. But the liberal media bias and people relying on hearsay and unnamed sources caused me to "cry foul".

Being uninformed is a temporary thing, as I said, what ails Hillary, Biden and others is permanent.

I also consider it unfair how people have labeled me as a way to brush my views aside.

[Cleon]

A Dem would not have been given a pass by the media for that. You think one would?

I sincerely doubt anyone who wasn't absolutely, unhealthily obsessed with her every move would even notice, much less give a "pass."

(And I think you meant Rep, not Dem.)

[DDWW]

Making stuff up again, I see.

Want some cheese with that?

:D:D:D

DDWW

[thaiboxerken]

Dude. Come-on. You are grasping at straws. Any american who loves this country can sing this in their sleep.

Shut the front door. You really need to get away from this patrionism as a religion crap. A one word mistake does not a buffoon make.

By the way, I don't know all the words.

[TheDaver]

I will not judge until I get all facts. And I know how slanted the press is. And I know how much the Lib Dems BS. Remember that "vast right-wing conspiracy"?
Anybody stundied this one yet?

[Safe-Keeper]

Dude. Come-on. You are grasping at straws. Any american who loves this country can sing this in their sleep. I confess to only barely knowing the two first verses of the Norwegian national anthem. Guess that must mean I'm not a True Norseman, and should not be eligible for political positions, because, you know, all a Prime Minister does is sing anthems all day.

[Bill Thompson]

By the way, this says it all
http://www.sarahpalin.com/ (http://www.sarahpalin.com/)
(perhaps an unintentional joke?)

[Bill Thompson]

Shut the front door. You really need to get away from this patrionism as a religion crap. A one word mistake does not a buffoon make.

Do you mean "patriotism"? I will assume you did. I never said patriotism was a religion and I made no such claim.

I never said one word makes a bufoon and I made no such cliam.

Claiming your detractors said something they did not say in order to attack them is a logical fallacy.

[Bill Thompson]

Anybody stundied this one yet?

Do you not know when Hillary said this?

You never heard her saying on morning television that her husband was not messing around with interns and it was just a "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy"?

Palin might be scary to think of as president for some reasons but Hillary is scary for others.

Is Hillary a good decision maker? If you think she is, I have to say you have been duped by the well-rehearsed and well-funded Clinton media machine. People who have been close to her – such as her Whitewater associates and people close to the Stan Lee campaign scandal -- will tell you that they are left in awe by how she is willing to back-stabs her supporters; and how she is unwilling to negotiate, or compromise on policy; and how she seems to be devoid of any ethical or moral standard in dealing with people. A perfect example of this last personality trait is seen in how she handled the Paula Jones case.

In case you do not know or do not remember, this is the case in a nut shell. In May 1991 Paula Jones was a state employee in Arkansas and was asked to have a face-to-face meeting in a hotel with then-governor Bill Clinton. Shall I continue or do you want to skip to the next paragraph? Basically it seemed that Bill Clinton and Paula Jones had different ideas of what was supposed to take place in this face-to-face meeting. That became clear when Governor Clinton showed his erect penis and Paula Jones made a dash for the door.

Eventually Clinton and Jones found themselves in a sexual harassment suit. By the time Bill Clinton had become president, Jones' lawyers were looking for more evidence since the original event did not have many witnesses and it was becoming a case of he-said-she-said.

But that changed when rumors began to surface that Clinton was involved in some inappropriate behavior with some White House interns.

Jones’ lawyers convinced the judge in the case that specifics of this behavior would go far to show Bill Clinton's pattern of behavior and provide credibility to the Paula Jones' side of the story. The Judge in the Paula Jones case agreed that Jones' lawyers could interview White House interns.

When Hillary heard of this, she decided to fight this. That is right. Hillary, not Bill, swung into action. Details of what happened are described in the book “The Truth About Hillary”. Hillary summoned her talented and her high-cost lawyers to the White House for advice.

The advice she got, I admit, was very sound. Her advice is simply this: “It is important that we make this go away as quickly and as ethically as possible. We need to see if Jones will drop the case in exchange for a cash settlement and some sort of watered-down admission from the President.”

Hillary should have taken that advice.

To Hillary Clinton, telling the truth has never been the course of action to take. So she decided to fight but she decided to fight the investigation in a way that I do not think anyone can say makes any sense. She went on national morning television and said that the Paula Jones case, the investigation into inappropriate behavior of The President with White House interns were all a “vast right-wing conspiracy”. Clearly, as outlined in “The Truth About Hillary” and supported by many witnesses, Hillary must have known about Monica Lewinski and affairs with other White House interns. But somehow, in Hillary's mind, she had delivered a severe blow to some dark, imaginary evil force. After giving this infamous “vast right-wing conspiracy” rambling rant on NBC's “Today's Show” the program cut to commercial and she has been reported to have said “that will teach them to f**k with us”.


All this leads to a noteworthy outcome. The result of Hillary ignoring the intelligent and good advice of her lawyers and the result of choosing to be combative was the proceeding Impeachment proceedings of the president. The Monica Lewinski affair became public knowledge and a public and international humiliation for the United States. All this would have been avoided if Hillary made the right decision. All this would not have happened if not for Hillary.

Is Hillary a good decision maker? If you think she is, I have to say you have been duped by the well-rehearsed and well-funded Clinton media machine that avoids these facts.

[thaiboxerken]

Do you mean "patriotism"? I will assume you did. I never said patriotism was a religion and I made no such claim.


You are not claiming it is a religion, but you sure do treat it as if you are a fundamentalist zealot of the religion of Patriotism.

[Bill Thompson]

You are not claiming it is a religion, but you sure do treat it as if you are a fundamentalist zealot of the religion of Patriotism.
I never said patriotism was a religion, and I am not treating patriotism as a region. Just get over it. The gig is up, dude. You are trying to re-characterize me. Is this how far you will go?

First you doubted me and wanted proof.

Then you tried to make a big deal out of the fact that few people don't know all the verses to the National Anthem.

That failed and so you tried to brush it off by saying that it was just one word and so it does not matter.

That failed and so now you are trying to re-charaterize me and say I am acting like a -- whatever. Isn't that what a strawman argument is? Redefine your detractors so they are easier to knock down? If there is one thing I am not it is a religious zealot and I do not act like one.

Few Americans don't know each and every word perfectly of the first verse of The National Anthem. It is not illogical or being a zealot to think that any and all Americans who love his or her country would know each and every word. Another thing is this. Songs are the easiest thing to memorize. Our brains seem to be wired for it. A favorite song that we have not heard for decades can be sung along to when they pop up on the oldies radio stations. It is perfectly logical to assume that since Hillary does not know the words to The National Anthem, her running for president is out of her own private lust for power. And since at least 3 books have been written by respected impartial unbiased reporters claiming just that, I think they are right.

And that can be argued as being just as bad (if Palin's stupidy is hearsay and exaggeration) or might be worse than Palin.

And much of what Palin has been accused of thinking or saying have been out-right lies.

Take the 4 thousand year dinosaur bit that everyone seems to believe and that Matt Damon popularized for example. It turns out to have been just another lie.

One thing that Liberals, Mormons and Biblical Fundamentalists have in common is that they do not study subjects to conclusion. They only research a topic to the point where they find a comfort zone that supports what they want to believe.

Matt Damon's YouTube damnation on Sarah Palin seems convincing.

Well, Matt Damon is an actor. One might think he is convincing.

But, it turns out, Palin does NOT think that dinosaurs walked the earth 4 thousand years ago.

Palin might not be a genius, but I think the real, gullible, stupid, mindless sheep-herded-into-the-polling-booths are the American public in general and Liberals specifically.

John Kennedy said that the enemy of the truth is not a lie, it is a myth, the rumor, and the half-truth. I think he was right.

I also find it sad that people, being the apes that we are, like to join up in groups and we just chime in and repeat whatever the group is saying. Well, we need to evolve and check the facts for ourselves.

It is sad and shocking to think that Palin thought dinosaurs walked the earth 4 thousand years ago. But it is even sadder and more shocking that it is not true and everyone just accepted it as truth because it satisfied the theology that they found so welcoming, warm and inclusive.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Does_Sarah_Palin_believe_that_dinosaurs_were_alive _4000_years_ago

[thaiboxerken]

Yes, you are treating patriotism as a religion when you get extremely upset over one word in the National Anthem.

[Cavemonster]

Never mind, not worth the virtual ink...

[Bob Blaylock]

By the way, this says it all
http://www.sarahpalin.com/ (http://www.sarahpalin.com/)
(perhaps an unintentional joke?)


Hmmm…

bob Mon May 10 02:44:33 {~} $whois sarahpalin.com

Whois Server Version 2.0

Domain names in the .com and .net domains can now be registered
with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net
for detailed information.

Domain Name: SARAHPALIN.COM
Registrar: DIRECTI INTERNET SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. D/B/A PUBLICDOMAINREGISTRY.COM
Whois Server: whois.PublicDomainRegistry.com
Referral URL: http://www.PublicDomainRegistry.com
Name Server: NS1.HE.NET
Name Server: NS2.HE.NET
Name Server: NS3.HE.NET
Status: clientTransferProhibited
Updated Date: 03-may-2010
Creation Date: 26-apr-2004
Expiration Date: 26-apr-2011

>>> Last update of whois database: Thu, 13 May 2010 06:53:46 UTC <<<

NOTICE: The expiration date displayed in this record is the date the
registrar's sponsorship of the domain name registration in the registry is
currently set to expire. This date does not necessarily reflect the expiration
date of the domain name registrant's agreement with the sponsoring
registrar. Users may consult the sponsoring registrar's Whois database to
view the registrar's reported date of expiration for this registration.

TERMS OF USE: You are not authorized to access or query our Whois
database through the use of electronic processes that are high-volume and
automated except as reasonably necessary to register domain names or
modify existing registrations; the Data in VeriSign Global Registry
Services' ("VeriSign") Whois database is provided by VeriSign for
information purposes only, and to assist persons in obtaining information
about or related to a domain name registration record. VeriSign does not
guarantee its accuracy. By submitting a Whois query, you agree to abide
by the following terms of use: You agree that you may use this Data only
for lawful purposes and that under no circumstances will you use this Data
to: (1) allow, enable, or otherwise support the transmission of mass
unsolicited, commercial advertising or solicitations via e-mail, telephone,
or facsimile; or (2) enable high volume, automated, electronic processes
that apply to VeriSign (or its computer systems). The compilation,
repackaging, dissemination or other use of this Data is expressly
prohibited without the prior written consent of VeriSign. You agree not to
use electronic processes that are automated and high-volume to access or
query the Whois database except as reasonably necessary to register
domain names or modify existing registrations. VeriSign reserves the right
to restrict your access to the Whois database in its sole discretion to ensure
operational stability. VeriSign may restrict or terminate your access to the
Whois database for failure to abide by these terms of use. VeriSign
reserves the right to modify these terms at any time.

The Registry database contains ONLY .COM, .NET, .EDU domains and
Registrars.
Registration Service Provided By: WHOIS.COM
Website: http://www.whois.com

Domain Name: SARAHPALIN.COM

Registrant:
PrivacyProtect.org
Domain Admin (contact@privacyprotect.org)
P.O. Box 97
Note - All Postal Mails Rejected, visit Privacyprotect.org
Moergestel
null,5066 ZH
NL
Tel. +45.36946676

Creation Date: 26-Apr-2004
Expiration Date: 26-Apr-2011

Domain servers in listed order:
ns1.he.net
ns2.he.net
ns3.he.net


Administrative Contact:
PrivacyProtect.org
Domain Admin (contact@privacyprotect.org)
P.O. Box 97
Note - All Postal Mails Rejected, visit Privacyprotect.org
Moergestel
null,5066 ZH
NL
Tel. +45.36946676

Technical Contact:
PrivacyProtect.org
Domain Admin (contact@privacyprotect.org)
P.O. Box 97
Note - All Postal Mails Rejected, visit Privacyprotect.org
Moergestel
null,5066 ZH
NL
Tel. +45.36946676

Billing Contact:
PrivacyProtect.org
Domain Admin (contact@privacyprotect.org)
P.O. Box 97
Note - All Postal Mails Rejected, visit Privacyprotect.org
Moergestel
null,5066 ZH
NL
Tel. +45.36946676

Status:LOCKED
Note: This Domain Name is currently Locked. In this status the domain
name cannot be transferred, hijacked, or modified. The Owner of this
domain name can easily change this status from their control panel.
This feature is provided as a security measure against fraudulent domain name hijacking.

PRIVACYPROTECT.ORG is providing privacy protection services to this domain name to
protect the owner from spam and phishing attacks. PrivacyProtect.org is not
responsible for any of the activities associated with this domain name. If you wish
to report any abuse concerning the usage of this domain name, you may do so at
http://privacyprotect.org/contact. We have a stringent abuse policy and any
complaint will be actioned within a short period of time.

The data in this whois database is provided to you for information purposes only,
that is, to assist you in obtaining information about or related
to a domain name registration record. We make this information available "as is",
and do not guarantee its accuracy. By submitting a whois query, you agree that you will
use this data only for lawful purposes and that, under no circumstances will you use this data to:
(1) enable high volume, automated, electronic processes that stress
or load this whois database system providing you this information; or
(2) allow, enable, or otherwise support the transmission of mass unsolicited,
commercial advertising or solicitations via direct mail, electronic mail, or by telephone.
The compilation, repackaging, dissemination or other use of this data is expressly prohibited without
prior written consent from us. The Registrar of record is Directi Internet Solutions Pvt. Ltd. d/b/a PublicDomainRegistry.com.
We reserve the right to modify these terms at any time.
By submitting this query, you agree to abide by these terms.

I don't think this domain is owned by, nor associated with Sarah Palin. I don't think it has anything to do with her other than a fraudulent use of her name and identity for the purpose of putting forth a puerile insult against her.

[Cleon]

I don't think this domain is owned by, nor associated with Sarah Palin. I don't think it has anything to do with her other than a fraudulent use of her name and identity for the purpose of putting forth a puerile insult against her.


You don't say.

[fuelair]

Accusing Palin of "sleeping her way" to becoming governor or mayor and therefore lacking in intelligence is a new 'un on me, but, in rebuttal, it is :

a). Rash, since there is not the slightest evidence for her sleeping her way to any of her positions.

b). Illogical, since governor, like mayor, are elected positions, not appointed ones, so even if that was her goal she would have to sleep with thousands of people (at least), the voters.

c). Chauvinistic, since it implies successful female politicians (well, good-looking ones, at least) are not in their position due to their ability but due to "sleeping around".

d). A non-sequitor, since even if she did (despite (a) and (b) above) somehow manage to "sleep her way" to governor and mayor "with tremendous ease" that would certainly not prove she is lacking in intelligence -- if anything, it would show she is a very shrewd person.

e). Irrelevant, since the mere fact that she could have theoretically "slept her way" to governor (which is doubtful) is meaningless to the discussion of whether her being governor without so doing -- the obvious truth -- is evidence for her intelligence or not.

f). Hypocritical, since "she slept her way to the top, the whore!" is precisely the sort of chauvinistic accusation liberals claim conservatives are making in their alleged attempt to keep women down; and finally,

g). Condescending, for obvious reasons.

It isn't often that one can find people making a political statement that manages to combine (a)-(g), but you've managed... I think you're suffering from a rather severe case of "Palin derangement syndrome". Take two copies of the National Review and call me in the morning... In all fairness, he simply noted she could have. Unless I badly misinterpreted he did not claim she had. And that was only a minor point of the whole.

[rjwould]

I don't think Sarah Palin is stupid, but I do think she is very in-formed. She seems incredibly bull-headed to a fault, but not really unlike many others, especially those of the political right-wing of America.

Personally, I think she may be Aspie (Asperger Syndrome) and I believe George Bush and Karl Rove are as well. But so are at least one in every five people globally as I see it.

[SonOfLaertes]

- snip -
It is sad and shocking to think that Palin thought dinosaurs walked the earth 4 thousand years ago. But it is even sadder and more shocking that it is not true and everyone just accepted it as truth because it satisfied the theology that they found so welcoming, warm and inclusive.



Everyone just accepted it as truth because ...

There are ample examples of similar statements by Ms. Palin which lead one to accept such quotes as representative of Palin's thoughts. Such as the videos provided by Shadron earlier in this thread. View them yet, Bill? They are not long and provide the "evidence" you claimed you were looking for, also earlier in this thread. I still find it curious that you appear to be ignoring them and continue to post as if you have no evidence of Ms. Palin's public statements.

Really, watch them. The woman is exceptionally uninformed. She seems to totally lack any curiosity about the world in general, or science, or history, or even politics ( the "Bush Doctrine").

Mind you, many people don't feel that ignorance should be an impediment to political office. I think she got elected in Alaska on the basis of her seeming opposition to "big government", and damn her qualifications. But that is an entirely different argument than the current thread.

Please comment on Shadron's videos.

[shadron]

I know the National Anthem's first verse, the one everyone sings since childhood, by heart, yes.

Hillary was doing her own thing? Well, her own thing is not being qualified to lead the country.

I know that this angers liberals for no real reason. Coulter gets lots of things wrong but one thing she gets right is the idea that Liberalism is like a religion. And people get upset for disrespecting their religious leaders, like Hillary.

You do not make any sense. Are you saying that, since so few know all the verses of The National Anthem, Hillary should get a pass on not knowing the first? That is bull.

Certainly, no greater bull that that you've been sheding. Do you know the Gettysburg Address, Bill? I think that is worth ten times Key's best, and yet I don't see it as definitive of anyone's loyalty to the nation. To know what it means, yes. To have memorized it, like I did in school? That's what religions do.

[shadron]

You've pretty well shown us, Bill, that while you may know the words, you know nothing about the background or the meaning of "The Defense of Ft. McHenry"; all you care about is the memorization, word for word, of the first verse. As a definition of patriotism or a necessary skill to hold elected office, that ranks right up there with being able to serve the coffee without scorching it.

I have the feeling you're in a corner with this that you never foresaw coming, but your pride won't let you back out, so I'll not pursue it. But I don't think I'll ever be able to forget it, either. Everyone needs some amusing bits in their life, wot?

[Bill Thompson]

The issue is not if Palin is uninformed or stupid or not. The issue, I believe, is that she is a Cheney. And because she is a Cheney, you want to believe she is stupid and you will accept any half-truth, distortion of quotes, and lies.

But being a Cheney is not so bad.

[Cleon]

The issue is not if Palin is uninformed or stupid or not. The issue, I believe, is that she is a Cheney. And because she is a Cheney, you want to believe she is stupid and you will accept any half-truth, distortion of quotes, and lies.

But being a Cheney is not so bad.

She's a what? :confused:

[Bill Thompson]

You never give up, do you. You seem like a devoted follower of a faith to me.

You've pretty well shown us, Bill, that while you may know the words, you know nothing about the background or the meaning of "The Defense of Ft. McHenry";


Don't change the subject. We are talking about Hillary not knowing the National Anthem.

If Palin showed that she did not know the exact words to the National Anthem, the press would be relentless. ANd yet Hillary gets a pass.

If Palin had been sexually approaching young staff memebers in private hotel rooms, the press would be relentless, and yet Bill Clinton gets a pass.

If Palin had been screwing a photographer hired by her staff and if the press knew about it, the press would be relentless, and yet John Edwards gets a pass.

If McCain or W had claimed to have written a book and yet annalysis shows it was ghost written by someone whose association the american public would find objectionable, the press would be relentless, and yet Obama gets a pass.

If McCain or Palin had been involved in a fund raising scandal and misuse of a company's funds for political gain, the press would be relentless, and yet Hillary gets a pass.

You've pretty well shown us, Bill, that while you may know the words, you know nothing about the background or the meaning of "The Defense of Ft. McHenry";

That is Ad Hominem, by the way. (yawn) Another logical fallacy.

[Bill Thompson]

She's a what? :confused:

See, there's three kinds of people: Cheneys, Obamas, and Hillaries. Obamas think everyone can get along, and Cheneys just want to americanize all the time without thinking it through. But then you got your Hillaries, Cleon. And all the Hillaries want is to falsehood all over everything! So, Obamas may get mad at Cheneys once in a while, because Obamas get americanizeed by Cheneys. But Cheneys also americanize Hillaries, Cleon. And if they didn't americanize the Hillaries, you know what you'd get? You'd get your Cheney and your Obama all covered in falsehood!
bhbojUoQJnc

[Cleon]

You never give up, do you. You seem like a devoted follower of a faith to me.



Don't change the subject. We are talking about Hillary not knowing the National Anthem.

Actually, the subject of the thread is Sarah Palin. You changed the subject. Repeatedly.


If Palin showed that she did not know the exact words to the National Anthem, the press would be relentless. ANd yet Hillary gets a pass.

No, you don't get to argue hypocrisy based on how you claim the press would act if the situation were different.

That's called "making stuff up."


If Palin had been sexually approaching young staff memebers in private hotel rooms, the press would be relentless,

Particularly Larry Flynt.

and yet Bill Clinton gets a pass.

A pass? It got round-the-clock coverage for at least a year, and the guy got impeached. What pass?!


If Palin had been screwing a photographer hired by her staff and if the press knew about it, the press would be relentless, and yet John Edwards gets a pass.

Again, your hypothetical situation does not evidence make.


If McCain or W had claimed to have written a book and yet annalysis shows it was ghost written by someone whose association the american public would find objectionable, the press would be relentless, and yet Obama gets a pass.

What the hell are you talking about?


If McCain or Palin had been involved in a fund raising scandal and misuse of a company's funds for political gain, the press would be relentless, and yet Hillary gets a pass.

Actually, McCain was involved in a number of fund-raising scandals (example (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/07/us/politics/07mccain.html)). I can't imagine how you didn't hear about them - maybe the press just gave him a pass?

[Cleon]

See, there's three kinds of people: Cheneys, Obamas, and Hillaries. Obamas think everyone can get along, and Cheneys just want to americanize all the time without thinking it through. But then you got your Hillaries, Cleon. And all the Hillaries want is to falsehood all over everything! So, Obamas may get mad at Cheneys once in a while, because Obamas get americanizeed by Cheneys. But Cheneys also americanize Hillaries, Chuck. And if they didn't americanize the Hillaries, you know what you'd get? You'd get your Cheney and your Obama all covered in falsehood!

Um....ok. Could you address the subject without the crazy rambling this time?

[SonOfLaertes]

You never give up, do you. You seem like a devoted follower of a faith to me.



Don't change the subject. We are talking about Hillary not knowing the National Anthem.

If Palin showed that she did not know the exact words to the National Anthem, the press would be relentless. ANd yet Hillary gets a pass.

If Palin had been sexually approaching young staff memebers in private hotel rooms, the press would be relentless, and yet Bill Clinton gets a pass.

If Palin had been screwing a photographer hired by her staff and if the press knew about it, the press would be relentless, and yet John Edwards gets a pass.

If McCain or W had claimed to have written a book and yet annalysis shows it was ghost written by someone whose association the american public would find objectionable, the press would be relentless, and yet Obama gets a pass.

If McCain or Palin had been involved in a fund raising scandal and misuse of a company's funds for political gain, the press would be relentless, and yet Hillary gets a pass.

Uh - no. The OP is about Sarah Palin, not Hilary.

You said that you couldn't believe that the things attributed to Palin were true, and that you would need evidence. Evidence was provided. Suddenly you don't want to discuss Palin anymore and are trying to avoid the original point by focusing on Hilary.

You want to discuss Hilary? Start a thread. You want to post in this thread? Discuss Palin.

[SonOfLaertes]

See, there's three kinds of people: Cheneys, Obamas, and Hillaries. Obamas think everyone can get along, and Cheneys just want to americanize all the time without thinking it through. But then you got your Hillaries, Cleon. And all the Hillaries want is to falsehood all over everything! So, Obamas may get mad at Cheneys once in a while, because Obamas get americanizeed by Cheneys. But Cheneys also americanize Hillaries, Cleon. And if they didn't americanize the Hillaries, you know what you'd get? You'd get your Cheney and your Obama all covered in falsehood!

Wow, this was posted while I composed a reply. Now I have no idea what it is we are talking about.

[Bill Thompson]

Um....ok. Could you address the subject without the crazy rambling this time?

It is crazy rambling to someone not familiar to popular culture
Revist
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5930107&postcount=144

[Bill Thompson]

Uh - no. The OP is about Sarah Palin, not Hilary.

.

Exactly. And if the press had treated other political figures on the left as they had treated Palin, this thread might not even be here. Our press and media has done us a great disservice.

[Chris L]

Suddenly you don't want to discuss Palin anymore and are trying to avoid the original point by focusing on Hilary.


Actually I think he's using Hillary and her "missteps" as a way of discounting your evidence. His hypothesis (I believe) is that making mistakes in public != stupid.

[Cleon]

Exactly. And if the press had treated other political figures on the left as they had treated Palin, this thread might not even be here. Our press media has done us a great disservice.

I for one am grateful they exposed an idiot for being an idiot. I wish they'd do that more often.

[Bill Thompson]

Wow, this was posted while I composed a reply. Now I have no idea what it is we are talking about.

The movie Team America World Police was making a veiled political statement about humanity and human nature. All three types of people can be regarded as being bad. But one type, in reality, is not nearly as bad as the other types. Palin is a "Cheney-type" of person. And that is what people find objectionable. The reports and rumors about her being stuid is what people WANT to believe. THis is why they accept it withough caring if it is really true or not.

[Cleon]

The movie Team America World Police was making a veiled political statement about humanity and human nature. All three types of people can be regarded as being bad. But one type, in reality, is not nearly as bad as the other types. Palin is a "Cheney-type" of person. And that is what people find objectionable. The reports and rumors about her being stuid is what people WANT to believe. THis is why they accept it withough caring if it is really true or not.

More bald assertions, complete lack of evidence.

[Bill Thompson]

I for one am grateful they exposed an idiot for being an idiot. I wish they'd do that more often.

but they did not.

not really.

As far as I can tell, the "quotes" from Palin that are the most damning are fabrications. She did not even say the things they say she said.

On the other hand, we KNOW the wack job filth that Hillary, Biden, and others have spewed from their pie holes, and the press looks the other way.

[Bill Thompson]

More bald assertions, complete lack of evidence.
About what? Be specific.

[Cleon]

but they did not.

not really.

As far as I can tell, the "quotes" from Palin that are the most damning are fabrications. She did not even say the things they say she said.

No, I think you just dismiss them because you don't want to believe they're true. She plays on your team, and you don't want to think she's really as dim as she appears.

(See? I can play this game, too.)

[Bill Thompson]

Actually, the subject of the thread is Sarah Palin. You changed the subject. Repeatedly.




You cannot really talk about Sarah Palin without questioning if the things said about her are really true and if the press was fair -- and if they would do the same to a candidate or politician on the left.

[Bill Thompson]

No, I think you just dismiss them because you don't want to believe they're true. She plays on your team, and you don't want to think she's really as dim as she appears.


You lie.

I only wondered if she really said the things she is rumored to have said. The worst things she did not say.

I have no team.

Only members of this forum have assumed I am a neocon or something. One idiot thinks I am a fundamentalist. I believe some people assume that their GED somehow balances the playing field and now they have powers of preception were they can tell fact from supposition.

[Cleon]

You lie.

I only wondered if she really said the things she is rumored to have said. The worst things she did not say.

I have no team.

No, I think you're just not being honest with yourself.

Clearly, you do have a team; you don't leap to the defense of Hillary Clinton, despite the fact that many of the accusations levied against her over the years have been over-the-top and unfounded. Instead, you're playing up the "Palin as victim" meme, despite the fact that she was treated with kid gloves most of the time. Her appearance as a moron is her fault, and her fault alone.

Obviously, you're just dismissing everything showing Palin to be an idiot and blaming it on the media out of your own bias. You don't want her to be an idiot, so you decide it's all a media conspiracy.

[Iamme]

I just can't imagine that woman being President. I just can't.

This may be a cliche' description of her, but I really do think she is too folksy to be our leader and commander in chief. Carter seemed TOO nice. So does Sarah. You can't play nice in this world. You get walked all over.

Also, she seems to be an echo chamber for the obvious stuff everyone already knows. When she talks, she doesn't seem to say anything new. She just says obvious, already put out there stuff. She makes me have to slap myself in the face and wonder if I am dreaming, how she has elevated herself as far up in the political scene as she has. It is like I am dreaming.

[Chris L]

I just can't imagine that woman being President.

Neither can some of the people applauding her.

[SonOfLaertes]

but they did not.

not really.

As far as I can tell, the "quotes" from Palin that are the most damning are fabrications. She did not even say the things they say she said.

On the other hand, we KNOW the wack job filth that Hillary, Biden, and others have spewed from their pie holes, and the press looks the other way.

Bill, once again, you are avoiding the issue at hand. At this point I must conclude that you know that you are wrong and are not honest enough to simply admit it.

Once again, this is a thread about Sarah Palin. You are quite free to start a thread about Hilary, and discuss your impressions of her there.

In your quote above you once again state that "She did not even say the things they say she said" yet you admit that you have not watched Shadrons videos. So how do you know what she says on them? You are being intentionally evasive. Discuss Sarah Palin, not anything else you can think of to avoid admitting you are wrong. Watch the evidence that you asked for, and comment on it.

I may actually agree with you about some of the things you are saying about Hilary Clinton. Start a thread and find out. But stop running away and discuss Sarah Palin in this thread.

From your previous responses I must conclude that you will simply evade the issue at hand once again, and derail, derail , derail.

[fuelair]

See, there's three kinds of people: Cheneys, Obamas, and Hillaries. Obamas think everyone can get along, and Cheneys just want to americanize all the time without thinking it through. But then you got your Hillaries, Cleon. And all the Hillaries want is to falsehood all over everything! So, Obamas may get mad at Cheneys once in a while, because Obamas get americanizeed by Cheneys. But Cheneys also americanize Hillaries, Cleon. And if they didn't americanize the Hillaries, you know what you'd get? You'd get your Cheney and your Obama all covered in falsehood!
bhbojUoQJnc



Bill, this makes no sense. If it is supposed to, would you mind adding any necessary extra words, sentences and/or paragraph (s) that could help make it easier to understand what you mean to be saying here.

By which, so you realize I am not trying to be funny: 1)explain americanize - I understand what it should mean, but that does not seem to be what you do by it as used above. 2) explain "falsehood all over everything" 3) how can persons or Cheney get "all covered in falsehood"?:confused:

[SonOfLaertes]

You lie.

I only wondered if she really said the things she is rumored to have said. The worst things she did not say.



It is not hard to find Sarah Palin's interviews on the internet. In fact, it is hard not to find them.

You need not wonder. The fact that you feign ignorance is very telling.

[jack nicholson = a few good men;1992] You can't handle the truth! [/jack nicholson]

[Iamme]

Neither can some of the people applauding her.

Hmmm. I take it you are applauding? What do you make of the fact she quit being Governor?

[fuelair]

I just can't imagine that woman being President. I just can't.

This may be a cliche' description of her, but I really do think she is too folksy to be our leader and commander in chief. Carter seemed TOO nice. So does Sarah. You can't play nice in this world. You get walked all over.

Also, she seems to be an echo chamber for the obvious stuff everyone already knows. When she talks, she doesn't seem to say anything new. She just says obvious, already put out there stuff. She makes me have to slap myself in the face and wonder if I am dreaming, how she has elevated herself as far up in the political scene as she has. It is like I am dreaming.

She really didn't - unfortunately McCain did - another thing he would have to answer for if there really was an afterlife.

[Chris L]

I take it you are applauding?

Actually I was referring to a survey http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/us/politics/15poll.htmlof Tea Party goers that suggests that they don't think she is qualified to be president either. While I don't applaud her, I don't see her as a danger to Western civilization either.

As far as her resignation goes, it was probably the best of a bad set of choices for everyone.

[SumDood]

<snip>
Take the 4 thousand year dinosaur bit that everyone seems to believe and that Matt Damon popularized for example. It turns out to have been just another lie.
...
But, it turns out, Palin does NOT think that dinosaurs walked the earth 4 thousand years ago.
<snip>

You are guilty of all of which you are accusing us. Matt Damon never said Sarah Palin thinks dinosaurs walked the earth 4000 years ago. He said its important to know IF she does believe it. If you would actually watch the video, you would know this.

How can anyone still support or even defend Palin after seeing the Couric interview? Have you, Mr. Thompson, seen those?

You're acting like every wooist here. When given a fact, you ignore it and divert attention elsewhere.

Us: "Palin gave very poor answers in this interview"
You: "The quotes attributed to her are mostly fabrications!"
Us: "Uh, well, here's the video of her giving very poor answers."
You: "But Hillary is just as bad!"
Us: "Are you going to comment on the answers she gave in the interview?"
You: "But the liberal media slants everything!"

Blah blah blah

[Slimething]

You cannot really talk about Sarah Palin without questioning if the things said about her are really true
There is enough evidence of Palin's ignorance on tape from her own mouth. You have been presented some of that evidence. You chose to ignore it only to launch tu quoque attacks on politicians you feel should be more vilified by the media. That is not a defense. It is merely a product of your own bias.

and if the press was fair --
Ah, yes, the old canard. I agree that too much of the reporting we see is biased one way or the other. However, the camera does not lie. You need to look at those videos and be truthful.

and if they would do the same to a candidate or politician on the left.
Ever watch Fox News? Methinks you do...plenty. Had the media not done "the same to a candidate on the left" how do you know Hillary missed a word singing the national anthem? Or any of the other stuff you use to hate Hillary?

I find it very disturbing when a self-described skeptic hurls labels such as "liberal" and "conservative" around. That practice insinuates prejudice towards ideas. That is, you believe that one speaker is more correct than the other simply because of a nebulous definition of their political leaning. In your world, one side is automatically correct and the other side is wrong by default. You're not listening to either the ideas or the news. You're wasting your time deciding which camp any one person belongs to so that, then and only then, you can agree with the source you like and not the other. What a foolish way to live one's life. :(

[MarkCorrigan]

People talking to Bill Thompson, please remember this is the guy who thought Wal*Mart made an advert about a child wishing for his father to be killed by nuclear fallout.

That is all.

[Bill Thompson]

I am not much of a fan of believing in something because it is the "correct thing to believe". If you want to convince me of something, I want tangible proof.

Hearsay and rumors and lies simply pulled out of the air are not tangible proof.

Since it is demonstrative that Palin did not say the most dopey things she has been accused of saying, it is beginning to look to me that it is the people who follow the mainstream media like a pack of sheep who are the real dopes.

====================

And as for your off-topic attack, Mark, I think you are graping at straws and I invite you to keep discussion threads on-topic: http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5933593&postcount=494 and not lie or misquote or misrepresent or take things out of context.

That is all.

[shadron]

A cheney, huh? I wouldn't guess so. Cheney was a rather distinguished senator who recommended both Saddam and backing up Social Security trust, and disremembered trying to cool thoughts of a Near East war when he was that legislator. Later he recanted, when he entered the executive. In between is was a board member of one of the largest corporations in America. Somehow, I don't think she can walk in his shoes, either experientially nor as easy a change artist (except for that damned bridge caper).

Since it is demonstrative that Palin did not say the most dopey things she has been accused of saying, it is beginning to look to me that it is the people who follow the mainstream media like a pack of sheep who are the real dopes.

Perhaps, but would you object if we sheep classify you as a groupie?

[thaiboxerken]

Is Bill a time-cube contributor?

[MarkCorrigan]

I am not much of a fan of believing in something because it is the "correct thing to believe". If you want to convince me of something, I want tangible proof.

Hearsay and rumors and lies simply pulled out of the air are not tangible proof.

Since it is demonstrative that Palin did not say the most dopey things she has been accused of saying, it is beginning to look to me that it is the people who follow the mainstream media like a pack of sheep who are the real dopes.

====================

And as for your off-topic attack, Mark, I think you are graping at straws and I invite you to keep discussion threads on-topic: http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5933593&postcount=494 and not lie or misquote or misrepresent or take things out of context.

That is all.

Walmart Ad Shows US Troops Attacked by Nuclear Fall-Out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9lkmd-mMJ0
That is not snow, Gomer

The OP of that thread Bill.

Seriously, you got called on this and back-pedalled so fast you practically went back in time.

Meanwhile, anyone who watches the aforementioned Couric interview should be left in no doubt that if Palin wasn't an idiot, she was so grossly misinformed you might as well have had Borat as your VP.

[SumDood]

<snip>
Since it is demonstrative that Palin did not say the most dopey things she has been accused of saying, it is beginning to look to me that it is the people who follow the mainstream media like a pack of sheep who are the real dopes.
<snip >

How about an example? Has anyone here attributed a dopey quote to her that is inaccurate?

She demonstrated her own stupidity in the Couric interviews. Remember, those are the ones you refuse to watch and/or comment upon. Who is the one acting dopey?

[Bill Thompson]

I have no faith in anything.

I cannot see how people can have so much faith in the media to believe their rumors and hearsay. They have this faith even in the light of their own admission that they have looked the other way and decided not to report on the most damaging information regarding the political Left. We know that Edwards had a kid with a woman he was not married to and got his best friend to admit it was his. We also know that the press knew this. We know that Hillary did not know the words to The National Anthem. We also know that the press tried to distract this issue when the video surfaced by saying that "she could not sing" as a way to cover it up. We know that the Clintons were involved in a campaign funding scandal and we know that this was not reported in the mainstream media.

The list against the Left is huge. There are the FBI reports on Republicans that appeared on Hillary's Desk, there are her hands in pardons in order gain support in New York to ensure she became a US Senator.

All these things are well known and can be verified as facts and yet the mainstream media does not report it.

On the other hand, they over-report and exaggerate and even fabricate quotes from Palin.

If we pride ourselves as being critical thinkers and skeptics, why do we put our skepticism on the back burner when trusting the News Media?

Palin was a VP candidate in the last election. Was as much scrutiny given to Biden? Someone here has said that Palin made mistakes during the VP debates. This is true. But I recall that Biden made a lot more goofs during that debate. I found it interesting how Oberman came down on Palin about her mistakes and acted as if Biden was not even there at all.

People make a big deal about Palin being unknowledgeable but noone makes a big deal that there is no cure for Biden's mental affliction -- whatever that may be. Maybe it is tourettes. Biden spouts racist comments at convience stores when on the campaign trail. Biden acts like a giddy kid when the Health Care Reform Bill is signed "this is ***** big". We may not want to have a president as unknowledgeable as Palin but do we want some guy suffering with tourets -- or probably something worse -- as president?

You do not like what I have to say, so you label me as a neocon to brush me aside. That is strawman. Don't do it.

I am not on any "team". I do not accept anything with faith. You should not either.

Just out of curiosity, I took a look to see if anyone wrote a book suggesting that Palin was treated unfairly by the press. I had no idea if such a book existed or not. Trust me, I am not a fan of hers and I do not support here. I am only saying that the press is biased and you should not trust them when they do not have recorded direct quotes from the people they are bashing.


I had no idea this book existed until now
The Persecution of Sarah Palin (http://www.amazon.com/Persecution-Sarah-Palin-Elite-Rising/dp/B003A02R7G%3FSubscriptionId%3D14H876SFAKFS0EHBYQ02 %26tag%3Dnashentefood-20%26linkCode%3Dxm2%26camp%3D2025%26creative%3D165 953%26creativeASIN%3DB003A02R7G)

[Bill Thompson]

Wrong again, Mark.
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5936310&postcount=499
You must feel you are really loosing this argument to bring up something so unrelated and months old to either change the focus of the issue or grasp at straws.

================


How about an example? Has anyone here attributed a dopey quote to her that is inaccurate?


SumDood, this is not how logic works. You do not start with a crazy idea and then demand that someone "prooves it to be wrong". It is extremely difficult to prove a negative. Science does not work that way either. If you have something to report, you had better have your evidence and facts and can prove it to be true.

We know that the silliest quotes from Feye were made up just to be humorous. I am reminded of the Movie The Exorsist when the older priest told the younger one to be careful because the devil would "mix truths with lies" inorder to convince you

Palin said that she knew what NAFTA is all about and that you could not be governor of Alaska without knowing about it. She said she has no idea where these "unnamed sources" got this idea or who they could be.

She demonstrated her own stupidity in the Couric interviews. Remember, those are the ones you refuse to watch and/or comment upon. Who is the one acting dopey?


Many people don't know what "The Bush Doctrine Is". It is not reported on often. Couric seemed interested in throwing rarely used terms at Palin to make her look stupid. If that had not worked, I am sure she had more to throw her way.

You don't think Couric had her own political agenda? When W invaded Iraq she said on the air that Sadam might make his way out of Baghdad and "hopefully" into Syria. I am not saying that she was on Sadam's side but clearly this slip-up suggests that, like a number of people on the Left, she did not think he was an enemy.

[MarkCorrigan]

Many people don't know what "The Bush Doctrine Is". It is not reported on often. Couric seemed interested in throwing rarely used terms at Palin to make her look stupid. If that had not worked, I am sure she had more to throw her way..

She asked her what papers she read and she responded "All of 'em!" but couldn't actually name one.

[thaiboxerken]

Palin just said that she misses GW Bush because Obama bailed the banks out!

[Monketey Ghost]

As fuelair pointed out, we have McCain to blame for foisting this outrageous moron on the rest of the US.

To think once I considered voting for the man.

[Whiplash]

Alot of people on the left had tremendous respect for McCain.. until he was the Republican nominee. Then he was Bush Jr suddenly.. and LONG before he chose Palin.

I found that hypocrisy disturbing. I got sick of hearing the left praise the man for 8 years and say how he should have got the 2000 nod.. and how he was the only moderate Republican.. and then watch them act like he was a member of the Nazi party from the day he got the nomination.

[MarkCorrigan]

Alot of people on the left had tremendous respect for McCain.. until he was the Republican nominee. Then he was Bush Jr suddenly.. and LONG before he chose Palin.

I found that hypocrisy disturbing. I got sick of hearing the left praise the man for 8 years and say how he should have got the 2000 nod.. and how he was the only moderate Republican.. and then watch them act like he was a member of the Nazi party from the day he got the nomination.

I'm what you would likely consider far left, and I had immense respect (and still do, sort of) for McCain.

However, the thing that threw me. That REALLY threw me. That made me never want that man to become president in a million years, was his "Health of the mother" comment, complete with air quotes.

That made me lose a hell of a lot of respect for him.

[Cleon]

Alot of people on the left had tremendous respect for McCain.. until he was the Republican nominee. Then he was Bush Jr suddenly.. and LONG before he chose Palin.

I found that hypocrisy disturbing. I got sick of hearing the left praise the man for 8 years and say how he should have got the 2000 nod.. and how he was the only moderate Republican.. and then watch them act like he was a member of the Nazi party from the day he got the nomination.

Bzzzt...Nope.

People started losing respect for McCain not when he got the nomination, but when he started trying to get it--by cozying up to the Religious Right. You may recall that one of the reasons the Left respected him in the first place was because he used to stand up to those bozos.

There is hypocrisy here, but it's not the Left's...It's McCain's.

[varwoche]

SumDood, this is not how logic works. You do not start with a crazy idea and then demand that someone "prooves it to be wrong". It is extremely difficult to prove a negative. Do you actually think that readers will let this goofy evasion slip by? You made a claim that is entirely provable, if it's true that is.

Well?

add: And no, SNL skits don't count. And by the way, by far the funniest Tina Fey bit was when she did an extended imitation of Palin, accurate down to the syllable. Truly hilarious!

[Bill Thompson]

Do you actually think that readers will let this goofy evasion slip by? You made a claim that is entirely provable, if it's true that is.

Well?

add: And no, SNL skits don't count. And by the way, by far the funniest Tina Fey bit was when she did an extended imitation of Palin, accurate down to the syllable. Truly hilarious!

That is like the Mormons who insist that they are right and demand proof that they are wrong. The Liberal Media make claims that they cannot backup. So why do you believe them?

[Bill Thompson]

I'm what you would likely consider far left, and I had immense respect (and still do, sort of) for McCain.

However, the thing that threw me. That REALLY threw me. That made me never want that man to become president in a million years, was his "Health of the mother" comment, complete with air quotes.

That made me lose a hell of a lot of respect for him.

How so? He was trying to imply that he had good genes and would be healthy into his term.

[Bill Thompson]

She asked her what papers she read and she responded "All of 'em!" but couldn't actually name one.

No one reads "all" the newspapers. I mean, clearly she did not mean this literally. Unless someone had them "all" delivered to their home could you name them. I am sure if someone said that they read "all of 'em" they mean that in the Internet Age they search for stories online based on topic rather than by publisher.

This question might be a good one to ask in 1942.

I think this question is a set-up and one where no answer would be a good one. If she had named a newspaper, the Media would have used THAT against her as showing she is out of touch with the Internet Age.

I think this question s a set-up and the Press would not have asked this question to anyone on the Political Left.

Disclaimer: The Following Is a joke.
Obama does not need to read the newspaper, Bill Ayers just tells him what to think.
Biden does not need to read the newspaper, that is what the voices in his head are for.
Disclamer: Here ends the joke phase of this post.

[Hindmost]

...snip.....

I know that this angers liberals for no real reason. Coulter gets lots of things wrong but one thing she gets right is the idea that Liberalism is like a religion. And people get upset for disrespecting their religious leaders, like Hillary.

....snip....

How can you tell the difference between what you indicate "Liberalism is like a religion" from calling Conservativism a religion.

For instance...editing your post:

I know that this angers conservatives for no real reason. "Any Liberal" gets lots of things wrong but one thing they get right is the idea that Conservativism is like a religion. And people get upset for disrespecting their religious leaders, like Bush.

When Palin was selected, most people didn't know her, however, the conservatives lined up to support her with religious ferver. Coulter has religiously supported anything conservative right up to Mccarthyism.

So how to you tell the difference between your side and the other side?

glenn

[varwoche]

That is like the Mormons who insist that they are right and demand proof that they are wrong. The Liberal Media make claims that they cannot backup. So why do you believe them? This is as goofy as the day is long in the dead of summer in Wasilla. Allow me to remind you of your claim: it is demonstrative that Palin did not say the most dopey things she has been accused of saying If it's demonstrative then you should be able to demonstrate, and I'm still waiting...

[SumDood]

How about an example? Has anyone here attributed a dopey quote to her that is inaccurate?


SumDood, this is not how logic works. You do not start with a crazy idea and then demand that someone "prooves it to be wrong". It is extremely difficult to prove a negative. Science does not work that way either. If you have something to report, you had better have your evidence and facts and can prove it to be true.

Well, this is what you said:
<snip>
Since it is demonstrative that Palin did not say the most dopey things she has been accused of saying, it is beginning to look to me that it is the people who follow the mainstream media like a pack of sheep who are the real dopes.
<snip>
So please demonstrate that Palin did not say the most dopey things she has been accused of saying. Put up or Shut up.

[varwoche]

The Liberal Media make claims that they cannot backup. So why do you believe them? The only entity who is documented here as a non backer-upper of claims is you.

[SumDood]

Wow. I was expecting some sort of 'i misspoke' or 'thats not what i meant' or 'i am going to continue as if i never said that' from Mr. Thomson. I didn't think he'd just abandon this thread permanently.

[SonOfLaertes]

Wow. I was expecting some sort of 'i misspoke' or 'thats not what i meant' or 'i am going to continue as if i never said that' from Mr. Thomson. I didn't think he'd just abandon this thread permanently.

Actually I'm amazed he stuck around for as long as he did. He began his participation in the thread by declaring that there was no evidence of the statements attributed to Palin; evidence was provided. He ignored the videos (I have no doubt that he watched all of them) and continued to declare that no evidence was provided while desperately derailing any attempt to get him on topic.

It must be a relief for Bill not to have to dance around his first post in this thread anymore. Frankly his evasions were exasperating to the point that I am also relieved that he has slipped away.

[Skeptic]

As far as I can tell, the "quotes" from Palin that are the most damning are fabrications. She did not even say the things they say she said.

On the other hand, we KNOW the wack job filth that Hillary, Biden, and others have spewed from their pie holes, and the press looks the other way.

Did it ever occur to you that this might be a blessing in disguise to Republicans?

Misspeaking politicians exist on both parties, but when the press treats one with kid's gloves and the other with an iron fist, (a) the press mostly hurts itself, as the double standard is obvious, thus lowering its crediblity even further and its ability to influence in favor of the left is further minimized, and (b) it leads to the Democrats not pruning total idiots (Biden) from their ranks, hurting their chances.

We all know better than to expect the least fairness from the MSM. Look at, for example, Time's (or was it Newsweek's? They are indistinguishable clones) Stalin-era-like pean to dear leader before the elections, which merely served to make both it and Obama look ridiculous with its over-the-top starry-eyed servility, or the New York Times' mysterious objectivity about the recent oil spill, when it takes little imagination to realize it WOULD ALL HAVE BEEN THE EVIL ENVIRONMENT DESTROYING BUSH'S FAULT had he been in power. Examples could be multiplied ad infinitum, but with the internet, they simply don't have 1/10th of the power they once had.

[Hershele Ostropoler]

I agree that too much of the reporting we see is biased one way or the other. However, the camera does not lie.

Sure it does. It's just as easy to take a quote out of context in audio or video than in print, and easier to edit things together.

I'm specifically not saying there's anything misleading about the Couric interview (beyond the limitations inherent in trying to get a complete picture of anyone from a brief interview). But I wouldn't say straight out "the camera does not lie."

I am not much of a fan of believing in something because it is the "correct thing to believe".

I'm all in favor of questioning Authority, but rejecting any answer other than that Authority is wrong isn't really "questioning."

[Skeptic]

I envy your user's name, Hershele... how's the Rebbe been doing recently?

[Thunder]

how come when right-wingers say something stupid...they simply "misspoke" or made a "mistake".

but when left-wingers say something stupid...they said EXACTLY what they meant?

[Hershele Ostropoler]

I envy your user's name, Hershele... how's the Rebbe been doing recently?
You get no credit for recognizing it, though. Now if you were, like, a black guy in St. Louis or something ...

I think the role of the Jester is an and valuable one. Precursor to the skeptic.

[Skeptic]

Doesn't count these days -- google took all the fun out of knowing stuff.

[Bill Thompson]

I do not think Sarah Palin should, or really wants to be president.

I think she should not be president for different reasons than posted here. I think people should not become president just because of luck. We only know about her because McCain picked her for Vice President. Despite what you might think, presidential candidates to not pick a VP because they think they will make a good president. Presidential candidates pick running mates to balance out the ticket.



Kennedy picked LBJ because Kennedy was considered a young Northerner of privledge and LBJ was an older politician from Texas.
Bush Senior picked Quale because Quale was younger and better-looking and this was supposed to present an image of newness and freshness.
Obama picked Biden because he was older and -- let's face it -- was a little racially incensitive and this presented an image of national unity and forgiveness.
McCain picked Palin because she was further right-wing than McCain -- so that appealed to the party base -- and she was a woman and that was supposed to draw some of the people who thought a woman in the White House would make some sort of magic and world peace happen. Plus McCain wanted to address the ideas that he was against women's rights.
Palin is known today just because she was lucky. Not for anything she did. For this reason she should not be president.

The idea that Palin should not be president because she is "stupid" does not make any sense. Some of the worst presidents we have had have had the highest IQ's. Some of the best presidents we have had have been the less educated ones.

Now, I think she is out giving speeches now because she is trying to sell her book. I also think she is trying to land a gig doing something else and she knows that being well known can't hurt.

[Cavemonster]

The idea that Palin should not be president because she is "stupid" does not make any sense. Some of the worst presidents we have had have had the highest IQ's. Some of the best presidents we have had have been the less educated ones.


Let's unpack these statements a bit. First, your contention that some of the worst Presidents have had high IQ's was challenged before and you didn't support it.

Next, you're using high IQ as the opposite of "stupid" which simply isn't comprehensive. There are a lot of ways to be stupid that have very little to do with the way we measure IQ. For instance, Nixon had a very high IQ, but that didn't stop him from acting very stupidly.

Then you go on to make another unsupported claim, that some of the best presidents were the less educated ones. Besides being unsupported you're bringing in yet another term. Education level is not the same as IQ by a long shot. George Bush was a Harvard MBA grad, but likely didnt have a terribly high IQ, and was demonstrably stupid.

Three different things:

Education (which can be unpacked further into how much information you really absorbed vs. what sort of degrees you hold)
IQ ( A measure of certain types of logical problem solving ability)
Stupidity (The profound lack of intelligence in any of a number of areas, including but certainly not limited to those measured by IQ). Sometimes popularly used as a synonym for more specific shortcomings such as ignorance or credulity as well.


Is education an issue for a candidate? Yes, to a degree. The job requires quite a bit of history and world and economic knowledge, and yes enough understanding of math to follow economic arguments, and an ability to study and absorb a lot of information quickly which is often, but not exclusively learned through the practice of extended and intense study.

Is IQ an issue? Up to a point. It is a decision making post, and an ability to quickly and accurately make logical decisions is key. Someone with a very low IQ would likely have more trouble doing the job and may be more apt to make errors.

Is stupidity an issue? Absolutely, if that stupidity is an inability to process information in ways the job may require.

[Jekyll's Guest]

The idea that Palin should not be president because she is "stupid" does not make any sense. Some of the worst presidents we have had have had the highest IQ's. Some of the best presidents we have had have been the less educated ones.

Evidence please.

Lots, and lots of evidence.

[Titanic Explorer]

the anti intellectualism of the right wing never ceases to amaze me...
They strive to legitimize the unflattering sterotype held abroad about Americans, that Americans are uneducated and ignorant.

The anti intellectual right admired Reagan and both Bushes because none of them were intellectuals.

They love Joe the Plumber *BECAUSE* the man is stupid and is thus somehow percieved as being 'a man of the people'. Same for Sean Hannity and Sarah Palin.

Palin would be an abysmal leader- she lacks curiosity, she is an isolationist, and is a Christian radical. In her dream world, America would be a Christian theocracy.

[Jekyll's Guest]

the anti intellectualism of the right wing never ceases to amaze me...
They strive to legitimize the unflattering sterotype held abroad about Americans, that Americans are uneducated and ignorant.

The anti intellectual right admired Reagan and both Bushes because none of them were intellectuals.

They love Joe the Plumber *BECAUSE* the man is stupid and is thus somehow percieved as being 'a man of the people'. Same for Sean Hannity and Sarah Palin.

Palin would be an abysmal leader- she lacks curiosity, she is an isolationist, and is a Christian radical. In her dream world, America would be a Christian theocracy.

In Britain I saw stupidity embraced with gusto, but never lauded. Only having lived in Britain and America I have to assume that lauding stupidity is unique to a section of the U.S. population.

Can anyone from any other foreign nation comment on this? Do you live in a nation where someone can brag that they think the Earth is a few thousand years old and that God talks to them and get voted in to office?

[thaiboxerken]

Hey, if you are educated, intelligent and accept science as a valid method of discovery, then you're just an Elitist!!

[Jekyll's Guest]

Someone needs to start a thread complaining about stupid things the British do, so everyone can see that I'm actually even handed in my bashing of stupidity worldwide!

Honestly folks, when I lived in Britain, my complaints were all British complaints. :)

[The Painter]

the anti intellectualism of the right wing never ceases to amaze me...
They strive to legitimize the unflattering sterotype held abroad about Americans, that Americans are uneducated and ignorant.

The anti intellectual right admired Reagan and both Bushes because none of them were intellectuals.

They love Joe the Plumber *BECAUSE* the man is stupid and is thus somehow percieved as being 'a man of the people'. Same for Sean Hannity and Sarah Palin.

Palin would be an abysmal leader- she lacks curiosity, she is an isolationist, and is a Christian radical. In her dream world, America would be a Christian theocracy.

Psst, your bigotry is showing. Are you saying Joe Bidden is an intellectual?

It is abundantly clear that you are a classic intellectual. A classic intellectual is someone who is educated beyond their intelligence.

[Titanic Explorer]

Psst, your bigotry is showing. Are you saying Joe Bidden is an intellectual?

It is abundantly clear that you are a classic intellectual. A classic intellectual is someone who is educated beyond their intelligence.



Trapped in a box defined by pary lines, are we?

I have no loyalty to the Republicans or Democrats- but I regard the right wing as my enemy, as they advocate fascism, anti-intellectualism and theocratic tyranny..BOTH parties are right wing, but the republicans are rabid right wing

[Whiplash]

Trapped in a box defined by pary lines, are we?

I have no loyalty to the Republicans or Democrats- but I regard the right wing as my enemy, as they advocate fascism, anti-intellectualism and theocratic tyranny..BOTH parties are right wing, but the republicans are rabid right wing


The only people I ever see try to claim that both parties are right wing, just one more than the other, are always on the far, far left wing themselves (yet consider themselves to be in the center). You seem to be a victim of your own ideological beliefs as well.

[Titanic Explorer]

The only people I ever see try to claim that both parties are right wing, just one more than the other, are always on the far, far left wing themselves (yet consider themselves to be in the center). You seem to be a victim of your own ideological beliefs as well.


hardly- I have views on the right and the left. I strongly support the war in Iraq, so as to crush Islamic tyranny-I think we should nuke those motherfuc***s from orbit. I'm pro death penalty, pro torture (on pedophiles and rapists) , pro choice and believe in the right for gay couples to marry, and support socialized medicine.. I find myself agreeing with many of Christopher Hitchens's views, in his distain for Christian zealotry and desire to destroy Islamic fascism.....

By the way, by British standards, America is a VERY right wing nation, thats a fact. That doesn't make me a radical leftist to see the truth.

[thaiboxerken]

Psst, your bigotry is showing. Are you saying Joe Bidden is an intellectual?

Do you think Biden being picked as VP actually energized the left to vote for Obama?