PALIN MAINSTREAMS THE BIRTHERS
My latest at PJ Media is up - a midday special guaranteed to win me lots of friends and get me a lot of lovin’ from all you Palinbots out there.
I write, of course, about Palin’s most spectacular stupidity to date; mainstreaming paranoids:
I didn’t want to write about Sarah Palin anymore.
Really, I didn’t want to. God, I didn’t want to. But every time I think I’m out, she pulls me back in.
Face it, my friends. If Sarah Palin’s nugatory understanding of everything from foreign affairs to economic matters doesn’t cause you concern, if her predilection to expand, exaggerate, or fudge the truth about herself and her past statements hasn’t yet convinced you that she is a lightweight prevaricator and doesn’t deserve your support, then this exchange with conservative talker Rusty Humphries should change your mind:
[...]
Those who live on the fringes of American politics usually don’t realize how wacky they truly are. For the last time: The state of Hawaii issued a statement confirming that Obama was born there, thus making him a U.S. citizen. Why is that so hard to accept? There are no “questions” left to answer except in the minds of simpletons and paranoid conspiracy freaks.
No, it is not a “fair question.” It is a silly, stupid, ignorant question. No, “the public” is not making this an issue — only looney tune numbskulls are pursuing it. No, there aren’t “enough (whatever that means) members of the electorate who still want answers.” Only a small subset of the entire electorate cares.
And her whining declaration that she didn’t go after Obama hard enough on his radical associations fails to mention that the reason McCain dropped it was because nearly 2/3 of voters couldn’t have cared less. It was a losing strategy, period.
No - she didn’t say that she believes the birthers or that she wants to see Obama’s birth certificate.
All she did was say that those who questioned the president’s legitimacy were themselves, legitimate.
Read what she said and come back here and tell me that she wasn’t legitimizing the Birthers. Convince me of it and I will write an apology.
Otherwise, run away. Run far away from Sarah Palin.
UPDATE
More than 100 comments over at PJM - I’d say it’s 20 to 1 against me. Better than I expected.
Allow me to add something; Does opposing a conservative make me less of a conservative? For some, the answer is yes.
In which case, I would say they are cultists rather than conservatives. If you think opposing a personality determines one’s adherence to conservative principles, might I suggest you get ready because the Mother Ship is close now and you don’t have much time.
It is pure idiocy to judge the depth of one’s belief in anything in the first place. But to include one’s devotion to an individual as a litmus test of orthodoxy? Those who think this way may want to re-examine their assumptions.
It’s a shame for history’s sake that Germans didn’t follow that advice 75 years ago.
Palin generally says whatever pops into her little head. Someone — I can’t recall who — pointed out that she never sees beyond the next ten minutes. She makes George W. Bush look like Solomon. And people who think she’s the next Reagan? I was never a Reagan worshipper but Palin isn’t the equal of his big toe.
Comment by michael reynolds — 12/4/2009 @ 12:58 pm
You mean like stating there are 57 states or that the cops in Cambridge acted stupidly or bowing embarrassingly to foreign dignitaries or giving one our nations staunchest allies (Britain) an insulting gift and giving them the traditional reception their dignitaries deserve?
I think what Palin said was stupid but if it makes her incompetent then by what standard can you claim Obama is competent?
Comment by Bald Ninja — 12/4/2009 @ 1:26 pm
Great post and awesomely hilarious comments over at PJM. Kind of like blasting a hornets nest with a shotgun. Thank you for that.
Comment by Aaron — 12/4/2009 @ 1:37 pm
Ninja:
You’re kidding, right?
We’re not talking about slips of the tongue. Do you actually believe Obama doesn’t know how many states there are? You think he got through Harvard without knowing the number of states? Don’t base your argument on ridiculous comparisons. No one thinks Obama is either stupid or thoughtless. You may not like his policies, you may think he’s wrong, but it takes a complete idiot to think Obama is stupid.
By contrast, pretty much everyone has figured out that Palin is a ninny. People on the left, people on the right, people in the middle. Everyone from Charles Krauthammer and George Will and Rick Moran and Christopher Hitchens (I could go on all day) to absolutely everyone from center right to far left.
In fact, if you want a quick and easy Idiot Identifier just add the people who think Obama is stupid to the people who think Palin is smart. If you fall within that circle it’s a pretty sure bet you’re an idiot.
Which is not to say that any number of people outside the circle aren’t also idiots. (In fact, you could add the number of people who admire Cindy Sheehan and the number of people who think the CIA blew up the twin towers and get the same ambient IQ.)
I’m just saying if aliens show up and demand a meal of complete cretins unadulterated by any indigestible shreds of intelligence, we can safely feed them Palin fans without concern for the aliens’ digestion.
Comment by michael reynolds — 12/4/2009 @ 1:44 pm
Bald Ninja said:
What she said isn’t what makes her incompetent, it’s her incompetence that does that.
Comment by Chuck Tucson — 12/4/2009 @ 2:12 pm
I guess I’m just a backwoods simpleton.
Number one, is anybody really paying attention to this? Number two, in some polling, didn’t a high percentage of respondents say that Obama should release his records? If you play it on the angle of openness and accountability(which Sarah has always pushed) I really don’t see how this shows a)she’s inept or crazy or whatever or b) that this is a losing issue in the first place. This should be a losing issue for the PRESIDEBT folks. Why bash Sarah?
Comment by Pofarmer — 12/4/2009 @ 2:25 pm
Just repeating below what I submitted to “PJ Media”…
I suggest that Moran, (sometimes his name deserves a vowel other than “a”), should have stuck to his opening gut feeling and eschewed SP as a topic – hope he does so in the future, although, to protect my own gut, I hardly read this or any of his material.
Comment by SmartyMarty — 12/4/2009 @ 2:26 pm
[...] left and the more liberal conservatives amongst us, such as Rick Moran, are saying that Sarah Palin’s statement on the Obama birth certificate is giving legitimacy [...]
Pingback by Palin Mainstreaming The Birthers? I Don’t Think So — 12/4/2009 @ 2:29 pm
Faux conservatives like Rick Moran, Andrew Sullivan, et. al. will never understand Governor Palin’s appeal. That’s OK, they can stick with Mittens. How’s that RomneyCare working out Rick?
You a psychic? Really?
If so, you suck. I hate Romney - with a passion.
How’s that idiot thing working out for ya, huh?
ed.
Comment by DB9 — 12/4/2009 @ 2:39 pm
DB9 said:
It’s not that they will never understand the appeal, it’s that they understand it all too well. The former governor’s appeal isn’t that hard to comprehend.
Comment by Chuck Tucson — 12/4/2009 @ 3:01 pm
Rick:
I once believed as you do regarding the “birther” issue, but _The Birther Movement Is Obama’s Fault_ by Tommy De Seno of JustifiedRight really changed my views on this issue.
I highly recommend you bring your views on that issue up to date by reading the article: http://justifiedright.typepad.com/justified_right/2009/07/the-birther-movement-is-obamas-fault.html
Comment by Will Spencer — 12/4/2009 @ 3:23 pm
Sarah Palin is a regular person, just like you and me. Except she’s brave enough to ask questions. See here: http://blog.infinitemonkeysblog.com/?q=node/6889 (If you don’t want to read the whole thing, just skip to the bottom. I won’t hold it against you.)
Mr. Moran, you mention from time to time how you’ve lost a great deal of traffic over the past year. For what it’s worth, you’ve gained a regular reader in yours truly. Cheers!
Comment by Ben Boychuk — 12/4/2009 @ 3:38 pm
Opposing a conservative doesn’t make you less conservative. But being intellectually lazy does destroy your argument, such as it is. And now you show your true intellectual heft:
“It’s a shame for history’s sake that Germans didn’t follow that advice 75 years ago.”
Wow! Anyone who supports Palin and doesn’t subscribe to your unhinged rantings is, drumroll please…a Nazi! Guess I better go pick up a copy of Mein Kampf.
By the way, I think Ace and Jim Geraghty have a much more realistic perspective on this non-issue that seems to have your panties in a bunch.
http://minx.cc/?post=295474
http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZWVlZGIwMDhjZTNkMDFhYzBjOTI2ZTE2YTlkNWQ5OTQ=
Wrong. Anyone who supports Palin and thinks I’m less of a conservative because I don’t is a cultist and engages in the cult of personality, i.e. Hitler, Mao, Kim, etc.
Can you understand it now? Words too big for ya? I can go small. I’m used to doing it with Palinbots.
ed.
Comment by DB9 — 12/4/2009 @ 3:45 pm
Rick,
Thanks for the “Update”. I hadn’t been called a “Nazi” in almost 18 hours and it was ruining my day!
Regards,
Comment by the Dragon — 12/4/2009 @ 3:55 pm
@Ben B:
Maybe you (or somebody else) can clarify this for me . . .
“Sarah Palin is a regular person, just like you and me” — what does that mean?
I see that phrase, or some variant, in almost every “pro”-Palin message, comment, blog, opinion, and I still don’t know what that means. How is she different than other Vice-Presidential candidates or State Govenors? What about her is “like me” or “like us” that other politicians don’t have?
Legitimate question here — not trying to attack Palin or her supporters (although in full disclosure I do despise the woman).
Comment by busboy33 — 12/4/2009 @ 4:07 pm
“‘Sarah Palin is a regular person, just like you and me’ — what does that mean?”
Nothing. It’s a South Park reference.
Comment by Ben Boychuk — 12/4/2009 @ 4:13 pm
Rick
It is not opposing a conservative, It is when, how, and what aid and comfort it may give the bottom feeding Liberals.
From what I see you are a purist and an absolutist.
You attack people when they are in fights with others and are having a tough time.
You attempt to make a virture out of kicking people when they are down. Or derailing any conservative that does not pass the Rick Moran purity test when they are ascending.
Timing is everthing
At least that is what I see.
Comment by steve — 12/4/2009 @ 4:16 pm
I think Palin knows fully well what she is doing and that the birth certificate is a non-issue. However, she knows it will stir up her base who follow her blindly. The upright All-American Mom who defends us all against the degenerate ‘elites’. Does that narrative have anything to do with ‘conservative values’? Of course, not but her ratings in the GB/Rush crowd soar, her book sells well and if you point out some let’s say less convincing things about her you get ‘called out’ by her followers. Anyway, it wouldn’t be a big deal but contrary to Palinbots she is not presidential material. We’ll see if she makes a run (she will probably try).
Comment by funny man — 12/4/2009 @ 4:18 pm
Some of the comments at PJM were funny as hell Rick. I think you should write more of this stuff just to bring them out. My favorite: Moran the undercover Maoist.
Comment by Allen — 12/4/2009 @ 4:20 pm
She is a populist political figure, who therefore appeals to some people with folksy, and less calculated opinions. That is why she will (a) always have a segment of fans who feel she speaks to them and their concerns, and (b) never be a serious candidate for national office.
Comments made by people that don’t like your critique of Sarah’s quotes are from those who only want ideological-friendly opinions from those who are perceived to be on “their side”. I read this same reaction of left-minded sites when a blogger dares to disagree with a favored Democratic figure.
Its just a human thing.
Comment by Craig — 12/4/2009 @ 4:22 pm
There is little doubt Palin was every bit as unqualified to be president as was Obama. What we never will now is whether she would have been as incompetent and as big of a buffoon as Obama is. The electorate was left with a dreadful choice in 2008, and will correct it come 2012. While the temptation is to inflict total humiliation on the Democratic Party for the fool it nominated and got elected, we need to keep our eye solely on victory, first in 2010 and then in 2012. From what I see, that is the focus among conservatives so I don’t share your apprehension, Rick. The long, slow death of the Democratic Party that was given a brief reprieve from 2006 until now has only stalled and will accelerate from this point forward.
Palin will be a footnote in about a year, and Obama will contest Buchanan as the worst president in United States history when he leaves office January 21, 2013. God willing there will be a country left to revive then.
Comment by obamathered — 12/4/2009 @ 4:25 pm
busboy,
Try this answer to your question in #15.
I’ll start back 20 years ago when Rush Limbaugh came on the scene. There were many, including myself, who had NEVER heard anyone in the media raise issues and concerns which I/we had personally. Did that mean I agreed with everything that Rush said/says? No, yet he became a spokesman, and quickly found a large following while expressing views in a public way, that we had been expressing and discussing on a micro basis.
Sarah Palin is similar, like 5 or 10% of the population, she DID NOT go to Harvard or Yale. She did things like EARN her way through college. As I did in the early 1970’s. In fact I transferred my junior year of college to a state University 3 hrs away where the tuition was $300/semester (for reference gas was 34 cents a gallon). I worked a full-time job and finished my final 2 years in 1 year and summer-school. The “she’s a regular person” comes from the fact that she seems to have led a fairly common life like running a business, having a family and following her interests and passions which led her into politics.
I am quite sure that IF I sat down to talk with Todd and Sarah Palin, there would be many common life experiences. I have very sincere doubts there are very many other politicians for whom that can be said (at least not the handful with whom I have been acquainted).
One of the modern Conservative icons, William F. Buckley’s said, “I would rather be governed by the first three hundred names in the Boston telephone book than by the Faculty of Harvard University.” I think that get’s a part of it as well.
I have a lot of clients as an accountant, who have better ideas on HOW to improve the economy then our elected officials, no matter whatever party they belong to.
Regards,
Comment by the Dragon — 12/4/2009 @ 4:30 pm
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Matthew Elliot, Mimesis Art Prints. Mimesis Art Prints said: PALIN MAINSTREAMS THE BIRTHERS: My latest at PJ Media is up - a midday special guaranteed to win me lots of fri.. http://bit.ly/5J9Acw [...]
Pingback by Tweets that mention Right Wing Nut House » PALIN MAINSTREAMS THE BIRTHERS -- Topsy.com — 12/4/2009 @ 4:36 pm
Oooh, Obama went to Harvard!!!! He’s still incompetent as President.
Is Palin smart? I don’t think she’s as stupid as her detractors think she is and I’m not convinced by her supporters that she’s competent to be President. The larger point is that people are much more willing to give Obama a pass on being ’smart’ than they are Palin.
Comment by Bald Ninja — 12/4/2009 @ 5:03 pm
1) Somehow I suspect it wasn’t an accident that you pick the words from the definition of “treason” in the constitution.
2) Did it ever occur to you that the people giving us the most “aid and comfort” are the Palinites who want that unelectable bimbo to be the face of their party?
Comment by angullimala — 12/4/2009 @ 5:05 pm
Serious question for you Palin haters out there - would you mind enumerating why she is stupid?
I don’t have an issue with the conservatives who think very poorly of Palin (like Rick) so I don’t really see liking Palin as a litmus test for conservative bona fides but I am genuinely interested in why, specifically those who hate her do so.
Comment by Bald Ninja — 12/4/2009 @ 5:06 pm
This blog is getting very Andrew Sullivan circa 2005 as of late. The constant drumbeat about the great unwashed and their illiberal litmus tests, while simultaneously calling for the excision of anyone who says something slightly disagreeable. The promotion of nebulously-principled, aspirant courtiers like Conor Friedersdorf (a Sullivan toady) as the type of people conservatives should really be listening to. Long posts concerning an utterly ill-defined “intellectual conservatism” that get bogged down in superficial semantics rather than articulating a robust oppositional philosophy to the government overreach we face today. Frequent, tedious articles concerning the importance of criticizing one’s side (a very worthy topic, but certainly capable of being overdone), culminating notably in that self-stroking “My Conservative Apostasy” post of yesterday. Mr. Moran seems to be blogging from some Platonic bunny hole where philosopher-kings are the rule and not the exception, and those who make the most modest populist entreaties shouldn’t just be harshly refuted, but banned from the decision-making arena all together.
Do you exaggerate everything for effect or are you really an ignoramus?
Just asking the question…
ed.
Comment by Pat Doherty — 12/4/2009 @ 5:06 pm
Bingo.
Sorry. I am not the one calling for purges. Marginalize the haters and ideologues - yes. Reduce their influence - yes.
Now - if you go to PJM and see how many people are saying that I should be drummed out of service for saying mean but true stuff about Palin, maybe you should be talking to them about purges, not me.
ed.
Comment by Bald Ninja — 12/4/2009 @ 5:13 pm
Rick said:
“Wrong. Anyone who supports Palin and thinks I’m less of a conservative because I don’t is a cultist and engages in the cult of personality, i.e. Hitler, Mao, Kim, etc.
Can you understand it now? Words too big for ya? I can go small. I’m used to doing it with Palinbots.”
Gee Rick, you really are a slippery fellow. It is I who will have to “go small” to help you out. I’m looking over what I wrote and I don’t see where I wrote that opposition to Palin makes you less of a conservative. Can you show me where I said that? Please, by all means, take your time. It appears to my untrained eye that I said the following:
“Opposing a conservative doesn’t make you less conservative.”
That‘s a real head scratcher there Rick. Perhaps English is a second language? Third? Since you seem to have had great difficulty comprehending this, I’ll try again. I’ll type more slowly this time so you’ll (hopefully) understand. I trust you’ll read slower too. Don’t be afraid to consult Webster’s and sound out words if necessary.
I said, paraphrasing, that being intellectually lazy compromises your argument, to which you changed the subject. Clever that. Then, you continue by pronouncing that anyone who supports Palin’s libertarian brand of conservatism is not only a Nazi, but a Maoist as well. And we can’t leave out Kim, right? Curious grasp on political philosophy you have there Rick.
Wow! Anyone who supports Palin and doesn’t subscribe to your unhinged rantings is, drumroll please…a Nazi! Guess I better go pick up a copy of Mein Kampf. - That’s from your comment.
Now - my response was to explain what I meant - just as I would to anyone with the mind of a 5 year old:
“Wrong. Anyone who supports Palin and thinks I’m less of a conservative because I don’t is a cultist and engages in the cult of personality, i.e. Hitler, Mao, Kim, etc.
Is your name “Anyone?” Was I referring to you? Why no - no I wasn’t. I was doing what we call “responding” to your ridiculous, ignorant charge.
you continue by pronouncing that anyone who supports Palin’s libertarian brand of conservatism is not only a Nazi, but a Maoist as well.
Um, no…let’s examine what I said again. In case you missed it.
“Wrong. Anyone who supports Palin and thinks I’m less of a conservative because I don’t is a cultist and engages in the cult of personality, i.e. Hitler, Mao, Kim, etc.
You forgot the part about “and thinks I’m less of a conservative because I don’t…” I realize short term memory loss is common among adults who were dropped on their heads as infants so I will give you a pass.
Of course I “pronounced” no such thing. And you sir, are a prime example of someone who is so besotted with idiotic ideology you actually read things that aren’t there.
Go away now and leave the big people alone.
ed.
Comment by DB9 — 12/4/2009 @ 5:13 pm
And her whining declaration that she didn’t go after Obama hard enough on his radical associations fails to mention that the reason McCain dropped it was because nearly 2/3 of voters couldn’t have cared less. It was a losing strategy, period.
I really like the whining thing…I believe Rick has used that in other posts as well. What makes it quite funny is that after castigating Palin for whining, Rick whines about his (his posts) treatment, after he intentionally attempts to offend/insult a segment of readers, and he succeeds. I guess I should give him credit, maybe he knows his “whines”.
I, instead, weather willing, in the morning will stop by Sarah Palin’s book signing in Fairfax, VA, on my way to our favorite Winery “Grey Ghost Vineyards” in Amissville, Va.
Regards,
Comment by the Dragon — 12/4/2009 @ 5:24 pm
Why is the sky blue?
I know there’s an explanation but not exactly sure what it is. The real question is why some many conservatives are in lve with someone so stupid.
“Who is the greater fool, the fool or the fool who follows him?”
~ Old Ben Kenobe
Comment by Richard bottoms — 12/4/2009 @ 5:36 pm
Rick had me nodding in agreement until that last bit, alluding to Palin as Hitler (on which he doubled down in response to a comment by saying he meant Palin followers were cultists like followers of Hitler, Stalin or Mao).
This is silly. Everyone should swear to stop making Hitler analogies to American politicians.
Palin is just another in a long long line of pols who have engaging personalities or a knack for ingratiating themselves with one or another group of voters, while not being especially bright or capable or even well informed. City, state and even federal offices are full of such pols. The top executive of my suburban town, a Democrat, is as dumb as a stone and only barely articulate. But he’s clever enough to get reelected regularly. Over many years in politics, I’ve personally known many, many New York state legislators, New York City Council members, citywide and statewide officials a some members of the House who have no clue what they’re doing, can’t speak effectively in public, and or have no knowledge of or interest in anything beyond what they’re immediately briefed about.
Luckily, however, these dopes usually max out in lower offices or at most get elected to the House. It’s just much harder to run successfully for offices where broad support across a large population is needed if you’re neither particularly smart nor well informed (enough to fake it anyway).
Unless….you can leapfrog over running such a race or races by being picked for a nomination by one guy!
Palin is no Hitler and her supporters are not cultists. If anything, the never-ending barrage of liberal and elite attacks on her induce conservative folks to rally round in defense of a person who was recently their candidate (but someone most of them would never have heard of but for John McCain’s hail mary pass in choosing her)m
I did not allude to Palin as Hitler. That’s nonsense. I said that anyone who subscribes to the view that I am less of a conservative because I don’t like Palin is a cultist and engages in the cult of personality. Eschewing principle for personality is what happened in Nazi Germany, China, and North Korea to give three examples.
Nowhere did I even come close to saying Palin was Hitler. You misread the update.
ed.
Comment by John Burke — 12/4/2009 @ 5:45 pm
I don’t exactly what I was exaggerating (to be fair, the philosopher/king thread may have been a bit much) since you didn’t address anything I said and retreated instantly into the warm confines of the ad hominem. Perhaps you can enlighten me with your acumen.
Why bother? I mean really, what is the point? I have learned that people like you have no desire to engage in any kind of colloquy. You read and interpret what I write through a prism of ideology and don’t realize, cannot fathom that your interpretation is so out of whack with the words on the page that it would be worse than useless to waste my time giving a detailed response to anything you think.
ed.
Comment by Pat Doherty — 12/4/2009 @ 5:57 pm
So in other words you don’t know why she’s stupid - she just is.
Comment by Bald Ninja — 12/4/2009 @ 6:01 pm
Bald Ninja,
I don’t hate her. Why should I? I just think she doesn’t understand enough foreign policy to be President. Her press conference after resigning as governor? That’s whining. Her interview with Couric? Pathetic. Self criticism doesn’t seem a strong trait with her (ok, to be fair that’s not widespread in either party).
Comment by funny man — 12/4/2009 @ 6:09 pm
Rick, you really are a piece of work. You can’t back up anything you say so you change the subject and resort to name calling and ad hominem. I’ve known others like that. They have no argument or point so that’s all have left. Quite telling.
I responded directly and succinctly to your point. You simply refuse to acknowledge you were stupidly wrong.
ed.
Comment by DB9 — 12/4/2009 @ 6:28 pm
funny man said:”…Her press conference after resigning as governor? That’s whining.” I guess telling facts is whining? OF COURSE, she was STUPID in pushing the “ethics complaints” she got caught up by as part of a major piece of Ethics/corruption Legislation and DID NOT anticipate it’s abuse.
Sort of like Rick punching people rhetorically and then whining about being punched back.
“Her interview with Couric? Pathetic.” Granted it was a very poor interview. According to John Fund of the Wall Street Journal, the Couric interview’s lasted close to 9 hours. IF that’s the worst of it not so bad. Also, she admitted her poor performance. I am quite confident that I could do 9 hours of interviews with Stephen Hawking, slice it and dice it to 13 minutes and make it look like he couldn’t andwer 2+2, much less be one of the most renown theoretical physicists.
“Self criticism doesn’t seem a strong trait with her (ok, to be fair that’s not widespread in either party).”
Have you read her book? Plenty of self searching, JUST learning and moving forward…not alot of complaining about it. Although you will get agreement from Rick, he got a different version of the book than I did. Rick calls it “Cotton Candy” Conservative.
I am having tee-shirts made “I’m a PROUD “Cotton Candy Conservative”. I’ll post them.
Regards,
Comment by the Dragon — 12/4/2009 @ 6:39 pm
adnwer=answer
Comment by the Dragon — 12/4/2009 @ 6:41 pm
Why such vitriol? People like me? Does that mean people who disagree with you Rick? This is the second time I’ve commented on one of your posts, and the first time you’ve responded. You don’t know me. If you’re capable of diagnosing my mental process and cognitive flaws by virtue of a single blog post you have a truly enviable intellect. I’ve been a faithful reader, a fan for over a year (perhaps I should I have expressed that in the post). I didn’t attack you personally. I criticized what I find distasteful about something I generally like. Maybe it was overdone, I’m certainly capable of doing that. If it offended you on a personal level I apologize. I’d imagine you’ve been subject to worse excoriations than my little blog-jeremiad. The exact reason I posted my comment was in the hope of having a meaningful dialogue with you. If I didn’t like you I would simply call you a douchebag or a faggot or some other blog colloquialism. For someone who writes affectionately of a sober, empirical, intellectual conservatism, your response is disquieting in its raw, seemingly emotional vituperation.
Comment by Pat Doherty — 12/4/2009 @ 6:42 pm
Bald Ninja:
Ask a high school drop-out kid’s book author:
Q: What newspapers and magazines do you read?
A: Well, Katie, I read mostly online. I usually start with the NYT, WaPo and MSNBC. I check HuffPo to see what the left is interested in, and I check Drudge to see what the right is interested in. I use various blogs to point me to unexpected sources — smaller papers, other news sources, blogs which don’t rise to the level of everyday reading. There are a half dozen blogs I read more than once a day — 538, Andrew Sullivan, OTB, the Moderate Voice, The Glittering Eye, either for their own writing or because they point me to other interesting data. Then there are another half dozen blogs I check daily. The end result is that in addition to NYT, WaPo and MSNBC, I usually also know what’s in the WSJ, the Financial Times and the news weeklies. Of course, I’m not a politician, just an interested voter.
Ask an Alaskan governor and VP candidate:
Q: What newspapers and magazines do you read?
A: Duuuuuuuuuuuh. Uuummmm. (Drool.) Errrr. Hmmmm. (Wink.)
Comment by michael reynolds — 12/4/2009 @ 6:44 pm
the Dragon,
look you like her, and that’s fine. I like some of her too but don’t think she’s fit to be President. However, I don’t say you are not a conservative and neither should you say that about me (at least not based on my opinion of Palin). I didn’t say you did though. So on this point we can agree to disagree.
Comment by funny man — 12/4/2009 @ 6:48 pm
Rick,
You’re a child. You can’t rebut my point, so you simply claim you have, change the subject, or resort to name calling, as children do.
Comment by DB9 — 12/4/2009 @ 6:54 pm
Bald Ninja:
“The larger point is that people are much more willing to give Obama a pass on being ’smart’ than they are Palin.”
That is the most obvious point. Both are unqualified, inconsequential pieces of shit. For those of us on the Right, we will be able to kick the Left for a decade or two for having the misfortune of having their low-life trash elected. If we play it correctly, the first shoe to drop won’t be retaking the House in 2010. The first shoe to drop will be wiping out Obama in 2012, and then going after these left-wing bastards in the fetid corpses on which they feed: academia, the media, and so forth. Given AGW is based on fraud, the MSM media is composed of now-obvious two-bit whores, along with the other trash armour that protected these dung heaps for decades, we can wipe them out–forever–as long as we don’t follow the Democrat mode and replace the ignoramus puppet Obama with an ignoranum puppet like Palin.
Let’s be smart, people.
Obama is the last nail in the coffin of the Democratic Party and the Left. Let us not take it out.
Comment by obamathered — 12/4/2009 @ 7:29 pm
Yeh, tell us Ricky Baby. Kind of like those of us who questioned Manmade Global Warming - only a very stupid or ignorant conservative would dare do such a thing about the law of “gravity.”. Question and be kicked out of the society of those who are always right and thus cannot be questioned.
I was always taught that there are no dumb questions just unasked questions. I tell my students here in China this everyday. Am I mistaken?
Dare ask a question that goes against what Ricky Baby believes and prepared to be called “silly little liberal-like names” and ostracized from the big “conservative” tent that he and others preach about every day. Ask the question and forever be labeled - blah blah blah. No room for “Ricky-labeled” nut/cult cases. Only those approved need apply.
Instead of the constant petty name-calling and bitterness against those who dare ask, why not send them to plenty of websites that pretty much prove Obama was born in Hawaii. Let ‘em ask the questions. Questions are good for the soul and the intellect if for no other reason than to have self-proclaimed brilliant people run around and call people names for asking.
Palin is stupid. Bush is stupid. Limbaugh is stupid. Coulter is stupid. Hannity is stupid. Mitt is stupid. The only ones who are not stupid are you and me and now that I have written this, you realize that only you are left or are you still claiming to be “right.”
Comment by Cecil — 12/4/2009 @ 8:49 pm
To Dragon:
I wear an XXL so make one of those Cotton Candy Conservative T-shirts for me as well. Make it a crimson Chinese red one to match the redness of Ricky Baby’s . . . from all the spankings he is getting.
Comment by Cecil — 12/4/2009 @ 8:56 pm
I was always taught that there are no dumb questions just unasked questions. I tell my students here in China this everyday. Am I mistaken?
Dumb questions:
1) How many legs does cheese have?
2) Does your car like hot dogs?
3) Is Obama American?
Actually, it’s pretty easy to construct a dumb question. Any two nouns, a verb or two and a question mark.
Tip: Commonplaces are often wrong.
Comment by michael reynolds — 12/4/2009 @ 9:31 pm
We are about to deploy 30000 more troops to Afghanistan, unemployment hovers around 10%, health care is about to be reformed and Iran is stepping up it’s nuclear enrichment program. At the same time thousands worry about a Hawaiian birth certificate??? Is that our political input? Is that what we conservatives stand for? Pleeez.
Comment by funny man — 12/4/2009 @ 9:34 pm
This birther thing refuses to go away.
This climategate refuses to go away.
The reason is this.
There is truth to it. Completely false things become urban ledgends.
Comment by moneyman — 12/4/2009 @ 9:53 pm
michael reynolds,
1.) Ask someone from Wisconsin,
2.) Yes, If it’s the Oscar Meyer Weiner car…
3.) Maybe? Probably? Or more likely, yes…so what is this being hidden through this little chirade?
Regards,
Comment by the Dragon — 12/4/2009 @ 10:01 pm
moneyman,
according to your logic ‘Palin is a dumb bimbo’ refuses to go away because there is truth to it.
Millions of flys eat poop, doesn’t mean I have to join in. So just because some people…
Comment by funny man — 12/4/2009 @ 10:23 pm
///Dumb questions:
1) How many legs does cheese have?
2) Does your car like hot dogs?
3) Is Obama American?//
My cat’s name is “cheese.” Is it still a dumb question?
My dog’s name is “car.” Is it still a dumb question?
The issue is not “American.” Is it still a dumb question?
No dumb questions, only dumb attempts at cuteness. Everything depends on the circumstances.
It is not ok to ask about Global Warming. It is not ok to question evolution as a scientific theory. It is not ok to ask about the lack of openness of the Obama Regime. Duhhhhh, and the list goes on.
Lucky you are not in charge of determining what questions can or cannot be asked.
Cute really isn’t that cute BTW.
Comment by Cecil — 12/5/2009 @ 1:07 am
funny man, you’re obviously making too much sense for the average commentator here. The Pro-Palin/Anti-Logic nonsense being spewed at Right Wing Nut House (and at PJ MEdia) is somewhat amusing to myself and Mr. Reynolds, but must be giving Rick and other honest Conservatives heart palpitations. As our nation is going through major changes, they are only interested in re-living yesterday’s battles and blindly opposing anything with the President’s fingers on it. Clearly, they’re not listening to the rational grown-ups and the remainder of the grown-ups are pandering to their worst instincts.
Comment by Surabaya Stew — 12/5/2009 @ 3:04 am
Great post. I read it over at PJM and it was a breath of fresh air. I’m sick of the birther issue and I’m sick of all the idiots leeching onto it. It’s just making conservatives look bad everywhere.
But there’s no logic that will ever change the mind’s of the birthers. The birth certificate has been released. Even if Obama pulled strings and got a full birth certificate, I bet the same people would be claiming forgery. Oh wait, birther Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs, has already pointed out that the brith certificate released is a forgery.
I’m just thankful that you’re speaking out for sensible and logical conservatives. We’re out there and we’re sick of the BS growing in conservative movements.
Keep up the good work.
Comment by Chris — 12/5/2009 @ 9:10 am
I hope Palin wins the gop nomination in 2012.Nothing could be more entertaining than a Obama versus Palin showdown.The second most entertaining thing in 2012 will be the Palin versus Mittens bloodbath for the gop nomination.Mitt can articulate economics like a professor, Palin speaks in platitudes. We’ll find out where the soul of the gop lies, my guess, Caribou Barbie wins with a wink and a nod.
Comment by Joe — 12/5/2009 @ 10:25 am
Palin cannot “mainstream” this issue as she is not “mainstream” herself. She has a small but vocal following. She currently holds no political office nor does she hold a position of influence within the RNC. In other words, her overall influence on American politics is minimal at best.
She has no chance of winning election to any office any where right now. She quit in mid term as governor of Alaska. Any opponent she might have in either a primary or a general election would be certain to have a field day with this. If she quit in mid term as Governor of Alaska how can we be sure she won’t quit again when the going gets tough? She has no defense against this. Her candidacy to any office would be over before it got started. As such, the RNC will never give her the nomination.
It is somewhat bewildering why the media and main stream Republicans such as this site spend so much time analyzing such an insignificant individual. I suppose assigning more power to something or someone than it actually has makes it easier to vilify that which you hate. Personally I think it would be more productive to analyize the positions of someone like Mitt Romney. He actually has a chance to get the Republican Presidential nomination. Sarah Palin does not.
Comment by B.Poster — 12/5/2009 @ 10:49 am
B. Poster:
You’re citing logical reasons Palin can’t win the nom. But her supporters aren’t rational. And the more you cite reason the more they will reject your arguments and support Palin. In the meantime she will pull focus from more sensible GOP candidates and the Palinbots will aid and abet her every step of the way.
That’s why sensible conservatives want to kill her off, once and for all. (They’ll fail.) And of course Democrats love Palin because she exemplifies everything wrong with the GOP.
Think of it as a conspiracy between the Palinbots and the Democrats against the frustrated remnants of the old GOP. Democrats and Palinbots have the same goal: the neutering of the GOP and the redefinition of “conservatism” as “lunacy.”
Comment by michael reynolds — 12/5/2009 @ 11:26 am
Interesting advice from B. Poster & Michael Reynolds.
With ALL the hype about 2012, I had missed the memo that the Iowa & New Hampshire are JUST 6 weeks away. Oops…my mistake, that’s more like 108 weeks away.
Let’s just consider the Republican Establishment and most of the currently perceived front line candidates as much like General George McClellan of the Army of the Potomac. He supposedly wanted to fight, just couldn’t quite find the right situation to actually take the fight to Lee.
Palin, whether she runs or not, is more akin to either Robt E. Lee or George Patton. Both, took advantage of circumstances as they appeared on the ground, and advanced rather than sit in their cave for more fortutious circumstances.
Sarah Palin, warts and all, IS IN THE FIELD, firing, taking return fire and withering, friendly fire AND is still advancing. The only other Republican currently who has even seen the battle is Pawlenty. He seems conflicted, wanting the comfort of the cave, BUT sees that there is a battle to be engaged, and he is following and there.
And don’t forget that the army was already assembling before Governor Palin arrived, the Tea Party folks and the townhall folks were preparing the battlefield.
Yes, there are other Republicans attempting to be part of the battle, yet their voice isn’t heard. Currently ONLY ONE is being heard, with a pathetic Facebook page and 2 words, the ObamaCare opposition gained traction. Might/Probably have happened anyway, yet no one had the megaphone AND the strategic sense to ATTACK!
Interesting who MUST be destroyed, seemengly the thoughts of many intelligent Republicans and bloggers? Those stupid populist Conservatives the “Cotton Candy Conservatives”. The only ones who joined the battle while the “proper” conservatives and Establishment Republicans dithered. Yep, Rick is correct, these folks MUST be put in their place, and let their “Betters” handle things now. They’re just bumpkins and hicks.
Rick, I don’t think Shut-Up and get out of the bus is going to work.
Regards,
Comment by the Dragon — 12/5/2009 @ 12:23 pm
Palin, whether she runs or not, is more akin to either Robt E. Lee or George Patton.
Yes, that was the first thought that came to my mind, too. Palin = Robert E. Lee.
Please don’t let Rick or anyone else sane dissuade you: rock on Sarah!
Comment by michael reynolds — 12/5/2009 @ 1:32 pm
Rick-
this is as much a response to your “conservative apostacy” thread as this one-
I am seeing more and more of the principled conservatives break with the conservative movement before it veers off the cliff, and I applaud them.
The modern conservative movement has become its mirror twin; Russell Kirk wrote that conservatism has no creed or manifest, it has no fixed ideology like Capitalism.
Conservatism seeks balance, order, and reason. It doen’st hold to a fixed idea, but changes course, adapts to new data, turns in popposite directions if the evidence demands it.
The conservative movement has become a cargo cult of Capitalism; they hold that any deviation from free market is inherently evil, and cling to “tax cuts” as the magic solution to any and all economic problems, regardless of evidence, or changes in facts.
Conservatism seeks social order and mutual responsibility; yet the conservative movement seeks individualism, an atomized collection of private interests and personal gain, ignoring the larger societal good. The conservative movement- Palin in particular- is based on tribal identity, holding themselves up as real and true, and anyone else as inauthentic, alien, and dangerous.
The conservative movement has become its opposite; it is more like classic dogmatic Socialism than anything else.
Free thinkers of all stripes are being thrown out, or leaving on their own accord.
Comment by Liberty60 — 12/5/2009 @ 1:52 pm
@ Dragon:
Thanks for your reply.
So she’s “like us” because she (a) didn’t go to harvard and (b) worked thru college? But Joe Biden, fameous for riding trains rather than driving even as a senator, is an “elite”?
I know you like her, so I’ll just agree to disagree with you on this one. But let me say this: “Vote for Sarah” hasn’t got crap to do with her in college. It has to do with her right now. Today, is she “just like you and me”?
Also, in regards to the “Couric interview was cut and edited” meme: I’ve said this before, so I’ll try to be brief (not my strong suit). There’s two types of “cut up”. One involves leaving parts of the interview out. The other involves splicing parts together that didn’t go together. Your tone implies the Couric interview was the later, but it wasn’t.
If you think you could interview Stephen Hawking and get him to say ignorant sh!t about math . . . good luck to you. If you think you can interview him and re-edit the interview to make his answer to question #45 appear to go with question #13, then yes, he’ll look foolish. But that’s not what happened with Palin.
If you ask Obama 2 questions, and the first he answers brilliantly and the second he says something ignorant, when you show his answer to the second question does your “cutting” of the interview mean his answer wasn’t ignorant? It was all in the editing? No. Palin’s answers wern’t spliced together. Her interview with Gibson was just as bad. As was her resignation speech. As have pretty much all of her speeches been when she wasn’t reading prepared comments. That’s not editing, or cutting, or media bias, or anything. That’s just her looking pretty damn bad.
She seems like a nice lady. Hell, W seemed (and still seems) like a nice guy. But “lets hang out and get a beer” and “leader of the free world” are two different jobs, and qualifying for one doesn’t carry over into the other.
Comment by busboy33 — 12/5/2009 @ 1:58 pm
michael,
Glad you liked it.
It’s always interesting how you almost always default to insult, generally referencing ones intelligence level. I guess that’s ALL you got.
Regards,
Comment by the Dragon — 12/5/2009 @ 2:20 pm
Dragon:
What can I say? I must be one of the elites.
Comment by michael reynolds — 12/5/2009 @ 2:36 pm
michael,
You seemed to be
Actually, all this discussion about 2012 is quite stupid. 2010 is MOST IMPORTANT!
But then, I’m not intelligent like Rick and others. They whine about a litmus test, and then want to drive out most of those who are ACTUALLY attempting to do something because they are too this and too that and too stupid and too angry and too whatever else. Of Course, that is not a litmus test, just BRILLIANT STRATEGY?
A stupid idea I have is you figure out how to marshall the resources available to you and figure out how to win with it. It might not be easy, BUT we are talking about the Intelligent set here, one would think they could figure it out.
Regards,
Comment by the Dragon — 12/5/2009 @ 3:03 pm
busboy,
First, the “She’s like us” is not limited to the education thing, it was just an easy personal example.
Second, I did not say that the Couric interview was good, neither has Sarah Palin. You have stated categorically that Couric did not pick and choose from from 9 hours to get 13 minutes (that’s roughly 3.5% of the total tape). Have you seen ALL 9 odd hours?
To your Obama example, IF all that was shown was the 2nd question which was horrible, does that mean he is stupid? OR did he just give a bad answer to a question?
Third, regarding Charlie Gibson, OK interview. I do remember seeing a series of 3/4/5 questions of the “Bush” Doctrine sequence, which context made the 1 answer chosen/shown sensible/reasonable.
Fourth, as to “Leader of the Free World”, one thing you can be sure, Sarah Palin WILL NOT be apologizing for the US to every tinpot dictator in the world.
Finally, as I mentioned to Michael. ALL this focus on Sarah Palin and could/can she, would/will she, should she in 2012 is idiotic at this time. 2010 is what should be the current focus.
Regards,
Comment by the Dragon — 12/5/2009 @ 3:34 pm
Gee thanks, Rick. I reposted part of your post at Free Republic and got banned!
All anti-Palinistas will be purged!
http://ikeonic.blogspot.com/2009/12/palin-victim-of-birther-pains.html
Very sad. I am at a loss. Nothing anyone says will make a difference - only disasters will either wake them up or marginalize these fools. I am not hopeful.
ed.
Comment by Ikeonic — 12/5/2009 @ 3:56 pm
@Dragon:
“have stated categorically that Couric did not pick and choose from from 9 hours to get 13 minutes”
I have absolutely not said any such thing . . . ever. Lets assume that Couric (and Gibson) went throught footage with a specific eye to only air the most damning material they could find. Does that make the material not damning? Of Course not.
“IF all that was shown was the 2nd question which was horrible, does that mean he is stupid? OR did he just give a bad answer to a question?”
Does it categorically prove that he is stupid? No. But if its an easy question (say, “what do you read”) and he botches it, then it tends to hint that he might be a bit mentally deficient. If he does it again, and again . . . and again . . . it tends to suggest it a bit more strongly. Hell, look at the commenters on this and other political sites. Obama bowed too low in Japan. He’s a fool! Ignorant! Naive! Unfit to lead!!
Let me turn the implicit question (you can’t prove she’s stupid) around — what does she say that implies she’s intelligent?
I respectfully disagree with your assessment of the Gibson “Bush Doctrine” questions. I don’t think she came out looking good at all.
I do agree that 2012 is irrevelant at the moment. But as influential as Palin is in the Red sphere at the moment, she certainly isn’t irrevelent even though she’s not running for anything in 2010.
“Fourth, as to ‘Leader of the Free World’, one thing you can be sure, Sarah Palin WILL NOT be apologizing for the US to every tinpot dictator in the world.”
As long as she does the really important stuff . . .
btw — “every tinpot dictator” is a might exagerated.
Comment by busboy33 — 12/5/2009 @ 3:57 pm
“Palin generally says whatever pops into her little head.”
As in her “pretty” little head? As in she’s a little woman and therefore should not be taken seriously? It would be such a treat if you liberals could surprise me and refrain from immediately becoming what you say you despise when criticizing a conservative. I won’t hold my breath. I’ve grown accustomed to the liberal double standard — and its twin, liberal hypocrisy.
Comment by Anon — 12/5/2009 @ 6:22 pm
Well said and bravo. I cut ties with the Republican party mid-Bush fiasco because I felt as if I was the only person voting R that didn’t need to consult a Bible, Rush or Sean before forming an opinion.
I am glad I found your column over at PM (via Sullivan). You certainly have drawn quite a response from the Palinbots. That they can’t see how utterly ridiculous and ignorant their whackadoo theories and rants are is utterly frightening. Where have all the sane conservatives gone? Since when is being willfully ignorant something to flaunt like a trophy?
I may have to dust off my own blog now. Hrmmmmm.
Comment by kim_tn — 12/5/2009 @ 6:33 pm
Since it started getting Republicans elected in greater numbers, starting around 1980. I know that insults Saint Ronnie, but from our perspective it’s true. Moral Majority, Christian Coalition, etc.
You people just started noticing about 2006, right after even the most die hard Republican started wondering WTF??? during Katrina, Teri Schiavo, and of course the giant goat screw that was Iraq began to seep into your brains.
Oh well. Better late than never.
As the saying goes, if you ’sub with the Devil, you better have a long spoon.
Well these days is pretty darn small, and more rightly described as a spork.
Now I remember why I have banned you 3 times; you really are ignorant of history.
You have a Noam Chomsky approach, seeing events through extraordinarily partisan eyes. Facts don’t matter unless they can be squeezed through your ideological prism.
The record tells a different story - to those with a more balanced and objective eye. For you and many on the left, that simply isn’t possible.
ed.
Comment by Richard bottoms — 12/5/2009 @ 7:05 pm
busboy asked:”Let me turn the implicit question (you can’t prove she’s stupid) around — what does she say that implies she’s intelligent?”
Herein lies the rub. HOW do YOU define intelligent? Is it an IQ score?
This sort of harkens back to our discussion on Krugman. Did Krugman win his Nobel Economics Prize because he went to MIT? I doubt it, he won because the Committee considered that his Theory groundbreaking in some way. Did his degree at MIT alone earn him the Nobel, unlikely, yet I’m sure it a was helpful foundation, BUT what he did with/after the degree was what seemed to merit the Award.
I’m not answering directly, because the only one’s who ever bring “intelligence” in reference to Sarah Palin are those wishing/attempting to diminish her. There is not this chorus of Palin supporters saying I support Sarah because she’s so smart. It’s a given.
If you want her IQ, I don’t know.
I’ll ascribe how Palin has gotten to where she is as to proof of intelligence. IF she had been the next in line in some machine in some major city, then empty suits can go far. To run an get elected at several levels, particularly as an outsider for Governor I would guess could just be luck, getting major ethics reforms and gas pipeline and reworking oil leases could also be luck, both in picking those issues AND picking the people to get them done, or maybe it was getting ALL the opponents drunk, if that’s what you wish.
Bottom line, the question is inane.
IF you want to use a different question regarding specific abilities like can she proceed directly to the blackboard and write out the mathematical equation’s for the 5 insoluable problems of the string theory before the 11th dimension was added, I am betting she can’t do that.
A better question from your perspective might be questions regarding her judgement. Depending on how you posit the question, the answer(s) are far more varied.
Regards,
Comment by the Dragon — 12/5/2009 @ 7:23 pm
Please read what I wrote a little closer.
I am not saying the present state of the Republican party is not qualitatively different than 1980.
But, and it’s a big but, the GOP started on this path inevitably when it hooked up with the Christian troops to power their machine.
People don’t believe in evolution, demand prayer in schools, start segregated Christian academies to circumvent integration, oppose abortion in all its forms, and believe liberals to be literally evil working hand in hand with the devil will eventually become a headache to your ownselves someday. That day is here.
It’s 2009 and you’re shocked, shocked to find out that such world views lend themselves to the rise of empty headed zealots like Sarah Palin.
I’m not disputing that YOU’RE shocked.
I am saying,: We told you so.
Comment by Richard bottoms — 12/5/2009 @ 7:28 pm
That’s what you reap from 3 decades of gleefully bashing academia. Your foot soldiers now embrace ignorance as a virtue.
Comment by TomD — 12/5/2009 @ 11:12 pm
The same sort of cultish behavior has taken over Free Republic also. It’s so bad the owner is writing “eff you” rants at anyone who doesn’t fall into line in support of Palin. He is running anti/Romney ads at the top of every thread, because they fear Romney will keep Palin from running.
Those idiots don’t understand that Palin’s been signaling for months that she is content being a private citizen, multimillionaire author/tourist.
I think a lot of people also forget that her supporters are NOT Republican voters anyway. They are disgruntled third-party people who are good at making waves, but most likely don’t even vote.
Comment by Guesst — 12/5/2009 @ 11:19 pm
Or, to put it another way:
“Stop using sex as weapon!”
~Pat Benatar
Comment by Richard bottoms — 12/5/2009 @ 11:45 pm
michael reynolds Said:
11:26 am Democrats and Palinbots have the same goal: the neutering of the GOP and the redefinition of “conservatism” as “lunacy.
CZ: Bringing it down to the lowest form of life as we know it - liberalism. How sweet it must be for you to win that one.
Comment by CZ — 12/6/2009 @ 8:58 am
Couldn’t have done it without all their help. Just know that as the GOP continues o paddle desperately for shore I’ll be among those tossing you anvils to catch. Is it my fault you keep reaching out for them?
Comment by Richard bottoms — 12/6/2009 @ 11:35 am
@Dragon:
“A better question from your perspective might be questions regarding her judgement. Depending on how you posit the question, the answer(s) are far more varied.”
Fair enough. You are right that it is the correct question.
I don’t think most people that call her “an idiot” are intending to state that on a standardized IQ test she would score within a specified sub-average range. Rather, I think the label is used casually to denote some combination of perceived (a) bad judgment, (b) obliviousness, (c)denial, (d)offensiveness, etc.
Like when people call Obama “naive”. I’m willing to bet he has more experience in politics than everybody on this site, so the label isn’t literally accurate. Rather, it’s a coloquial short-hand to say his experience is not as substantial as they may like, and to do so in a derogatory manner.
I call Palin an idiot but I do think she is intelligent in at least one sense — I think she is very, very cunning. Unfortunately, that may be a useful skill for a political leader, but alone it simply leads to self-absorbed Macheavellian machinations. I think her answer to the “what do you read” question displays that intelligence, and that is the problem with her (non-)answer. She didn’t want to say what she actually reads, because she new it would be mocked (”well Katie, I like Us Weekly, the crosswords in the TV Guide, and occasionally I’ll check out the latest issue of Glamour”), but she didn’t believe that she could get away with a convincing lie, so she fubbed it.*
Unfortunately, the intelligence she displayed concealing her reading material was (IMO) right — it does subject her to ridicule if she wants to be Vice Prez and she doesn’t read anything aside from fluff. There are alot on inferences that people will take from that . . . reasonable inferences, that are not flattering to her as a national leader. Perhaps those inferences are wrong, but they are reasonable and realistic. People wondering how she can be trusted for the highest office after quitting the Govenorship may be wrong, but that worry (based on the clear evidence) is reasonable. Now, whenever she walks out of something (like the recent footrace she quit to avoid photographers, the silliest excuse I’ve ever heard), its going to feed the fire. Bias? A Plot? The MSM out to destroy her? No — that’s how people think.
* Her “I was so offended that I intentionally choose not to answer it because everybody was trying to get me” answer that she recently came up with is uncredible. To be charitable.
Comment by busboy33 — 12/7/2009 @ 3:48 am
Jimmy Carter reported on UFO’s and you get excited by the “fair” comment? That’s a gross overreaction! Just say you really don’t like her and not put yourself in a bad light by acting childish. Do you really know what was meant by “fair”? Perhaps she was being cunning or just a woman!
Comment by RonU — 12/7/2009 @ 10:10 am
busboy,
Maybe it was the US magazine thing, I think there is a more likely, politically incorrect answer she avoided giving.
“Katie, I LOVE fiction, I read the Washington Post, The NY Times and the LA Times”
Regards,
Comment by the Dragon — 12/7/2009 @ 12:11 pm
Since I do oppose some slithy toves …ah, conservatives… because of their whacky positions on key matters, I take it that I am therefore not a mere cultist as defined here above!
Good to know, I think, else the momey Raths might outgrabe!
Comment by mannning — 12/8/2009 @ 10:39 am
Watching Moran trying to reason with Palinists is like yelling at a hungry lion not to nib at your torso while a rattle snake injects poison into your eyeballs.
Comment by U.Lessou — 12/8/2009 @ 10:46 pm