|
nice ace--did you actually look at the new yorker piece? it doesn't seem so, because it really is not about this question of qualifications in the abstract, nor is it about this tedious game of who gets to claim for themselves the ability to speak to or for "americans" whomever they are as a single entity....instead, the article is about the process whereby palin came to be in the position to get nominated in the first place. it's about the extent to which she worked and was worked by aspects of the social networks that underpin conservative politics. it's about the extent to which sarah palin is a regular politician doing the regular politician thing and not at all some "outsider" as she and the right claim.
so the piece referenced in the op is not an attack piece, ace. it's just about the way this story happened. that the facts of how the story happen undercut some claims that folk like you want to believe about palin is not a big concern of mine, but feel free to address the points if you like.
you say you want more interesting discussions---how about actually engaging with information that you do not control yourself? it'd be a step. unless by "interesting discussion" you mean "take my ultra-conservative premises as given."
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|