Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux
It could be reasonably suggested that Palin is a pseudo-intellectual (a person exhibiting intellectual pretensions that have no basis in sound scholarship....a person who pretends an interest in intellectual matters for reasons of status {as VP candidate}) if one were to consider how she claims to understand Russia because "you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska"
PALIN: And, Charlie, you’re in Alaska. We have that very narrow maritime border between the United States, and the 49th state, Alaska, and Russia. They are our next door neighbors.We need to have a good relationship with them. They’re very, very important to us and they are our next door neighbor.
GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks (re: invasion of Georgia), does the proximity of the state give you?
PALIN: They’re our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.
GIBSON: What insight does that give you into what they’re doing in Georgia?
PALIN: Well, I’m giving you that perspective of how small our world is and how important it is that we work with our allies to keep good relation with all of these countries, especially Russia. -----Added 24/11/2008 at 05 : 02 : 35-----
or her wacky interpretation of the First Amendment and her pretentious interest in "protecting candidates from the media" "If [the media] convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations then I don't know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media." --Sarah Palin, getting First Amendment rights backwards. |
I think they're a lot of folks running around each with their own definition of pseudo-intellectual. I always wonder when I hear someone use the term what they think it means.
As for Palin in general I find her and her following frankly scary. She doesn't appear to have even the most basic gasp of issues or even how our government works. Yet she and a lot of her followers want to put her in charge. To me she's GWB in a pair of pumps. Little knowledge of the inner workings of things and little curiosity in obtaining any knowledge. She's also shown a complete willingness to appoint people not based on their experience or knowledge but on their loyalty or friendship to her, see her agriculture department head for further info on this subject. If she does make it into politics on the national level I can see her making her own "heck of a job Brownie" statement. The only difference will be the name and she'll probably add a wink.
People seem to like her because they can see some of themselves in her, I think some guy's want to see a small part of themselves in her but that's a whole another issue. It's like "hey she's just like me, yeah!" Personally I don't want someone just like me running things. I want someone way smarter then me running things. I want a well educated, intellectual with massive curiosity running things. That in no ways means I think only someone who attended a school like Harvard qualifies. Personally I don't care if you went to Blue Mountain community college in North Carolina (I have no idea if thats a real school, just trying to make a point) I care whether or not you can answer questions regarding SCOTUS cases if you're looking to be in a position to possibly appoint SCOTUS judges.