Palin: Duped or just not too smart?
 

Palin tricked by Quebec prank callers:



TheStar.com | World | Quebec comics reach Palin with prank call

Another example of her not being very bright, or was she just suckered by experts? You'd think a VP Candidate would at least know who the Prime Minster of their closest neighbour and huge trading partner is.

If nothing else it shows that she's inward rather than ouward looking.

Rick Mercer did the same thing during the last election and ambushed Bush for a quickie interview and referred to Prime Minister Jean Poutine as one of Bush's biggest supporters:

Ambition does not require great intellect.

It is pretty funny to listen to her gush over "Sarkozy" especially when he mentioned her becoming president one day and that he could see Belgium from his house.

-----Added 1/11/2008 at 05 : 58 : 20-----
Statement from the Palin campaign:

Damn... she is so on message. I think she was trying to get Sarkozy's vote...

It's not the first time that Quebec radio prank callers managed to snare a political figure. We've been doing these type of calls for years. One show host was even calling local merchants for information, using only a handful of prerecorded sound bites for the entire conversation! It was very weird.

Of course, considering Palin's current position, this won't help the campaign all that much.

Honestly now, how many of you who aren't Canadians would really know this stuff off the top of your head?

Perhaps standards are lower in the US, but I'd expect anyone running for a top office in Canada to know the name of the leader of our closest neighbour and enormous trading partner. That was really the big giveaway.

to answer the OP question. . . Dumb as a brick, but by choice.

Her IQ probably isn't at the below-average stage, but, like our current president, she chooses to remain gloriously ignorant of the world around her. This is why she thought she was qualified to handle matters of foreign policy because she can see Russia from her state. By that logic, I can see the stars from my house, and am therefore an astronaut.

She can't even be bothered to read a newspaper, as evidenced when she could not come up with a single magazine or newspaper she reads when asked by Katie Couric. Even if I didn't read it, I could at least come up with "New York Times," "Washington Post," or perhaps, considering the source, "Highlights."

If you're genuinely not overly smart, I can have sympathy for you. If you're a moron by choice because you don't feel like informing yourself, then I have nothing but contempt for you - especially if you then have the gall to run for higher office.

In many ways I think Palin operates as if she is in another pageant. In her defense modern politics seems to be a series of photo ops and soundbites. Give her time and she will learn the standard answers and dodges to the usual questions. Also I doubt she will answer the phone again without vetting the caller. It remains to be seen if this stunt, her initial TV interviews and her support for the bridge to nowhere will dog her in the future.

shakran, I'm really surprised at your take on Palin's newspaper response given your knowledge about political maneuvering. No one really believes she doesn't ready *anything* do they? But if her campaign is rallying troops with the "elite media" bugle then it's damn hard to then say, well I read the New York Time and Washington Post every morning while eating my eggs and toast and a heap of trade articles for a few hours in the office each day.

I think what we saw was political inexperience. The lack of knowledge of the "correct" answer at the national level. It's much easier to appease a fairly homogeneous population. But when you know that there are unknown constituents out there, and that whatever your answer is going to be is going to be rebroadcasted to people you don't know what angers or appeases them, and the so-called knowledge pool running the campaign are telling you to keep unvetted answers to yourself, then you get someone who is unable to muster a rational response regardless of intelligence.

She was overprepped in her debates and interviews. The few times she "gaffed" (vs. not coming up with a suitable answer) were because on follow-ups she started to use her reasoning abilities and came up with answers that were internally consistent but inconsistent with her campaign's position. The campaign was the inconsistent entity, however, probably because he had to try and differentiate himself from both Bush and Obama as difficult as it is to do both at the same time consistently. What we saw is that when the two of them dropped the charade, they started to be appreciated for what they were. McCain's brand and Palin's accessability are huge political assets. They might lose millions of the more divisive identity politics subscribers, which would likely cost them votes necessary to win until they can carve into the moderate issues, but the votes they kept would be Obama-ish voters...ones that are excited and willing to stand at the polls and rallies for hours upon hours. In that sense, I think they would have deeper and stronger support, but they'd need to broaden it to win a national election in the future (in theory; in reality, I can't see McCain running for president again).

It's pretty easy to see Canada from many parts of Alaska. Harper is a western conservative, kind of like Palin herself. She should know that he's the PM.

I don't think she's that intelligent, but how smart do you have to be to know a few things about the outside world. What's most disconcerting is that she seems to lack even the slightest curiosity about the world outside of her conservative bubble.

On the other hand, i think people get taken in by these things just by being polite. What if it were Sarko? Do you point out all his errors? Do you say "Hey, that's crazy talk!"

So. . .What you seem to be saying is "Sarah Palin does indeed read newspapers, but doesn't want to admit which ones they are."

This brings two possibilities - - that she is as you say reading the "elite media" news sources, which means she's lying when she talks about her disdain for the media elite, or that she is reading some sort of newspaper (the Enquirer, perhaps?) that she is embarrassed to admit to.

I personally find it more likely that she doesn't read newspapers. Given her glorious ignorance on . . well. . just about everything except moose hunting and beer, I can't imagine that she's taking in much data from anywhere.

BTW I don't buy the "overprepped" argument. No preparation team worth anything would tell her to try to convince people that seeing a country from a vast distance means you're ready to conduct high-level negotiations with it.

That is what I'm saying, but let's not start to throw all of my comments into the same bag.
Of course she's strapping the issue of the "elite media" to appeal to their largest constituency. It also accounts for her flubs by placing the responsibility of the gotcha questions on them rather than her inability to answer them. I'm sure she believes that there are media elements that have it in for her and republicans. I'm also sure that she doesn't see Sean Hannity as one of those people.

Simply because you think that certain media elements have it out for you or your political ideals, doesn't mean there aren't business articles in there your aids will place on your desk each morning. I doubt that most politicians would classify the Wall Street Journal as one of those media elite sources, but I doubt that a bunch of working class fokes who have been chanting "media elite, media elite,, media elite" would appreciate a washington outsider saying that she closely follows what happens on in the business world by reading the WSJ every morning. That's my point, I'm not sure why you construct what I see as false dilemmas. Either she reads all media or no media? No, she reads media that could be construed by her constituents as not making much sense given what they were told to believe about the media in general. She is a governor of a huge energy state with deep, convoluted business interconnections. It's just silly to think she doesn't tune in to the business news and is instead zipping around shooting moose.

When the argument is that you're just a regular person who enjoys the wilderness because the people you want voting for you want anything but a politician, then it's not a good idea to admit that you read anything at all other than Guns and Ammo. Of course, if you say you read Guns and Ammo, then the professional politicians and media pundits WILL castigate you for being a bumpkin that doesn't know jack shit. It makes perfect sense to me that two vying sides would use little snippets like this as if they meant something, but it doesn't make sense when intelligent people like yourself operating on a slower messaging board and have the ability to sift info and play with shades of gray would do the same thing.

I know Palin likes to hunt, I know Cheney likes to hunt, I suspect Kennedies love to hunt, I know oregon separatists who like to hunt deer, I know people from montana who like to hunt deer, I know lifelong democrats who's entire family have voted straight ticket for generations but they run hunting expeditions. So basically what I can conclude from this is that hunting deer tells me exactly shitall about someone's politics.

I'm not sure I follow your logic on the overprepped point.
Because she answered the Russia comment with total lunacy from our standpoint she must not have been overprepped?
When I use that term, I'm thinking in my head that they took a pretty sharp woman and told her a few key phrases. But they also restrained her from talking about certain things and didn't trust her to use her reasoning abilities. When she used her own reasoning skills, she gave the "wrong" answer on the Pakistan situation. But my point was that she gave the logically coherent answer, just not the one the McCain campaign was advocating. But it's probably true that she doesn't have heaps of critical thinking skills, but that's not what intelligence is always about.

The SNL crew said she did her segments in one shot, and it was perfect. She evidently took a week's prep and gave the RNC speech to millions of viewers and tens of thousands of live crowd. She dazzles people when they let her off the leash. That's fact regardless of what people think of her qualifications. Her qualifications are in question, not her abilities. If people start arguing that she never will be qualified for Presidency then they are underestimating her abilities, imo.

So she's obviously got a sharpness to her that many or possibly most don't have. I was top in my class in sociology but I don't dare go out and stand with my wife when she sings a classical piece in German in front of a full music hall. I don't do it myself, but I've watched friends field dress hunts and I was impressed.

I guess the point is that whereas you take her ignorance at face value, I interpret these politicians' portrayals of ignorance to say more about what they think of the people watching them rather than what it says about them personally.

As for the original topic, I don't think many people in her situation responding here would have done much differently once you assume your aid would have vetted the caller. The really funny part was when he asked her about Nalin Palin. But it was only funny because I read my Goffman. It's funny to my friends on the floor because they think she's a dumbfuck. But of course, when someone says something you have no idea what they're saying, but they are a) foreign with an accent and b) a high level official, and c) you don't want to make them feel uncomfortable and, d) there's very little chance Palin follows Hustler releases, then it's really got nothing to do with her intelligence when she just goes along with what the speaker is saying.

When your boss says some weird shit to you, I hope you guys hold your tongues and laugh behind his back at the water cooler rather than saying, gee Tom are you losing your mind? or I can't understand your accent...or anything other than nodding politely and moving on which is what she did.

Then say what W said. It worked for him. "I don't read newspapers because I want to get my news straight, not filtered by the biased media." It will still make her look like a half-witted moron, but at least it'll be the kind of moron that her base likes.

Why? Wall Street is in New York, not DC. And that doesn't even touch on my inherent objection to glorifying and encouraging ignorance. "I don't want my leader to know what influential publications have to say (whether she agrees with them or not is another issue entirely - a president may not agree with bin Laden but I damn sure want him to know what the terrorist is saying). I want my leader to read nothing at all and hold to her own narrow world view no matter what the external evidence," is what you seem to think the republican base believes. You may actually be right about that - especially if you believe that the current republican base is in fact the neo-con party.



No, either she can recall the name of one media publication that she reads, or she cannot. If she can't she's either senile quite early, or lying.

So she's already hiding her activities, and she hasn't even gotten to Wasington yet? That's less than stellar.


I completely disagree. You do not have to be a back woods "redneck" who only likes huntin' and fishin' an' hockey mommin' in order to be a non-politician. This carefully crafted image (and that's just what it is, she can't even reliably hold up the folksy accent) is just that. An image. I.e, she's just another politician trying to make us think she's somethin' she's not donchaknow.

"I read newspapers." "I don't know which newspapers those are."

Those two statements mean either:

I really don't read newspapers

I read newspapers but am too stupid to recall even the name of the newspaper that I read.

I read newspapers and know exactly what they are but in order to protect my carefully crafted political image as a non-politician I'm going to lie and claim I don't know what they are. I realize this ignores the fact that I will look like an absolute moron when I can't remember the name of something I supposedly read routinely, but I feel it's better to appear to be an idiot than to appear to be the politician that I am.


No, she was probably overprepped, for her ability level. One does not attempt to teach a caribou how to do quadratic equations, and one should not attempt to teach Palin how to appear intelligent when discussing matters of state.

No, sorry, a reasonably sharp woman would not feel she was qualified for foreign relations duty because she can see russia from her home.

A reasonably sharp woman who did not feel she was qualified for those reasons, would also not believe that the American public would possibly think her qualified if she made those claims. The woman is dumb as a brick. Now, whether that's IQ dumb, or willfully stupid, can be argued. Personally I think she's willfully stupid - - that is, she has the mental capacity to learn and comprehend basic concepts such as "it takes more than looking at the shore of an entire nation to understand how that nation works" but has willfully chose to remain gloriously ignorant on such concepts.

We are talking about a potential president of the united states here, not the manager of the Wasilla Walmart. Critical thinking skills are an absolute requirement for the job. We have seen what the lack thereof gets us. Just look at W's record - -the other politician who doesn't read.

Wow. She can read cue cards. Big. Deal. I can do that too, but that doesn't qualify me for higher office.

She dazzled the mouth-breathing subpopulace that looked for pizazz and flare, but didn't give a crap about substance. She said /nothing/ substantive in that speech. Nothing.

Assuming I didn't catch the Steph Carse (the singer who's magically become PM of Canada, you know, the other country Palin can see from her state and must therefore know all about) or the part where he said Richard Sirois, the Canadian comedian, was Prime Minister of Quebec (which must be a surprise to jean Charest), I think once he started talking about guys with bread under their armpits I'd have figured out something was fishy.

No, we don't. We're mature and intelligent people, and when the boss wishes to communicate something with us, we want to be sure we understand what it is that the boss wants, and so we get clarification if we do not understand it the first time.

This is not about rational things your boss says that you're trying to clarify. If your boss starts talking about bread under his armpits I don't know what you would do, to be honest. Personally, I would smile and nod and get the fuck out of his office. If he was speaking with a foreign accent on a transnational phone line, I'd be more likely to think I misheard him...and I certainly wouldn't stop and say, "did you just say bread and armpits". I would just hear something entirely different and more sane (which is what the brain does when sent bizarre information) or move along to the next topic.

Anyway, whatever, this conversation has taken a bizarre cartwheel because I've not got any interest in defending Palin.
I was just surprised that someone who works in the media would feel confident assessing someone's mental abilities from media presentations; and even more complicated by the fact that the current Republican party seems to believe it's base appreciates close-mindedness and eschews complexities.

It's obvious to me that she was ignorant of foreign affairs, but I don't know how you then move toward an assessment of one's intellectual abilities based off lack of information. She is a high level politician, she has to deal with cutthroat corporations, and she has demonstrated social intelligence to me.

I am disgusted by many of her policies, I'm disgusted by this appeal to ignorance as qualification, but I'm equally disgusted by otherwise intelligent people who seem to confuse the real with the portrayed and then move from there into posts like yours over a crank call.

Smart people get taken by crank calls all the time...or they wouldn't work and they wouldn't be funny.
If you really think she's just dumb, then this crank call isn't funny at all it's just mean.

Yeah, I can't really blame Palin for this. It does show a lack of judgement on the part of her handlers, though. I think it was a bad idea to let her take this phone call in the first place. Eh, whatever, it's kinda moot now.

Well, that's just it. She's a high-level politician who has failed utterly to demonstrate any knowledge of high-level. . .or even grade-school level politics. Just because you're voted into office by the Alaskans (who I will point out just voted in a convicted felon to represent them in the Senate) does not automatically make you a wise and capable executive.

No one who, with a straight face, says that seeing Russia qualifies you to deal with foreign policy, or who says that being Mayor of Wasilla, population 5,500 when a tourbus is in town, gives you the executive experience necessary to be president, or who thinks the Vice President is in charge of the Senate and can "make policies there if she feels like it," and all the other demonstrations of ignorance and stupidity, willful or genetic, that Palin has exhibited just in the few short months she's been in this campaign, can possibly be taken seriously or considered intelligent by a rational observer.

Can you all really take pity on someone who wanted to be VP but didn't know which countries were in NAFTA (!!!), or that Africa is not a continent (!!!!!)? Please. I hope she goes down in TOTAL FLAMES from this day forward. What a fucking tool.

I sorta thought that any one mess-up could be a mistake. But taken together it looks like she's fairly hopeless.

I think that's it in a nutshell. It wasn't that a couple of Quebec comics fooled her on the phone - it's all the other stuff added up (along with the Sarkozy call) that really makes her look like a numpty.

There must be more to this story. I cannot believe that a college graduate, governor and former mayor does not know the countries in North America or that Africa is a continent and not a country. These are things one learns in grade school geography class.

hasn't it been 15 minutes already?

In American politics, those things don't mean a damn thing with regards to education/intelligence. I believe it.

Have you read the 7-chapter Newsweek article?

There is a sickness here.

There are any number of ways in which I could interpret your statement. Sickness with Palin? Sickness with TFP? Sickness with the GOP? Sickness with American politics? It would be helpful if you could clarify.

What sickness?

I think there is a natural curiosity about the charges alleged against Palin coming from inside the campaign....not from partisan Democrats. There was post-election sniping between the Kerrry and Edwards staff in 04, but nothing like this.

Combine it with her performances in her limited interactions with the press and its frightening to some that Palin could have been a heartbeat away from becoming the most powerful person in the world. The general consensus among many conservative pundits was that she was in no way ready, at the national policy level, to be in such a position.

Can she become a force within the party at the national level? Probably so because she obviously has appeal to the social conservative base.

Whether she can ever appeal to the party insiders or the broader voting public is a different story. First impressions are hard to overcome.

Otto, have you read the 7-part Newsweek coverage of both campaigns? I'd be interested in hearing your take after reading that.

Are you an angry person? You just sound so explicitly hateful and angry. What makes you such a hater? :expressionless:

Would you mind explaining to us what in the hell you read that made you think this? I've seen you post two "sniper" posts in this thread that imparted no information but appear overly snarky. I'd like you to start elaborating on them to provide hooks for discussion.

From the McCain interview with Leno:

McCain on Leno's Tonight Show: interview video / transcript | read my mind

If these "top aids" don't have the courage to make their statements in public they are cowards and lack character. People make mistakes, Obama visited 57 states, Bidden talked about FDR's comments on TV and didn't know how many letters are in jobs - in most cases people have a chuckle and move on. People hate Palin in a manner that is not normal, I don't get it. But, I really like the fact that she is not affraid to stand strong, face her critics and give it back with a smile. She is one of my heroes.

ace....did you really expect McCain to throw Palin under the bus on the Tonight Show and admit that he made a terrible choice, as most polls suggested?

As to anonymous sources from within her own party, I would tell Palin ....welcome to national politics.

When you make statements like you have foreign policy experience because you can see Russia from your shores or that as VP you would take a greater policymaking role in Congress or that First Amendment rights of candidates are endangered by an aggressive press...you should expect scrutiny and ridicule. Comments like those came right from the horses mouth...not anonymous sources.

I dont see the "hatred" you see, rather I see many in her party admitting that she was unprepared at a policy level for such a high national political office.

The cultural conservative base of the party obviously sees her as a potential leader, although I havent heard many who hold her to the level of hero worship.

As a partisan, I wish her well because there is nothing to suggest that she can appeal to swing voters in the future.

No. But, I I do think McCain is political and if he is aware a the "leakers" and the "leaks" help his reputation he would not act internally to stop the "leaks". That is just my gut feeling, and as you know I generally don't trust people who put politics first.

I think she is handling this like a pro. She is not hiding, she is not being negative but she is calling it like she sees it. I like that.

I understand your view. However, I would add that Obama was not ready when he first announced either. I doubt anyone is "ready" to run for President unless they have done it before. People bring their strengths to the table and compensate for their weaknesses, everyone has some.

I don't "worship" people. I have heroes, people that I hold in high regard because of a character trait or accomplishment. I have many including a person like my step-grandfather who never went to school, worked with his hands his entire life and raised my father to be a person of similar character and in turn impacted the person I am and the person my son will be. I have seen many people like my grandfather, they are my heroes too. I assuming you understand what is meant by "hero" (in a manner less than "worship"), even if you don't like Palin she has many character traits and accomplishments that make her worthy of being someone's hero.

I have a feeling that she will be a content person regardless of the course her political career takes.

I have a feeling that the Republican establishment will be more content if she just goes away.

Why is one of your heroes someone who doesn't have a meaningful higher education, doesn't have any grasp of the world we live in and doesn't hold her own family to the standards she'd like to impose on the rest of the country? That sounds snarky, and, to some extent, I guess it is, but I'm honestly curious why Sarah Palin is someone you'd call a hero.

Biden, McCain and Obama all misspoke during their campaigns and said silly things that now sound funny. No one questions whether Biden or Obama or McCain actually think or believe the things they said that sound really funny in retrospect. Sarah Palin said and believed totally ridiculous stuff. She said that she could see Russia and that it counted as solid foreign policy experience. She didn't know Africa was a continent. She didn't know what the VP does. She doesn't understand, as far as I can tell, any part of the constitution or its provisions.

I think she has a lucrative career ahead of her in the book-writing department and, after her stint as governor is over, as a conservative talking head. I have no doubt she'd make enough money to never have to worry about having a $150k shopping trip again, and, you know, I have no problem with that (nor would I have any reason to).

But if the republican party ever puts her up for VP or president again, they will lose my vote automatically and immediately. She is not qualified to hold high executive office in this country, and I think the polls of September, October and the election results speak volumes to back up the thought that the American public doesn't think she is, either.

On a side note: now I need to find a new avatar. Damn it all!

what do you mean she "doesn't have a meaningful higher education?" That seems incorrect and inflammatory.
it's also not a requirement for presidency, even if it was true.
she certainly seems to hold her family to the same standards as she wants for the country. I'm not sure what you mean by that other than her pregnant daughter, which is the context I see this brought up within, who did not seek or obtain an abortion. what other values are you concerned over?

she does seem to have a grasp of her world, which is what most people walking around have. very few people have the time or want to expend the effort of being experts in foreign policy...and no one can be an expert in all things anymore. Even Obama just held the basic blocks of global relations and then relies upon others for their foreign policy expertise.


I agree with ace about the fact that people often are not as prepared as we expect them to be when they run for office.
the difference between palin and obama in this regard, however, is that the public had nearly two years to weigh the benefits of obama against his deficiencies and we never had that opportunity with Palin. and the VP doesn't really get vetted at the same level as president anyway.

the same thing could have happened to McCain. had the fiscal crisis happened a year ago, he would have had a year to rework his positions and the voters would have had more opportunity to balance his lack of expertise with what he was willing to bring to the table.

Palin: Hawaii Pacific College-left after 1 semester, North Idaho community college-2 semesters as general studies, U of Idaho-2 semesters, Matanuska-Susitna community college-one term, U of Idaho-3 semesters ending in a degree in communications-journalism

McCain: US Naval Academy, captain US Navy

Obama: Occidental College-2 years; Columbia University-2 years, polisci (international relations); Harvard School of Law-graduate, Law Review

Biden: University of Delaware: history/polisci; Syracuse School of Law

Now, neither McCain or Biden have clean, sparkly records from their respective universities (though I can't find any major blemishes on Obama's), but I think it's pretty apparent that one of these is not like the others. And sure, it's not a requirement to become president, but it does reflect on one's level of knowledge and ability to think critically. And, in this campaign, I think the prestige of their alma maters followed pretty closely with an objective evaluation of the various candidate's intelligence and knowledge.

As for her daughter, yeah, I do hold that against her. If your entire image is "I am a good, evangelical Christian woman with a good, evangelical Christian household" and your 17 year old is unmarried and pregnant, that undermines your image and message pretty significantly. Sure, I guess it's fine that she didn't have an abortion and that's consistent, but she's not really upholding anything else she stands for on that note.

I didn't call Obama a scholar in politics and international affairs, but I really think it's dishonest to say that he doesn't seem to have a much better grasp of international and national affairs than she does. Again, Obama, McCain and Biden misspoke in ways that ended up being funny. Palin truly believed the things she said about the country and the world which weren't even close to true. I think that says a lot about the difference between the three of them and her.

so it turns out that one of my favorite palin-isms was a hoax.
she apparently did not say that africa was a country.

good hoax, though.
gots to hand it to these gentlemen:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/13/ar...13hoax.html?hp

I guess delete that part from my above posts. WELL PLAYED GENTLEMEN! Doesn't it say something that no one was really surprised when this came out, though? I think it does.

education typically tells a lot more about one's class background and life experiences than ability to think critically.
most of my students at the JC level were non-traditional students: parents, 30+, retraining for a different economic sector. I never saw a correlation between their education aspirations and the knowledge they had along with their critical thinking skills vs. the UC students I taught. In fact, except for a few handfuls from 300 person class sizes, it's been my experience that the 18-19 year old students were pretty atrocious as students on nearly everything except having enough money to afford attending a UC. That fact brought a whole host of problems, actually that made it more difficult to train them.

I can't convince you otherwise, but I think it's ridiculous to blame a working mother for her daughter's behavior. Especially when Todd was supposed to be the homemaker and the daughter is months away from being an adult. evangelical households experience the same kinds of issues non-evangelical households experience. might as well hold the fact that she works against her because in case you didn't know, a woman being the head of household instead of the husband is not scriptural if you take that stuff seriously. I prefer to think that people tend to balance their religious beliefs against their secular responsibilities and realities. and as far as I can tell, there is no policy she holds regarding unmarried, pregnant teenagers, other than the fact that she doesn't believe they should be allowed to kill babies. and her family subscribes to that, as far as I can tell. I'm sure her daughter's unplanned pregnancy was a stressful family event, but love and support of the person going through that is a Christian value in the general sense. I don't see her advocating on a policy level anything that contradicts that position.

Obama had a better grasp of international and national affairs for a lot of reasons. Some of them are the fact he had nearly two years to prepare for the public scrutiny of his grasp. Another point is that he was the lead of the ticket, whereas she wasn't. It's one thing to point out that she might have become president, it's another to realize she didn't have that in her head two years ago like McCain, Obama, and Biden did.

It seems like a large portion of your points are attributing things to her that she didn't have much choice in.
We'll see if she addresses her shortcomings in the next few years.

But saying that someone's educational achievements are less than another's because of the institution they attended is not realistic.
most of the people I got to know on a personal level from junior colleges were facing much greater barriers to greatness than anyone at a university that had very little to do with their ability or desire to do great things...and many have gone on to do great things, to top it all off. In fact, the very basis of community colleges was to provide minorities access to higher education and also to make an institution that participates at the community level in ways the universities can't or won't.
And blaming someone for the decisions their family members make when they aren't involved is not realistic, either.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree about schools. I think there's a major difference between institutions and what it takes to get into and succeed at them. I don't see someone who wanders around a bunch of JCs as someone who values her education and values being informed about the world. I think she backed this up by being largely clueless about this country and other countries. I think she backed it up when she couldn't name a single publication that she read on a regular basis as a source of news. I think she backed this up by sticking to the precise talking points she was fed until the last week or so when she went off script and talked about who knows what. At no point did she project or attempt to be an image of educated and informed, and I don't have any reason to believe that she is.

As for her family, here's my point: Sarah Palin represents and self-identifies as a member of our society whose primary political agenda is to regulate how people live their lives. She's interested in abortion, gay marriage, religion in education, "Family Values" and all the rest. If she were in a position of power, she would regulate those things to impose her values on everyone else, because she really truly believes that they're the only way to live. My problem is that she failed, obviously and spectacularly to impart (as opposed to impose) those values to her own children in her own family. If she lacks the wherewithal as a parent to impart values to her own children, I think it seriously undermines her claims about who is she and where she's coming from and what she stands for.

so in your world attending community college is an educational failure and unwed, teenage pregnancy is a moral failure

how these relate to being a victim of a prank call is beyond me...care to elaborate on that?

No, no and this thread has long shifted to her general qualifications and intelligence as opposed to specifically why she was duped. Threads naturally evolve as they go on. That's why it's conversation.

The problem is that I'm talking specifically about her, and you're generalizing my points to everything. HER educational history compared to the other candidates is lacking. Her interest in world affairs and her knowledge of American politics and the American political system is lacking. I attribute that to her comparative lack of a cohesive educational experience. It doesn't mean that everyone who goes to JC knows nothing or doesn't care about her education or doesn't get a good one. It means that, looking at her higher education, it wasn't a priority for her and the impact of that choice shows.

Additionally, it shows that she couldn't even transfer a core value of her faith to her daughter and then she poses herself as a "family values" candidate, which is kind of antithetical to having your own household with a knocked up teenager. It shows everything that is messed up and dangerous about abstinence based education. I don't think that it's absolutely wrong to be a pregnant teenager, though I think it's probably not something that many people "choose" and more end up "making do with." I think it reflects poorly on your legitimacy as a candidate on her platform to have a pregnant teenage daughter.

Not to really defend Sarah Palin all that vigorously, but...

I don't think that one can hold her accountable for the actions of her daughter, or hold the actions of her daughter up as some sort of example of the shortcomings of abstinence only education. I put myself in situations where I could have knocked someone up when I was a teenager, and I got comprehensive sex ed at multiple grade levels. They only way abstinence only education could have played a role in Bristol Palin getting knocked up would if it had resulted in her being either unaware that babies come from sex (seems unlikely) or unaware of the existence of prophylactics (also seems unlikely).

And I'm not sure that the ability for a person to transfer core values to their offspring is a reasonable yardstick for the evaluation of that person's personal integrity. My dad is a pastor, and a man of pretty substantial integrity. I'm essentially an atheist. My dad's inability to transfer his belief in god to me has nothing to do with his ability as a parent, or his integrity as a Christian.

How do you claim something is a variable for one person, but not the rest? If it's a variable, it will operate at a generalized level as well as the specific. If it doesn't, then it's not a variable.
If the basis of her lack of political knowledge is a function of the class of education she participated in, then that same deficiency will hold true for others taking the same class of education, as well.
If the basis of her lack of political knowledge is not a function of the class of education she participated in, then it drops out as a causal variable and shouldn't be included as a factor at all.

You are claiming you are only specifically referring to her and not other people attending JCs. Earlier, however, you posted that you saw a distinct difference in the types of people who attend the various classes of education. In fact, you specifically mentioned that you didn't see "someone" who "wanders around a bunch of JCs as someone who values her education." Your logic led you to use those generalized claims as you were developing your argument. That's not something I did, that's a function of the fact your premises lead you to conclude what you wrote.

Let's operate as if wandering around junior colleges is a variable in knowledge of foreign affairs. I'm at a loss as to how that operates. It looks to me that Palin was interested in pursuing a career in media. Very few students take classes outside their field of interest. The fact that Obama and Biden focused on political science tracks says more about their interest than their intelligence. The fact that they have a broader knowledge about foreign affairs says more about the information they were exposed to than about where the exposure came from.

Another problem with your analysis is that you are trying to apply what you think in general to fill in the holes about what you don't know specifically.
For example, without knowing the interaction between the junior colleges Palin attended and the four year university she ultimately graduated from with a degree, you are just speculating as to the reasons she moved across a number of colleges before finalizing her education trajectory.

We don't know in this conversation whether some of her courses were unavailable at the colleges she was attending. Or whether some operate as satellite colleges to the university. Many universities off-load their students to junior colleges because classrooms don't have enough seats. Sometimes a course is full and it's better to drive 20 miles to the next open classroom than it is to wait a semester/quarter for the course to open. Some courses are just flat out not even offered at other colleges or universities, even though they may be a requirement of the degree. If she sat down with an education advisor and they plotted out a plan to obtain a degree she wanted, then that would explain what you are considering a haphazard movement across campuses.

She could also have moved around due to her husband or her own job requirements.
The fact of the matter is that none of these speak anything about her ability or desire to expand her knowledge about what she was interested in--media.
If you want to start using foreign affairs exposure in college as a basis for distinguishing between candidates, you're going to end up with a very short list. Well, I think you've pretty much named them: Obama and Biden. I'm not sure why you include McCain's Naval Academy as an authorized agent of quality education in foreign affairs, other than it seems to me that you think it's a reputable institution. Applying that general premise to McCain's education without knowing the classes he took or how he performed in them seems about as non-sensical as faulting Palin for her educational decisions.

If you conclude she's dumb because of how she behaved, I don't fault you for that. But trying to root around in her past and using her educational background as fodder to validate your conclusions is not logically sound.


While I agree with you that a teenage pregnant daughter demonstrates the ineffectiveness of abstinence only education as a means to prevent pregnancy (assuming that's the policy the household adhered to, which I also agree is a reasonable assumption if Palin is to be consistent), I disagree it says anything about any parents' moral or value system or ability to impart one's values to the rest of their family members.

Seventeen year old children are capable of and desire to make their own choices in life. Values are guiding lights, but they do not prevent children or adults from making mistakes that conflict with one's value system. If you meant that you disagreed with abstinence only policies, and that her daughter's pregnancy is one example of it not working, then I agree with you. But that's not what your posts were claiming. You made a moral and character assessment based off her daughter's pregnancy, and I think that's not supported by the evidence you've posted.

I am not an elitist. I care more about character than "meaningful higher education" (whatever that means).

On a continuum with 10 being a knowledge of every aspect of world politics and issues, no person on earth scores a perfect 10. I think most politicians in Congress have a grasp of the world outside of the US generally based on second hand information and would score on average a 5 or 6. I think a person like Rice or Albright would score about an 8 or 9 in my opinion. I would rate Bidden 7, Obama 6, McCain 8, and Palin 4. With additional exposure to international issues, I see Palin going up to about a 7 pretty quick. I think the average American would rate a 1 or 2. International issues is a Palin weakness, but everyone has weaknesses. Prior to Obama running he was probably about a 4 also.

You did not specify the "standard" and how she is imposing it. The standard of unconditional love and support of your child even after the child makes a poor decision is a pretty high standard and she is clearly living up to it and is setting a fine example to her daughter, but I don't see how she is trying to force that on you.

Just a quick note; it's not clear that the 'Africa' anecdote is false, only that the person who claimed to be the anonymous source doesn't exist.

Wow, it seems that you want that Africa thing to be true oh so badly.

Palin is so dumb she was captain of her HS basketball team (what does that say about her teammates).
Palin is so dumb she placed second in a state beauty pageant (what does that say about the others)
Palin is so dumb that she did graduate from an accredited University (what does that say about college degrees).
Palin is so dumb, she was elected mayor of her home town (what does that say about her home town).
Palin is so dumb, she was appointed to her states Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (what does that say about those who selected her for the post)
Palin is so dumb she initiates an investigation on a member of the Commision who resigns (what does that say about that person)
Palin is so dumb she files an ethic complaint against the Republican Attorney General, who resigns (what does that say about him)
Palin is so dumb, she was elected the first female governor of the state of Alaska (what does that say about Alaskans)
Palin is so dumb, she has an over 80% approval rating as governor. ( what does that say about Alaskans)
Palin is so dumb, she goes through the McCain campaigns vetting process for VP (what does that say about the vetters and McCain)
Palin is so dumb, she is the first female Republican VP candidate (what does that say about women)

Why don't you folks give this "she is so dumb..." thing a rest and move on.

Fun! I'll play!

Palin is so dumb, she responds to a bipartisan report finding her guilty of ethical lapses by saying it exhonerates her!

McCain is so dumb he thought a cute chick would pull in the Hillary voters!

Wow!!
That’s just about as an elitist a statement as I’ve ever heard.

Guess what? I went to a community college. I guess that wasn’t…”meaningful”. Darn.

Translation:
Well…er…um…ok, it wasn’t true. But, it could’ve been and that’s just as bad.

Ok…

So, Obama could’ve been a Muslim terrorist sympathizer. Oh, sure, he’s not. But, he could’ve been and that’s just as bad.

Where’s the logic in that?

When did elite start to mean bad things?

I want the elite in charge. I want the elite fighting for me. I'll keep them at my house. Everybody else can have the non-elites.

Yes, I am an elitist when it comes to education. No, I don't have any problem with community college or people who go to it. I know some smart people who went to community college, and have been very successful, and that's fine for them. You, personally, may have taken that opportunity and done a lot with it, Bill. That doesn't change the fact that there are differences in opportunity between random community college A and Columbia University. That doesn't change the fact that someone who bounced around for years because she was busy doing beauty pageants going to five different colleges probably doesn't value her education very much. Nor does it change the fact that at no point in the entire campaign did she should any shred or glimmer of knowledge that one might glean from getting an education and caring about it.

Is it elitist for an employer to favor someone who graduated from Columbia and Harvard Law compared to someone who graduated from the University of Idaho with credits from 3 other community colleges? I think that's good sense, particularly when their conduct verifies the superficial guess you'd get about the difference between people with degrees from those schools.

And furthermore, when we're picking the president and the vice president, for the zillionth time I ask, why is elitism bad? We're not talking about your fishing buddy or your plumber. We're talking about, arguably, the most power executives on the planet. I want the very best possible. I'm not sure in some grand sense I'm thrilled with Biden and Obama, but Palin pandered to the lowest common denominator in every aspect of her conduct. I don't want that. I don't like that Bush did that, either.

As for the Africa statement, I think you're taking it too literally. If someone said to me "BoR didn't know that Africa was a continent" I would say, "That's odd, because he seems like a smart guy. I wonder how he missed knowing such a crucial and obvious fact." When I (and a lot of other people) heard that Palin didn't know it was a continent, not a country, we said, "Yeah, that's about what we've come to expect."

Hmmm...your point, Poppinjay, is well taken. Perhaps a better term to have used was...snob. Elitist, perhaps, is being used in place of snobbish, because it sounds better.
You're absolutely correct. And I was actually in the SAC Elite Guard, when I was serving in the United States Air Force. Perhaps I should know better (must be that Community College education of mine :rolleyes: ) I too want the elite to be at the forefront. But the true elite do not look down their noses at the rest. The true elite have risen to the top by their own desire to do so, not because they happened to be able to get into the "right" school and subsequently look down on those who, for whatever reason, did not. Those people are not, by your definition, what I would consider..."elite". They are...elitist. Placed at the top of the heap...in their own mind.

I dont think the issue is having an ivy league pedigree, but rather knowing enough about public policy to sound knowledgeable and sensible on important national issues and she failed that test miserably.

In any case, the Republican Governors Association announced the organization's new leadership today at the conclusion of their meeting in Miami:
Was it palin envy for the manner in which she attempted to dominate (or suck the air out of) the meeting in order to start rehabilitating her image or a recognition by her colleagues that she is an empty suit with folksy "hockey mom" appeal but little demonstrated depth of knowledge of national policy issues?

Probably a little of both. They certainly knocked her down a peg.

The fact remains that there are few within the party hierarchy either in DC or the state houses that have anything positive to say about Palin.

Ace -- I don't care if the Africa anecdote is true or false. I've pretty much made up my mind about Palin either way. But there's no reason to think it's false from the news story that was posted. And most of that list? Says nothing about her intelligence. I have a hard time believing that even you think that winning a beauty pageant means she's smart.

Is she smart? I don't know. I'd bet a great deal of money she's not as smart as Obama, but I think Obama is very, very smart. I tend to think that she's not very smart and not very intellectually curious. Why do I say that? Well, every single thing we know about her says she's not very smart. Even Ace, in his little list of reasons why she's smart, could only come up with "Was selected to be on an oil and gas commission in Alaska". As evidence she's not that smart, consider every interview she's had since she was nominated as V-P, her college record, her choice of husband, how she's raised her children, her behavior while V-P candidate and since the end of the election, and any number of other things. None of these things is in itself a perfect indicator of being not-so-bright. But all of them together make a pretty compelling case.

I believe intelligence can be measured in many ways, outside of normal I.Q. tests and the typical validation from institutions. The world is filled with women of exceptional beauty who don't win or come in second in beauty pageants. So, obviously it takes something more than beauty. You can dismiss "it", but I don't. Whatever "it" is I don't pass judgment on it, but I recognize it as an accomplishment worthy of acknowledgment because most people can't do it. The irony to me is that liberals complain about conservatives being intolerant of differences, but based on my experience on TFP, liberals are far less tolerant and and come across as having a very hostile attitude against people who don't drink the liberal viewpoint Kool-Aid. Bottom line is Palin has a proven track record of being a winner.

Just as a side note on "smarts". The "smartest" business people from the best business schools drove companies like Lehman, Merril, Countrywide, Wachovia, Fannie Mae, etc, etc, into nothing from being pillars in the financial community. Perhaps if some of the Ms. America candidates were in charge of these companies they would have survived this financial crisis without being bailed out or purchased.

lol, she fucking lost dude...that's the bottom line

Dude, did I ever say she won the pageant? Given that she is an average looking woman coming in second is even good for Alaska. If you don't see the pattern of success does not mean it is not there.
-----Added 17/11/2008 at 03 : 57 : 39-----
Also, the other-side of this is the possibility in a competition for power - those within a hierarchy may not be accepting of seeing someone leap-frog over them in that hierarchy. A meeting of Governors in 2008 will have very little meaning three years from now. Huckabee is still my first choice in 2012, but Palin is second at this point. It is not going to serve the Republican Party's interests to throw either one under the bus at this time.

The best thing the Republican party could do in the sense of rallying the non-NeoCon-Christian Right group of conservatives (who win them elections) is throw Palin under a bus. Those were the people she scared off in droves. It'd reestablish a lot of credibility that the party is returning to what it's supposed to stand for (smaller government, state's rights, non-interference in personal lives) if it were clear that she was not going to be around.

I wasn't talking about the beauty pageant. it's been my stance throughout this thread that her background is irrelevant in terms of both informing us of her intelligence or lack thereof. the only thing we have to go on is how we interpret her behavior in front of the camera.

I was responding to your point that at the end of it all, she's been a winner
my point is that actually where it matters to me, she lost
i.e., I only know about her because she ran as a VP candidate and so the bottom line for me is that she is not a proven winner
unfortunately for her, people tend to remember the shit you fail at rather than the things you succeed at doing.

this is beautiful.

Poor Sarah... she just can't get a break.

That damn liberal media is always setting her up for a fall.

Here's the thing on the turkey issue as far as I'm concerned. First of all her staff suck and she is seriously out of touch. As far as PR goes this was about as retarded as it gets. Why she would stand there (there had to be noise, right?) is beyond me. But about 90% of the people in the US outraged by this are going to sit down on Thanksgiving and eat turkey. Granted nobody wants to see how the sausage is made but how do people think the turkey gets from the farm to their table? In an odd way it's like the people who throw red paint on other people for wearing fur then stop by Mickey "D's" on their way home for a hamburger. Drew Carey used to do a bit in his stand up on this. Something about Dolphin free tuna... great if you're the dolphin and sucks if you're the tuna.

tully---i dont think folk are outraged at all--i think most folk think the clip is somehwere between funny and beautiful. i'm in the latter camp. it's a perfect metaphor. it doesn't matter to me that it was an outcome of staff ineptness. and i don't think anything differently about palin for this. it's just a perfect moment. better than reality even.

I have no real feelings on the video. I know I should have some, because I am inundated with messages about it, but nonetheless I have no strong reaction.

I do have a certain sense of amazement, which tends to follow me in a lot of social interactions far more mundane than this one.
I'm amazed at Palin's apparent non-chalant reaction to what seems to me to be an obvious distraction to just speaking normally in front of a camera. I'm amazed at the chicken grinder's grin. I have no idea what he is grinning at: is he ignoring the turkey he is butchering, is he enjoying it? Is he enjoying the camera presence? Is he staring at Palin's ass, is he imagining grinding Palin's ass instead of the turkey? Is his face frozen like that from a child because alaska is so fucking cold or he made faces at his sister like my mom used to warn me about?

It struck me as about as weird as the time a news reporter stopped a bicyclist after the Florida(?) hurricane aftermath. He asked if the biker was checking up on people. And the biker said, yeah, actually he was riding to his buddy's house. and the reporter asked if he was able to use the phones. but no, the biker was not. was he concerned about his friend's safey...not really, since he already knew he was fine and now they were planning on having some beers. hmm, strange, but aren't we both standing in the middle of a major catastrophe? well, the biker wasn't getting the message and decided to roll on. meanwhile, elderly couples were walking along the beach in the background within the camera's view.

just little things that make me think in my head, "that was a weird social interaction"

Maybe it's just the group of people I've spoken to about it. Which is limited due to my location. People I've talked to have been outraged that they (the damn media) would keep playing the clip over and over. Some have stated that Palin was set-up and couldn't possibly know what was going on behind her. I watch and I can't see how she couldn't know.

This morning I saw where some PAC's were releasing TV spots defending her. One starts with a picture of a cooked turkey in the background.

Reality? Maybe. At times the walking talking gaff machine that is Palin seems more surreal then real at times. I find some beauty in that.

Funny? Yeah I do find it funny, least now that she's not a heart beat away from the oval office. Talk to me again in early 2011, I may not find it so funny by then especially if people are still defending her with such vigor.

ah yes, the hyperreal of the working man

of course Baudrillard fascinates me just on the basis of living within stone's throw of Disneyland so I don't necessarily need Palin's version

damn, on second thought, maybe that's where the Republican party is headed if we accept that identity politics is on the decline...perhaps we are gazing at the dusk of simulacrum politics. (assuming the two are in fact distinct)



oh, I forgot to mention that my head was buzzing because when I watch the video on network news (haven't replayed it here, though) I am struck by the fact that I ought to be disgusted on some level, hence the blob over the turkey. but I'm not, and to be honest, I really want them to remove that fucking blob. because I want to see it, I want to see what I am supposed to be outraged over.

is the blob in this video? I wish I could see the grinding...

This one doesn't have the blob on the turkey grinder... and I'm with rb, this shit is beautiful.

very appropriate...the woman has the political instincts of a headless bird

Classic, wish I'd have thought to write that.

And yet she seems to have a rather large following.:eek:

"Never underestimate the power of human stupidity."
-- Robert Heinlein

Shouldn't that be "never misunderestimate?":)

I think the most interesting thing about the video is the way people respond to it and I think it illustrates a clear disconnection with what is real and the fantasy many Americans try to surround themselves in. Americans want to eat turkey, but don't want to know how it gets to the table for them to enjoy. It reminds me of the Obama campaign in the fact that he promises a free turkey for everyone but won't tell us how the turkey is going to get to our tables.

Palin is simply an earthy person who is not phased by what is real. We know that in order to eat turkey, there has to be some blood spilled. If the media was shocked, they shouldn't show the video. I bet the media folks in New York even have a problem going to a local fresh fish market, further cementing the notion in my mind that they are elitist snobs. I would love to see a documentary of Palin on a hunting trip, where she bags a moose, dresses it, takes it home and makes some chili. Gee whiz, I like this lady.

Reminds me of Roosevelt:

http://www.theodoreroosevelt.org/gra...0col/HC3x0.jpg

you mean from a small engine airplane or a helicopter? Even you can't think that's noble.

Also, hardly anybody is offended by the video, everybody just thinks it shows how inept she is or members of her team are.

Obama promised someone a free turkey? Everything I've heard from him is this (digging out of the quagmire Bush & Co. brought us) is going to be a long, hard struggle and everyone will need to work together for things to improve.

ace--i'm sorry, but that is one of the most surreal and ridiculous posts i have seen here ever.
you nearly made me spit a scallop onto my keyboard from laughing.

comparing sarah palin pardoning a turkey and then giving one of the most perfectly ludicrous interviews ever in terms of mise-en-scène (look it up--it gets better when you think in these terms) to teddy roosevelt, a "proving" your point by way of a photo of manly man tr sitting on top of a water buffalo that, presumably, he had just shot is just amazing.

amazing....

I prefer helicopters because of the ability to hover.

The reaction is sophomoric. The media was under no obligation to release the video. the cameraman or interviewer could have suggested a different location since he/she could see what was happening in the background. They got what they wanted so they could sensationalize it.

That's an understatement.

I want lower taxes, lower health care cost, more security, less dependence on oil, more government help with my son's college costs, secure retirement and reasonably priced popcorn at the movies (excessive profits by big corps., you know). I actually prefer ham to turkey during the holidays.
-----Added 23/11/2008 at 06 : 46 : 04-----
Happy to be of service.:thumbsup:

Apparently, a photographer asked her if she was OK with the Turkey slaughter in the background and her reply was, "no worries".

I do have to say that, I don't find anything remotely disgusting about the image of animals being slaughtered for food. In fact, I think these sorts of images need to be seen on TV. It's actually a big trend in mainstream TV in the UK right now. There are a number of TV shows and specials that deal with this subject from, Hugh's Chicken Run and Jamie's Eat to Save Your Life to Kill It, Cook It, Eat It. I wish I could see more of this sort of stuff on TV.

I just wish that Pailn was smart enough to make the analogy that Ace made... Sadly, I don't think that was what she intended at all.

She may be a genius who actually knows her target audience pretty well. Obama knew his target audience and did/said what need to be done/said to get the nomination - now he is moving to the center right as fast as he can. Similar to Bill Clinton, Bill Clinton, Bill Obama Clinton maybe the next four years won't be so bad after all. Looks like Obama will have an excuse to delay all of his big promises - while everyone focuses on turkeys - wow the irony.

Palin may be a reasonable governor (as more becomes clear, I think probably not very reasonable)...but every time she opens her mouth or every action she takes, she demonstrates that she is lacking in understanding either national policy or how politics at the national level works.
-----Added 23/11/2008 at 06 : 59 : 19-----
What target audience? The social conservative base and Joe the Plumber?

There is a reason why nearly every Republican in Congress and among the governors are distancing themselves from Palin. She is an accident waiting to happen.

So. . You make an assumption based-on-zero-evidence-or-facts about a group, and then use that assumption draw conclusions about them.

And we're supposed to take the rest of your post seriously?

I have been posting my views here for some time, some take my posts seriously others don't. I occasionally use humor and some hyperbole from time to time, but generally there is a factually based foundation in what I post. When I give my opinion or the way I see something I normally state it as my opinion or that it is my viewpoint. My viewpoint on the media was premised with "I bet...". I think most people understand what comes after a person makes that type of an introduction to a viewpoint. But I am not an English major, I am not a very good writer, my profession is not based on communication skills, and I went to a state school in the Midwest and I don't drink coffee with steamed milk - so take it all for what it is worth.
-----Added 24/11/2008 at 11 : 46 : 51-----
What are the approval ratings of Congress/Republicans in Congress/Govenors referenced and Palin?

Power to the People! Who cares what the elite thinks.

I'm completely lost on this logic that being elite is a bad thing. I want my doctor, lawyer, realtor etc... to be elite. Just as I want the people I elect to be elite. Heck I've been to Alaska and I hired a fishing guide. I wanted him to be an elite fishing guide. And I could not have cared less if he wanted foam on his morning coffee.

Being elite, being educated and studying issues and subjects is a good thing in my book.

BTW- I can't write for shit either.

coming from you the outer reaches of the fringe right by way of you, ace has a creepy khymer rouge twang to it, of a piece with that great idea of sending everyone who wears glasses for a period of re-education in the country which would force them to recognize the error of their pointy-headed ways by encouraging them to dig huge edifying holes with picks and wheelbarrows with the aim of helping them to become one with the salt of the earth, initially as a metaphor, then not.

The problem is really with pseudo-intellectuals. For example I have a bachelors degree and one of my best friends doesn't- the only thing that means is that I went to school and did what it took to get a diploma and he did not. In my view a pseudo-intellectual makes judgments based on something like a diploma rather than the individual. It seems Palin's biggest problem is that she is an outsider or different than those inside the beltway or those in the media fraternity. People secure with their intellect don't need to demean others and are accepting of the value of what differences bring to the table. No person is perfect but that does not mean they can not do great things or bring value.

I really have no idea what is or who is a pseudo-intellectual.

I think Palin problem was she couldn't answer basic questions then blamed the media for asking questions. If I asked my Realtor what the closing costs on a property would be and they answered "what are closing costs?" I'd find another Realtor. When a person running for VPOTUS is asked what that job entails four times and doesn't know the answer four times I longer take them serious as a viable candidate.

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.

This illustrates the trouble with your point of view. You assume all journalists are upper-crust snobs out of touch with the common man.

I got my degree from a midwest state school, too, and I drink my coffee black. I started my career making significantly less than a shift manager at McDonalds. I could quit right now and double my salary by becoming a PR flunky for some mid-level corporation. I'm not rich, I'm not elite, and I frankly resent the implication that just because I happen to know how to write a coherent sentence and get it broadcast on television, I must be some elitist bastard snob.

Precisely. The neo-cons have brainwashed a certain susceptible subset of the population into thinking that elite is bad, and dumbassery is good. Elite gets shit done. Elite should be something to aspire to, not to shun. It's amazing how backward we've become.

We've become a society where improving ourselves is considered bad. Where gaining experience in a job is a bad thing (Washington insiders!). The problem is not that they have been in Washington for a long time. The problem is that they have been in Washington for a long time making dumbassed decisions.

Plus, it's hypocritical. Had GWB been able to run for a 3rd term, neocons would have voted for him. Why? He is now not only a Washington insider, but the most highly placed Washington insider. Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms were both Washington insiders. If republicans think Washington insiders are such a bad idea, why the hell did they keep re-electing them?


And I point out again, that you made judgements based on something that you assumed, without even as much evidence as a diploma. Are you calling yourself a pseudointellectual, or do unique rules apply to you?

Huh, I had no idea you were a journalist and writer. You elitist fucking snob. Err, I mean that's interesting.




Not sure I'd use the term brainwashing or not but the neo-cons and their taking head water carriers have manage an amazing feat. They've managed to convince a whole lot of people that being elite is a bad thing. Yet at the same time they've managed to also sell it that being super rich isn't elitist or a CEO of a major corporation is worth every dime they make... sometimes even if the company is losing money. In a way they've manage to sell a new definition of the term elite. I've always understood the term elite to mean either a group within a society made up of those with high intellect, social, or economic status. Or a the most skilled member(s) of a group. Now it seems a ton of people use the term elite in a context that seems to mean a know it all type person that thinks they're better then everyone else. I hear, over and over again, comments like "that elitist, latte sipping snob." It's early here I'm enjoying my morning coffee. I too usually drink my coffee black but every once and while I'll have a latte. This morning is one of those morning. I must be an elitist latte sipping snob. Perhaps we should get together for an annual elitist fucking snob meeting? Though I'm not sure I'll fit in since my latte is from a box mix mainly made by Nestle (just add hot water,) that I buy at Wal-Mart.


Pseudo intellectual is like the term elite, I don't even know what it means any more. The goal lines on the meaning of words and issues in general seems to be changing constantly, IMO. People who I consider to be intellectuals are suddenly pseudo intellectual and people I would consider pseudo intellectual are suddenly common folks with good common sense. Most of the time these common folks with good common sense lack any and all common sense, again IMO. I've sat and watched the actions of GWB and I see someone with little in common with common people. He strikes me as a guy who was born on third base and seems to think he hit a triple. Yet many people I know tell me they like GWB because he a lot like them, just a common down home guy that they'd probably enjoy having a beer with. I hear stuff like that and think- really? You think a guy like GWB is just like you? Do you think you could get a legacy admittance into an Ivy League school?

Nothing seems to mean what I thought it meant. I read Ace's posts and I'd swear he's a hard core free market capitalists. At the same time I read "Power to the People! Who cares what the elite thinks.' I immediately think Marxism and socialism. Up is down, down is up and I have no idea what the most basic terms mean anymore.

I never understood why Obama's choice of lettuce was supposed to disqualify him from being president, for that matter.

Jeopardy Style:

Answer: psuedointellectual, elite, socialism

Question: What are words that have been repurposed by conservatives to mean "stuff we're not supposed to like"?

They're just code words. If you're in on it, you know exactly what they mean. They're just convenient signal words for helping the troops figure out which people they're supposed to align themselves in opposition to.

Find your nearest conservative and tell him that you didn't like your lunch because it was too elitist. They'll know exactly what you're saying, even though you aren't saying anything at all.

If results matter, it looks like the State headed by Palin is one of the few not facing budget problems, I guess being a simple minded person and balancing a budget has some merit in tough times.

http://www.cbpp.org/9-8-08sfp-f1.jpg

A link to the full report:

State Budget Troubles Worsen

Large oil and gas royalties may have been a factor as well.

I am definitely not an intellectual or even a pseudo-intellectual. I play video games, drink grape flavored Kool-aid, can't spel, and Tivo episodes of South Park.