Can Anyone Defend Palin as Anything But a Gigantic Joke? - Page 3

It's not just her lack of experience, it's her lack of intellectual preparation for anything approaching the Presidency of the United States. It's not just political experience that matters, but life experience. How can a woman who never left our nation until last year expect to grasp current geopolitics? How can a woman who thinks the world is 10,000 years old grasp much of anything? Our nation is facing a very transformative and tumultuous episode in its history, and while Palin consistently displays a lack of basic understanding on some of our most pressing issues Barack, who has led a life of intellectual curiosity and achievement, exudes nuance and a cool analytic mind.

As for O'reilly, I watched the same interview and I haven't a clue what you're talking about regarding his performance let alone comparing it to Palin's. You must watch a lot of Fox News.

But let's go further. She lies, outright. She has a history of holding vendettas and replacing public servants who disagree with her with friends and close associates. She is a member of a rather extreme, backward sect of Christianity.

I'm not making this shit up man. I'm not one to jump to conclusions or buy into stories without fact-checking.

It's not the lack of experience, it's the nature of her experience -- political opportunism, inquiries on book banning, abuse of power, willful disregard for bi-partisan inquiries, environmental abuse, clear-eyed lying, etc.

Again, it's the nature of Obama's experience. Contrary to what the Republicans have been saying about him, Obama has introduced many instances of anti-fraud legislation, including "putting the country's checkbook online," which Palin is proposing in her stump speeches despite the fact that Obama did it two years ago. He came from blue collar roots, went to Columbia and Harvard, became the first black president of the Harvard Law Review, was a professor of Constitutional Law for 12 years, and instead of taking his education into the most profitable sectors, he funneled his energy into helping working class people who'd lost their jobs. He served in the Illinois Senate for 7 years, then the US Senate. He's totally available to press, answers every question thoughtfully and unscripted, and is always candid and forthcoming. And he doesn't lie without blinking the way Palin does.

This is a straw man. The Gibson interview was exactly what everyone knew it would be. I don't think anyone but the right-wing defense gave two s#ts about the Bush Doctrine debacle. Seriously.
Except that Obama took every carefully framed question O'Reilly lobbed at him, and had enough insight and understanding of the issues to give clear, straight answers (as opposed to the repetition of things like "we can't second guess Israel, etc. evident in the Gibson affair).

Straw man. seriously, wtf?

Also, there's this (though the right wing noise machine is going into overdrive to kill the messenger): "McCain doesn't matter. Palin is Rove's Frankenstein monster for the coming police state.

Closer, if you truly don't want either side, I suggest you pick a side because none of the independent candidates are winning this election. It's hardball. Evidence of Republican election tampering is everywhere. And if you want the next President "elected" by operatives for Rove and Cheney, then you might as well align yourself with the Republican side. The only way democracy has a ghost of a chance of continuing after this election is if it's an unmistakable landslide for Obama. If it's anywhere near close, the Republicans will find a way to steal it. They're old hands at that.

Obviously true about bringing her in to steal the disaffected wimminz who were planning on voting for Hillary.

I wonder how many votes she would capture if she posted nudes?

There are lots of differences here but I just want to say that there is a difference between going through the nominating process, which Obama clearly had to do and getting picked like Palin was.

Obama had a multi-year effort of building a campaign, growing support, getting voters in every state in the country to vote that they think he is the best Democrat to put on the ticket.

Palin was hand picked by political strategists and has only been campaigning for 4 weeks. She has done 2 interviews and isn't engaging in any 1 on 1 questions with the public.

She could be the greatest politician in the world and everyone loves her but, unlike presidential candidates, she wasn't elected by her party and hasn't had any history of independently and consistently establishing and defending positions about serious national issues.

I don't believe this for a minute. Not a single Hillary supporter I know is anything but physically repulsed by Palin. Maybe they exist, but I think it's a myth cooked up by Rove to throw shade on their real reason to pick her: Rove is the god of this election and she is his clay -- morally opportunistic, willing to throw anyone and anything under the bus, and a solid end-of-the-world evangelical.

I see what you mean and I agree.

Obama stammers a lot when hes not reading off of a teleprompter. Always has. Chances are he always will.

If you read my post, I said "the same could be argued" but that does not mean I was arguing it. O'Reilly is O'Reilly and its hard to answer a question when you are constantly interrupted.

And yes, because Im not voting for Obama that obviously means I watch a lot of Fox News. How very open minded and liberal of you.


I personally dont really mind her religious background (Im an athiest). Same as I dont really mind Baracks supposed "black liberation theology" background. But thats just me.

Except for me apparently spending my time watching Hannity and Colmes reruns, but well let that one go.

Thanks for the response. Its goo to hear some actual insight as opposed to the standard "ROFL she has no experience!"

Hillary supporters would likely prefer a Palin/Hillary battle in '12 than having Obama sitting there at that point. So maybe they'll bite the bullet this time and simply not vote.

The Closer,

just imagine that, today, all four candidates walk into a high school and sit down to take an AP Government exam. Obama, Biden, and McCain would all do very well, I'm sure. With Palin... well, she'd probably be happy just to pass, and may need a couple tries to do it.

I know that none of the indies have a chance in hell of winning this election, but at the same time I wouldnt feel good about myself conforming to the status quo (like my vote would matter anyway. I live in Chicago). Call me a naive idealist, but I think that some day, eventually, all of the people who say every 4 years "Well, I would vote for someone who actually makes sense to me even though theyre not a Democrat or a Republican, but they wont win anyway so whats the point?" will actually exercise some self-respect and maybe well start seeing some real change. The kind that, believe it or not, even Obama wont be able to deliver.

I personally would rather have them take an AP Economics exam if it had to be one or the other.

For the sake of the rest of the argument please ignore this rather absurd aspect of it.

Come on yt. What really separates that kind of unfounded bullshit from this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSKM7...eature=related

I'm sorry, but as someone who is actually genuinely, deeply worried about the possibility of this woman having one of the most powerful positions on the planet - I have to say this. What kind of shit-witted moron do you have to be to still parrot the 'each side is as bad as the other!' schtick? You've watched Obama for the last couple of years. You've heard him speak. You've watched how he conducted himself in both the horrendous Democratic race and throughout this campaign, in the face of utterly repugnant tactics by the mcCain camp. You've read his policies, you may have even read his book. What is it - exactly - about the man that makes you put him on a par with this hilariously appalling Republican ticket? What fucking planet are you living on? How can any rational, intelligent human being look at McCain and Palin, then look across the aisle at Obama and Biden and think 'Yeah, neither is worth voting for.'

That'd be embarrassing for all four of them, probably.

Me not wanting Obama does not equal me thinking he is as bad as McCain.

If neither are my first choice, why vote for either? Why not...I dont know...just vote for my first choice?

Ive voted for Democrats in the past along with Republicans. The letter that appears in parenthesis after their name doesnt really concern me.

For me, it would be the mental status exam.

LOL. Sure it's an opinion piece, but it articulates certain facts that have been bothering me -- the fact that Palin's speech and not McCain's was carefully crafted by Bush's script-writers, the fact that her positions are so close to Bush-Cheney's, her talking points such a simplified distillation of what they have enacted over the yeras, her "faux folksy" manner so much more like the Bush snow job than anyone else in politics, and most powerfully of all, McCain's total abdication to Bush/Cheney precepts.

The police state part is the more far-flung editorial aspect of the opinion, but I think Naomi Wolf makes a very solid case that Palin is Rove/Cheney's creation. I don't expect Cheney to go gently into that good night after the election, do you?

Indeed. Sucks because even though it is especially timely in this day and age, when you think about it every thing that every president wants to do always boils down to money.

That and also it would make me feel smart if one of them didnt pass.

Im not saying its going to work, but thats exactly why she was brought on. It is probably the most unholy mixture of shamelessness and brilliance that I have ever seen.

I need to shit and shower every time I think of it.

I am in total and complete agreement with you on this, but this will require intensive work to build a case for a multi-party election and something like instant run-off voting. This campaign will have to be organized and strategic and include PR because Ron Paul had tons of support and campaign money and still couldn't get into the debate, and I'm sorry, once you let the corporate media marginalize you, it's over (I'm not supporting Ron Paul for president by stating this, just saying that all things considered, he should have been in that debate). So, yeah, you want that? Be prepared to work for it because, as you and everyone knows, power doesn't abdicate power without a fight to the death.

So, my point is this: this isn't the year to take a stand on that issue. This is a year to pick a side between these two opponents. These sides are ideologically pretty much opposite, so you should pick whichever side hews closest to your informed views.

Also, regarding my other responses to your posts, do you see the vast differences on display here?

Ok, I misread your comment and shouldn't have made the quip about watching Fox News. I guess I just don't think it can be argued that he fared as poorly as she did (in fact, I thought he did well).

Her religion bothers me because the belief seems to be very important to her identity, and one cannot hold these beliefs without them shaping your world view considerably. Even if Barack believed in Black Liberation Theology, and I'm of the mind that he's waaay too smart to do so, it would hardly be as narrow minded a perspective. But with Barack I don't think it was a matter of belief but community, being connected to the black community either out of a sincere search for identity or a more cynical, political need for religious roots. You might think I'm distorting the two in my candidates favor but I really don't think they are comparable.

Sidenote: It's interesting to me that your referred to Obama as "stammering". What I recall was not stammering but a cautious use of words. Barack takes his time to speak. Some might hold it against him, but as someone who is similarly "afflicted" (and soon to be in the legal profession), I completely understand why he does so. It's the product of a careful, analytic mind, probably made moreso by the spotlight he's under.

Attention: The Closer

Seriously? You think we're comparing numbers of days in office?

Let us look at it this way: In 2002 when the majority of this country was all hopped up for war in Iraq, State Senator Barack Obama spoke out against it. He had reasons deeper than just "War bad, no kill people." His reasons were strategic, they were based on rational thinking over misplaced rage. He had thoughts about them and he did all that was possible in his position to change people's minds. As it turns out, he was ahead of the curve.

In 2007, a few months after a dramatic Democratic victory based largely on this country's fury over the conduct of the Iraq war, the number one issue of that day, Governor Palin's response was:
In addition to that, Sarah Palin thought as recently as this year that the Iraq war is "a task from God" and states that Iraq was responsible for the 9/11 attacks.

Now I don't care what you think about the rightness or the wrongness of their opinions, but the point is that Obama thought about national and global issues. He thinks about international issues. He taught about the Constitution.

And you know why Obama stammers when he talks without a teleprompter? Because HE'S THINKING. I'll take "stammers when answering questions" over "doesn't think about what he's saying" any day and twice on Sunday.

Oh.. and check out how Palin did in her Macroeconomics class if that is the nature of your concern.

I know that's the popular opinion, but that's a dog that doesn't hunt. Maybe that's what they told McCain though.

I see what you mean and I agree.

To clarify, I have no problem with how Obama talks. I say "uh" more times than I should as well.

But we were talking about candidates presentation skills and I know them folks on the right tend to use this as some sort of "argument."

Preemptive kudos to you, as to be honest in all my months of being on the net you are probably one of the only people to not simply say "She was only a mayor of a town of 3000 rofl!" and actually expand as you do below.
Indeed he was.
I thought all republicans still maintain that Iraq was involved in 9/11. If thats changed Ive missed it. As for the "task from God" thing, if you actually read what she said you could argue very strongly that it was obviously taken out of context. IMO at least.
Indeed he did. At the same time based upon my personal views and interpretations of the Constitution I think he would bring entirely too much government control and influence into our lives, which is a bad thing. Again, just IMO.
If theres a way to see how all these folks did I would love to see it.

I wonder if McCain wrote "Jack Kemp" as all of his answers?

What I hate about Palin is her ideology, her leadership qualities, her lack of knowledge and the curiosity to gain such knowledge, and this is harder to quantify, what she represents in her supporters. She's very much a Bush Republican. Oh, and her phoniness. Bush used to only field questions from a screened audience. Palin can't even rise to that low bar.

I think the meat of the subject has been answered pretty straight forward. She's a cynical exercise in identity politics and when you have someone that reminds people of themselves, facts about their records comes across as insults.

As for Obama, I think the difference is that he's proved himself day in and day out that people should give him a chance. The fact that he went on FOX and took questions from Bill O' Reilly was brave and I for one think he thrives in a hostile environment. He actually seems to enjoy it.

What Palin needs to do is go on the Rachel Maddow show. I think Rachel would give her a fair shot and would prove Palin has what it takes. Not holding my breath though. The McCain campaign is afraid of that wonderful, intelligent woman.

Oh, don't even get me started on how she conducted the business of her government. The number of ways in which her administrations have mirrored the Bush administration is uncanny.

Graves. "Hopefully Americans will vote in graves this fall for the Republican ticket, the party that has allowed such a worthy candidate as Sarah to be included."

Nothing out of the ordinary here then. It is the Republicans we're talking about, right?

Education-wise there is no doubt that Palin is the most experienced:

I don't understand, McCain graduated with a degree of "class rank 894 out of 899"?

He got a commission in the Naval service. I don't know what exactly he majored in. But I don't think you necessarily major at the military academies. You specialize.

I don't know how it is in the Naval Academy, but you major at West Point. I have a friend who just graduated there with a major in nuclear engineering.


I wonder if he would have held the same opinion if he was actually in the Senate at the time of the vote. I think he might have voted or at least thought differently. No way to really tell though, thus that argument doesn't really hold up IMO.

As someone with a B.A. in Journalism, it's scares me that that is her education background.

We used to make fun of all those majors at my college.

I personally hope Biden makes her cry during the debate while making a point. Even Rove couldn't spin her at that point as capable of being CinC.

If there's anything we've learned from this election season, it's that there's around 1/3 of the population who will vote for whoever's the least qualified candidate you can plop down in front of them, because it reminds them of their own stupid asses. If Biden makes Palin cry, it will perversely be found to count against Biden and it will be used as evidence of her readiness to lead rather than as evidence of her utter unworthiness.

Thank you for adding that IMO because that's just asinine. Given his position at the time and the information he had he took a public stance. To say that his position would change if he was a US Senator instead of a state Senator is just ridiculously cynical.

Fortunately, that doesn't speak to the argument I made. The argument I made was that, regardless of veracity of the opinion he held, he at least took the time to forumulate an opinion beyond "I've been focused on state issues."

And conversely, had it been Hillary, we'd hear absolutely no end of the "If She Can't Take it She Should Get the Hell Out" rhetoric.

Just like the SNL skit laid bare last week, suddenly misogyny is a viable topic when it's a REPUBLICAN woman under scrutiny. THE HORROR!

Any woman reduced to tears by a debate should get the hell out - as should any man. This job's not for you. If you can't maintain your composure under pressure, stay the fuck away from the Oval Office please. This is why I don't want the quasi-senile and perpetually angry McCain, or the dumb, insane theocrat Palin. There's a whole lot of disaster waiting to happen with those clowns.

Heh, I said "waiting to happen". It's already fucking on.

Simple but oh so true.

I think this is the first time I've seen people speculate about another candidate crying in a debate.

Yeah, 'cause no one ever speculated about Hillary crying in an interview, or not crying in an interview, or reacting emotionally, or considering her cleavage, or her sexuality in any way. Palin is clearly the first woman ever to be subjected to such feminist torment.

I wonder if Obama is going to make McCain cry this Friday.

I still can't get past how seemingly intelligent people flock to Palin. It has to be the glasses.

I've wondered this myself. I know plenty of otherwise awesome, educated, decent people who are just in love with Sarah Palin and the whole Republican ticket. And the only thing I can figure is that they let themselves be won over by The Big Speech and didn't bother to do any research after the fact.

More likely that Obama is going to make McCain hulk out. McCain SMASH wasteful government spending.

I almost ACCIDENTALLY got a BA in Journalism, just because the electives I chose happened to be related. I was a Comp. Sci. major, but I could go back to school and add a BA in Journalism in one semester if I wanted.

But for me, it's scarier that it took her 5 stints at 4 schools to complete a degree... what's the longest she's done -anything-? Would it be surprising if 2 years into a VP stint, she decided she wanted to be a senator? Or an astronaut? Or a fireman?

Ewww. She's in her mid-40s and has had 5 kids. I'm betting that would torpedo her career faster than Sean Young's.

Now, if they got hold of some Tina Fey nudes and posted them as Palin's, then we might have something!

That sounds totally valid to me. Hell, the first time I voted, I voted Perot (with no regrets!). Not being a Republican or a Democrat scores major points with me. For me, this election is as much about excising a cancer from power as it is about who replaces them. But if you have a 3rd-party candidate you feel truly passionate about, more power to you - I know for sure your pick is no lower than 2nd-worst.

My favorite part is the censored title... I always knew Obama was a pimp!

Does it matter what you majored in when you got lower grades than Frank the Tank?

Weren't you around for Bentsen v Quayle?

I love how hurt he looked.

Modern Conservatives and Republicans couldn't care less about platform positions, but they LOVE LOVE LOVE anything that they perceive will piss off a liberal.

Seriously.

THEY LIVE FOR IT.