Article about Sarah Palin by David Kahane

dudalb said:
It is when you identify "Best" with having gone to a Ivy League college or being from a certain region of the country that problems ensue.
I am not convinced that having degree from Harvard or Yale makes you more qualified for the office then having a degree from the University of Wyoming.
Click to expand...
Then don't define "elite" as "someone with an Ivy League education".
 
I mean I don't know. Are any of us supposed to feel guilty because of this one article by one person on the subject of Sarah Palin?

Maybe the OP can show some balance and present an article about how some on the Right views Obama as a stupid, arrogant, foreign ****** who is dragging our Great Country down.

It's one thing for certain Republicans - not all - to claim the other side are snobby elitists, but it's interesting to hear those same people call an extremely intelligent Democrat like Obama stupid.

And yes, people are calling Palin stupid too, but let's admit it: regardless of party politics, she hasn't presented herself as the sharpest knife in the drawer. She hasn't offered a lot of evidence of intellectual curiosity; something that's needed for the highest office in the land.

Do not use alternate spelling to get around the auto-censor. In the public forums such words must be completely masked.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Lisa Simpson
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It occurred to me recently, that Sarah Palin has made Dan Quayle's fondest wish come true. Next to her, he finally DOES look like Jack Kennedy.
 
Those godless, socialist, loony liberals of the leftist media, have stuck their pointy elitist heads up their gigantic rectums just a little too far this time by attacking a sweet, pretty hocky mom who's only sin was to do the best job ever seen of running a city, a state and a campaign. I don't know what kind of drugs they're doing to come up with this stuff. They probably learned it from that terrorist-loving president of theirs who's not even an American citizen, or maybe from the Vince Foster-murdering Clintons. Whatever it is, we Real Americans are sick of their Communist agenda and their marriage-hating attacks. All they know is insult and innuendo.
 
Tricky said:
Those godless, socialist, loony liberals of the leftist media, have stuck their pointy elitist heads up their gigantic rectums just a little too far this time by attacking a sweet, pretty hocky mom who's only sin was to do the best job ever seen of running a city, a state and a campaign. I don't know what kind of drugs they're doing to come up with this stuff. They probably learned it from that terrorist-loving president of theirs who's not even an American citizen, or maybe from the Vince Foster-murdering Clintons. Whatever it is, we Real Americans are sick of their Communist agenda and their marriage-hating attacks.
Click to expand...

And we hate puppies. What kinda sick, twisted, Godless creature hates puppies?
 
As George Bernard Shaw famously said, "The only thing worse than being talked about, is not being talked about." For good or ill, people are still talking about Sarah.
 
NotJesus said:
Oscar Wilde.
Click to expand...

Thanks. Shaw didn't sound quite right.

(Of course, since my only knowledge of the subject matter is a Monty Python skit, I suppose it's not surprising that I didn't quite get all the players exactly correct.)

ETA: I see Tricky understood exactly where I got my material from.
 
Which assumes Meadmaker's somewhat tongue-in-cheek quote was sufficiently important of speakership that he thought it necessary to check.
 
SezMe said:
Which assumes Meadmaker's somewhat tongue-in-cheek quote was sufficiently important of speakership that he thought it necessary to check.
Click to expand...

That's right spending five seconds to learn something and check your facts before opening your mouth is a complete waste of time.

Growth is for sissies.
 
Brainster said:
The only problem with that article is that most of the Palin-bashers around here will think he was too nice to Sarah.

ETA: Uggh, and in the second half he indulges himself in little Obama Birtherism.
Click to expand...

I hadn't noticed it at first, but I did on the second read. I didn't like that either. It made me uncomfortable with it after the fact.

Robster said:
Whiplash, are you serious, or are you using a failed Poe to Poe?
Click to expand...

I was serious, but also in a bit of an angry and judgemental mood at the time I posted. I had read the article and felt pumped up a bit by it, as I feel that most of what Palin endured was not necessary or acceptable. And ongoing discussions on the subject lately had also gotten under my collar.

SezMe said:
I'd like to comment on the OP, not the article.

I know that you feel like you are in the distinct political minority here, Whiplash, but the chip on your shoulder does not help you. First, you start off by assuming the some here won't consider the article you cite. Why? We're a pretty inquisitive bunch so give the benefit of the doubt. If some don't read the article and move on, no harm done. If some don't read the article but still make some derogatory remark, then - and only then - are you justified in firing both barrels.

Next you broad brush so badly that you risk turning off those who might disagree with you but still want to hear an alternative view. "...at all times, and viciously." is hardly a phrase to engender spirited give and take. Speaking personally, after such a characterization, I'm inclined to respond with something like, "up yours" but I'll be cool.

So you want the article to shame those with whom you disagree? What a strange attitude. Why not present the article as something that might provoke thought on the part of those you disagree with? If you did that, I would certainly be inclined to look further. Conversely, why the hell should I read something that sets out to shame me? When presented that way, my natural reaction is to remember what my pappa used to say, "Consider the source and forget it." So if you want me to read the article, don't give me a reason to shoot (ignore) the messenger.
Click to expand...

You are, of course, spot on here. I remember at the time I wrote it that I was a bit worked up. I had been very angry about this subject.

But also, I remember thinking afterwords that I probably laid way too much of exactly the things you are speaking about, in my OP. I let my own feelings over-ride my judgement. I was self-righteous. And I betrayed how I feel, deep down, about many liberal positions and motivations.

I don't know what to say but, I'm sorry. I guess I thought that would somehow "shame" people into reading it.

Upchurch said:
The article was a giant straw man argument and not a very good one. Do you honestly think that is a realistic portrayal of what happened to Palin?
Click to expand...

I agree it was well over the top. But to be honest, I find it hard to not agree with many of the common conclusions about Liberal thinking and motivation that are often thrown about, based on their own actions and arguments. And my time here has not helped that a whole bunch. Some people have helped me to see more, but others seem blind and knee-jerkishly loyal.

Are you equally ashamed of the personal attack campaign the right enacted on Clinton and then Obama, or are you only outraged when conservatives are attacked?
Click to expand...

Upchurch, it seems I can always count on you to ask this kind of question, every single time.

Seriously, what's the point? It only goes towards my own credibility, and nothing about what is the right or wrong thing here. And I find this to be yet another common lefty tactic, to go quickly to their opponents personal credibility. The often played "hypocrisy card".

But I'll answer your question. I was not outraged about the Clinton stuff, because in those days I was a rabid, Dittoheaded anti-Clinton maniac. I see now, that I was wrong to support some of the things that were thrown around about him. I realize now that I was not entirely fair to the man at all. But I still think he was a slimeball, and not a very honorable person.

I do NOT like some of what has been said about Obama. And I've commented on it here and there. Apparently I need to come up with a system to be certain that I only post arguments of this nature for both sides, completely equally... :rolleyes:

Look man, I have been trying very hard to keep myself fair. I tried to have serious, unemotional discussions about torture and abortion, at length. There have been times I wanted to be extremely snotty and self-righteous. Oh so many times. Times where I wanted to call some of you on what I believe are your real motivations. But I keep holding back, all the time.

I have taken issue with things said by some people who are clearly conservative. I strongly suggested more civility to Marc39. I did the same with Skeptic and Cicero at one time or another. I thought I had made it clear, a long time ago, that I feel that we (on the right) should not stoop to that level. That we are doing exactly what we hated the left for doing to Bush for 8 years. That it's wrong. That the fact it was done before is meaningless to whether it's right or wrong. And how this ******** goes back decades.. But YOU did it to Clinton! But YOU did it to Regan! But YOU did it to Cater! On and ON AND ON!

I have consistently stated that I think politics is way too emotional and vicious. My goal, more than anything is to try to steer people out of the angry rhetoric and get to the meat of issues. My feeling is that we have all gotten so entrenched and personal about it, that we are no longer able to see the real truth at all times. Only when it falls on "our side". That we are not making progress of any kind in these mindsets. That politics is such a disgusting sewer anymore that we simply must try to fix it.

And yet I can still count on you to ask me if I feel equally outraged about whatever Republican injustice you seem to feel is equivalent to the matter at hand.

-
to all:

In retrospect, I was too hotheaded and nasty in my posting of this article. I was also considerably too self-righteous.

I apologize.

Having had some time to cool down, I do feel that the article was well over the top. But I do think it was intentionally done so as well. I don't like the birther aspect, I hadn't noticed it in the first read.

But I shared some of the feelings that the author has about tactics by some on the left. For right or for wrong. As I said above, it's kind of hard to not get that impression on some things. Just as I'm sure for many of you, it's hard to see past your own ideas of what conservatives really stand for, and are motivated by.

I feel the authors motivation, mostly, was to get Conservatives to stand up and fight as "dirty" as he suggests the left is. And in that, I completely disagree. In fact, as I realize that, I can't help but notice the irony with my own attempts to steer my side away from that mindset. So I shouldn't have even offered this article up. But I still think Sarah Palin was viciously brutalized, and unfairly.

I was angry, and held back for a long time, and finally let go a bit.
 
Last edited:
The original article definitely exagerrates, I think, although it seems that the "Obama birtherism" is heavily sarcastic, not intended to be taken literally.

But it certainly has a serious point. I've certainly read editions of Newsweek or the New York Times -- just to name two -- whose list of articles were, in effect, something like:

Let's all Laugh at Sarah Palin -- p. 2
New Test Results Prove Republicans are Stupid -- p. 3
Obama: Totally Great or Just Super-Cool? An Objective Analysis -- p. 5
Public Considers Media Left-Leaning for no Apparent Reason -- p. 6
 
Last edited:
Skeptic said:
The original article definitely exagerrates, I think, although it seems that the "Obama birtherism" is heavily sarcastic, not intended to be taken literally.
Click to expand...

I dunno. I'm not an american, so maybe I'm not skilled enough in the subtleties of american sarcasm, but when you get senators trying to introduce bills based on it... that sounds pretty serious to _me_. Plus, I don't know how it works over there, but I'd expect any kind of governing body and representatives to be a bit more serious than that. If someone wasted the congress's time with a bill that was supposed to be just sarcastic, that would scare me even more.

Skeptic said:
But it certainly has a serious point. I've certainly read editions of Newsweek or the New York Times -- just to name two -- whose list of articles were, in effect, something like:

Let's all Laugh at Sarah Palin -- p. 2
New Test Results Prove Republicans are Stupid -- p. 3
Obama: Totally Great or Just Super-Cool? An Objective Analysis -- p. 5
Public Considers Media Left-Leaning for no Apparent Reason -- p. 6
Click to expand...

Right, unlike any piece of Rupert Murdoch owned press which would read more like:

Let's all Whine at Slippery Slope Socialist Scenarios -- p. 2
New Ways To Use "Liberal" As If It Were An Insult -- p. 3
Obama: Yet Another Comparison To Stalin Or Hitler -- p. 5
Any Other Kind Of News Is The Product Of A Left Wing Media Conspiracy -- p. 6
 
dudalb said:
Or maybe Palin was just an incredibly poor pick as Veep..someone without the knowledge or experience for the White House.
But no, it was all a plot by the Evil Liberal Media to destroy poor Sarah.
Click to expand...

I wonder why the lame stream media didn't give Biden the same treatment they gave Palin? Or do you think VP Biden has proved to be less of an embarrassment that you believed Palin would be?

The latest:

"We misread how bad the economy was." Joey Biden

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationwo...,5351038.story

& still the greatest:

1. “Jill and I had the great honor of standing on that stage, looking across at one of the great justices, Justice Stewart.”—To cheering supporters on Inauguration Day, while substituting the name of Potter Stewart (who died in 1985) for Justice John Paul Stevens, who swore Biden in as vice president.

2. “My memory isn’t as good as Chief Justice Roberts.”—Needling the chief justice over Robert’s glitch in administering the oath of office to Barack Obama. Biden was asking for a copy of the oath so that he could swear in the White House staff on January 30, while Obama shook his head in disapproval.

3. “If we do everything right, if we do it with absolute certainty, there’s still a 30 percent chance we’re going to get it wrong.”—Channeling his inner Yogi Berra while discussing the stimulus package to members of Congress on February 6.

4. “Do you know the website number?”—Committing a minor techie blooper during a February 25 television interview reminiscent of George W. Bush’s description of the “Internets.”

5. “Give me a f______ break!”—Dropping the “f-bomb” to a former Senate colleague who addressed him as “Mr. Vice President” at a March 13 event in Washington’s Union Station.

6. “I wouldn’t go anywhere in confined places now. It’s not that it’s going to Mexico in a confined aircraft where one person sneezes, that goes all the way through the aircraft. That’s me. I would not be, at this point, if they had another way of transportation, suggesting they ride the subway.”—Taking flight from the White House talking points on the swine flu, and panicking millions of travelers, on April 30.

7. “I told you: Piece of cake. Piece of cake.” —Whispered in the ear of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor on May 27, after she delivered her poignant remarks in the East Room.

8. "What am I gonna tell the president? I’m gonna tell him his teleprompter is broken. What will he do then?” —Taking a dig at his teleprompter-reliant boss when one of the teleprompter screens fell down during Biden’s May 27 commencement speech at the U.S. Air Force Academy.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom