Not as bad as Gibson, but good lord. This campaign is now officially surreal. If Palin is supposed to be the "ordinary American" she passed that test--she really does sound like an ordinary American. Her answers sound like the responses Couric would get if she interview one of my friends. At three A./M. After a night of drinking.
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
You're way too generous. That was a train wreck.
"I'll have to get back to ya!"
Jesus. Her answer on Davis was comical.
You are a hard critic of your friends, sir. I fear what would happen if you ever unload on your enemies!
You must have dumb friends.
Meh, I wrote at 3 A.M. after a night of drinking. You guys need a drink yourselves:)
dumb as a doorpost! no, really, she is.
Indeed we do, Mr. Coates. Indeed we do:)
And what are all you whippersnappers doing reading a boring political blog at 10:30 at night anyway? Shouldn't you all be out partying somewhere? Is this what the youth today have amounted to?
You can actually see her trying to remember that talking points. "Katie, you have to remember that he's a maverick!"
You know how Bill Simmons talks about the Manning face. At what point do we start to talk about the Palin face, i.e. a person visibly trying to remember the stuff they've been drilled to say,
I'm at the office, T, because I'm one of those evil investment bankers trying to destroy the average American.
Youth? Who the hell is young? I've got ten years and one more kid on you. I'm lucky to be awake at all.
And I go back to my previous point, if good leaders hire people smarter than they are, we are all potential Vice-Presidential staff members. And I still can't think of anyone who isn't eligible.
she is both stupid and sorely lacking even a 9th grade level of knowledge. some tough cookie. what's really sad is that she lets mccain's handlers treat her like 'dumb broad with a pretty face.' what an asshole. both of them, in their own special way. look for mccain to check himself into a hospital before months end for exhaustion, with rest of 'campaign' just smear adds on the toob.
what a travesty.
I can't believe this is happening...she's so woefully unprepared...
It's like the campaign is clearly saying
who she is should be good enough to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency.
I feel like I'm living in a sci fi novel.
Coates you rock. And Palin cannot frame a sentence. She cannot bullshit coherently.
Today I thought, oh my god, Obama's gonna win, there's actually gonna be a President Obama.
Unless perhaps Bush gets that October surprise he's been gunning for in Waziristan.
This can't come out at the same time as their attempt to indefinitely postpone the veep debate and look anything other than desperate and transparent.
But bold. I'll give them bold.
To be fair, during the first part of the interview she was walking and answering questions at the same time.
This is a joke right?
David, that might be the genius comment of the year. Freakin' brilliant, my man.
I like how Couric takes the position of like a teacher explaining the things to Palin. And she's a little bit mad that Palin clearly didn't do her homework.
among other things in this increasingly bizarre campaign, the mention of Waziristan after watching that interview made Wario, out-of-nowhere nintendo mario bros. character, spring to my mind. Did watching that interview make me dumber?
She might as well declare that she's suspending answering any questions until Jesus comes back on a chariot.
This is what happens when you use someone to bring attention to the campaign, they are struggling to get the spotlight off her...and then what if they do???
Okay, I think, whatever else this interview shows, it shows clearly Palin is not ready for a robust debate on the issues, when she will be called upon to do more than simply regurgitate what she's thus far been able to digest about McCain's philosophy and policies. She will actually be challenged on issues about which she knows nothing. Such a debate is scheduled for October 2. She is not going to be ready.
Watching the interview, I think it's clear Palin has her own mind. She's a conservative. Left to her own devices, I think she would say there should be no bailout because some people should never have incurred mortgages they couldn't pay and banks shouldn't have lent them money they couldn't repay. That's not a good political stance right now, so she's tethered to McCain's position. Problem is, neither she nor McCain know what that position is since he clearly thinks a more 'liberal' view is winning the race.
So she's hog-tied. I think she does have a pretty standard basic conservative philosophy. I think, left on her own, she would likely state that philosophy in a naturally aggressive artless way. One thing this woman does not lack is balls. She seems naturally plainspoken, which is part of her appeal.
But for that very reason, I think McCain is terrified to let her speak her mind. She also, clearly, does not have the knowledge - due to a previous complete lack of interest - of the forces at work in the world. She doesn't know enough about economic philosophy, or Iraq, or national politics to speak to current issues through her own political (conservative) philosophy.
I feel crazy when I think it, but I wonder if this entire crazy political stunt - suspending his campaign and heading to Washington to deal with the crisis - is not an attempt by McCain to get rid of that VP debate. Obviously, McCain is trying to get the economic issue on his side. But he's also clearly terrified of Palin on her own. He won't even let her fund-raise on her own. This interview gives me further insight into why.
All that said, I'm not entirely sure McCain's crazy political play won't work. Especially if he can hold off a deal long enough to kibosh the VP debate, which debate will then never happen, or will at least happen when Palin has had more time to prepare. If Palin has more time, she may just sneak by. She's already improved since the Gibson interview. And if people buy that McCain eschewed politics to address this economic crisis, Obama might find it hard to eventually come out ahead.
Yikes.
why don't they just cancel their whole campaign and concede to Obama
Wow. I wasn't going to even waste my time listening to this, because I could already guess what she was going to say. But she surprised me. She's not even good at spewing her own campaign's talking points. Get this woman in a debate. Now.
"Yeah, Katie, you do sound like you know what you're talking about. But need I remind you...McCain is a Maverick. And as soon as I figure out why, I'll get back with ya!!"
According to Lindsey Graham, we should replace (er, postpone) the VP debate with a rescheduled presidential debate. There, don't you all feel better now about the future of the free world?
1. My friends, at 3 AM, would be cursing a hell of a lot more. But they would be coherent.
2. Also, did you really write after you were drinking? I can never write after drinking (a, emphasis a, beer doesn't count).
I am torn between my compulsion to watch, parsing every word, and wanting to turn away in sympathetic embarrassment for her.
I almost feel sorry for her.
But then I remember that she's a Bible-fellating, book-banning, fascist, lying moron who represents everything that is vile and rancid about the unwiped bottom of George W. Bush's America. I wish her a thoroughly humiliating campaign experience and a brutal loss in the election, one so severe that she longs for the cold black Alaskan winter.
To hell with her. And fuck McCain, too. His selection of Palin shows that he is both a fathomless cynic and a contemptuous asshole who thinks even less of America than Bush does. He might as well have nominated Jenna Jameson or Larry the Cable Guy.
I disagree with you about this not being as bad as Gibson. She's had more weeks to be filled with soundbites, and she still is wretched. There truly is NOTHING THERE.
ABSOLUTELY NOTHING THERE.
So, for my money, this one was far worse.
Katie Couric gets paid, what, 17 million? She needs to give back 16,950,000, because an ambitious reporter just out of journalism school would have done a better job. She's a friggin' NETWORK ANCHOR. She didn't do her damn job.
I gotta take issue with rikyah, Katie did fine. Didn't let her get away with sound bites and gave Sarah plenty of room to hang herself.
There is nothing about Couric's behavior in that interview that can legitimately give Palin defenders anything to beef about. They might anyway, but they are going to look silly.
And don't forget, there's more to come.
Let's mate Palin and Matt Millen and see what the ultimate over-it's-head idiot looks like.
And another thing - why do her new owners keep dressing her up in old Star Trek uniforms?
and what's up with her hand gestures. i don't think i have seen her once pay the least bit of respect to her opponents. you've seen mccain and obama time and time again at least pay lip service and acknowledge that the other person is a person of worth and conviction, but palin is constantly mocking obama and biden. i mean this is a guy who could run mental laps around her and she's sitting here making fun of him. just pathetic
Did anybody else recognize Katie's slight tone of voice change and fake grin when she said "I'm just gonna ask you one more time..."
It reminds you of the tone and look your mother gave you when she was totally fed up with all your crap...that was hilarious.
k1
1. How does liberal hollywood which supposedly cares about urban America give emmys to shows about white men that cheat on their wives (mad men) and not quality programming like the wire? I'm not big on victimization but with all the awards they give to stupid cookie cutter buffoonish shows about awkward middle aged white men, and all the bellyaching the same actors do about the plight of the ghetto, it would have behooved them to pay some respect to a great program that actually meant something.
Palin:
2. Washington has Harvard j.d.'s out the ass, making an ass out of this country and somehow the media looks down on this woman? 1/5 of the Senate has degrees at least from the Ivy League and this is the least popular congress in history. So what if she doesn't know McCain's record, Obama gets a pass on how Biden voted on the 1988 appropriations markup because he went to harvard? Having worked on the Hill and in the administration I can tell you it would not be a bad thing right now to have someone that knows the inside of a wallmart rather than their d.c. based lobbyist.
The very last sentence was brutal. Concede to Obama now, so that Palin can lose no further dignity is this disaster. McCain has destroyed Palin in three weeks. What would he do to America over 4 yrs?
i don't think i have seen her once pay the least bit of respect to her opponents. you've seen mccain and obama time and time again at least pay lip service and acknowledge that the other person is a person of worth and conviction, but palin is constantly mocking obama and biden. i mean this is a guy who could run mental laps around her and she's sitting here making fun of him. just pathetic
this is another thing that just pisses me off. She doesn't have the brain matter to hang with Obama and Biden. She simply doesn't have it, and she mocks them?
$*%$&, please.
One heart beat away, possibly - and you thought the economic situation was scary? I'll give her this much, she's pretty good at giving speeches..they must have a good class at Montana State. Beyond that, she's an empty skirt who has NO business being in the awkward position.
Shame on McCain, country first my ass.
you know what, William Donald Schaefer/Mayor Royce, if she was a fast learner, i'd give her some credit. but she's had weeks of uninterrupted study time and she didn't take ONE coherent stance in any of these answers. except to assert that the american people trust mccain and that he's a maverick. personally, i'd take an elite-level fast learner, but not a bullshit artist who knows how to sweet-talk the local walmart greeter. and fails at learning quickly.
but hey, maybe my standards are just too high. it's just the potential leader of the free world we're examining, right?
"Having worked on the Hill and in the administration I can tell you it would not be a bad thing right now to have someone that knows the inside of a wallmart rather than their d.c. based lobbyist."
I've been wondering when Dan Quayle would show up again.
Part II is even worse, she starts dropping her articles and shit ("this is crisis moment," "we need to look at trade as an opportunity, not as scary thing"):
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4476721n
"Having worked on the Hill and in the administration I can tell you it would not be a bad thing right now to have someone that knows the inside of a wallmart rather than their d.c. based lobbyist."
Why the hell should Obama go to Wal-Mart? Chicago didn't even have any until 2004! He's supposed to drive out to the burbs to satisfy you, because Sears and JC Penny and and Woolworths aren't 'real' enough? Is Target too fancy for ya?
Clue: Sam Walton didn't invent middle class shopping.
Clue: Wal-marts are scarce in cities, so aren't convenient (especially if you don't have a car), and so city people tend not to go because we have more important things to do than trying to live up to some bullshit notion of 'real America' that revolves around a company that has done a bang-up job helping to destroy American manufacturing.
Addendum: For all I know, Obama might well have shopped at Wal-Mart, particularly if he needed something while in Springfield.
I swear Republicans must think that everyone who lives in a city shops at Neiman-Marcus and Saks.
I can only assume it's projection, because that's where all the Republican politicians shop when in Washington.
"I'll give her this much, she's pretty good at giving speeches..they must have a good class at Montana State. "
Doug in CT, she's not from Montana. Try Idaho, the one that has a much higher proportion of Repubs.
I think Doug in CT may have been referring to one of the five colleges Palin attended on her six year quest for a bachelor's degree.
You folks have TOTALLY missed the history made during the Couric interview:
This is the first time a vice presidential candidate licked themselves on national TV.
Give credit where credit is due...or, maybe these days, just note it.
Wow. Just wow. The more I see of her the more I fear for our country. She doesn't understand anything that she is saying. You can see her trying to remember her talking points. Just pathetic. What a farce.
Somewhere in Alaska, Lyda Green is smiling and licking her fangs. Palin has made enough enemies there that she might well not survive for more than one term as governor. This interview showed that without note cards she is fundamentally ignorant, and in an embarrassing way. All she can do is repeat the question, add in a little random rightwing babble, and in general sound like a walking edition of the less convincing parts of Conservapedia.
unfuckingbelievable.
i'm becoming more convinced than ever that picking her was JMac's jump-the-shark moment. except now the damage is unfolding slow-motion style on TV screens across America. this combined with the recent stunts he's pulled has effectively destroyed what once remained of his shambolic campaign. and obama is standing looking as cool, calm and ready as he ever was to take this shit.
lights out, JMac.
what I find fascinating is that the only time she is truly relaxed and comfortable is when she is mocking someone else. The only time she seemed in control was when she mocked Obama as somehow checking the wind etc. Other than that...jeez. But again, 'underestimate her at your peril' say her handlers...
This video is almost as good as her getting a lobotomy or whatever from the Kenyan witch hunter guy at her church last spring.
Challenge for America: film a YouTube of some new immigrants to the U.S. speaking in more coherent, intelligent, and grammatical English than her. It's only fair. ESL teachers out there are you in??
But for reals: those of us not blindsided by fundamentalist hoo-ha or Sarah Palin's bangs... MUST get out there and vote, volunteer, organize, donate... cuz this ain't a joke ya'll. She is NUTS.
I think the McCain campaign is trying to shoehorn her into a role that she doesn't fit...she's not a statesman or an intellectual. Her appeal lies in charisma and her being perceived as being down to earth. Since they put her on the ticket they should let Palin be Palin, come what may. Obviously, they're afraid she will say something gaffe like and the media will pounce on her, but they're pouncing on her anway. They would do better to let her be herself, answer questions in her own way, say what is on her mind and stop trying to make her sound like a Hillary Clinton policy wonk, which she obviously is not.
Palin came across as a small-town mom without a clue. Somehow, I doubt this helped with undecided or independent voters.
Libertarian,
The problem isn't being a 'wonk', it's being patently clueless about domestic and foreign policy.
What's left if you don't have any idea, or apparently, any real interest in either of those subjects?
She is shockingly hopeless, and if you watch old Dan Quayle clips that aren't the spelling or debate chestnuts, he comes across as a genius compared with her.
Genuinely shocking.
William Donald etcetera, if she sounded sharp and prepared in her interviews and discussed energy policy and domestic economy stuff and western issues with real depth, very few would look down on her. She fails that test. Shopping at Walmart is not a suffiicient condition to become president.
She's definitely clueless about foreign policy, but that isn't really an issue at least for me.
I don't think any governor can be clueless about domestic policy. The governor submits a budget, understands where the taxes in their state comes from, how the federal government money applies in their state, has to deal with infrastructure, crime, etc. They're running a mini-country.
The McCain campaign is trying to give her a crash course in a level of policy that doesn't make sense...it doesn't make sense to try and school her on macro economics.
Let her use her experience as governor to guide her answers and if says something crazy, then, that's on McCain. But, trying to put all of these policy statements in her mouth that don't come from her or her experience makes her look like she's just prepped for her oral exams...it doesn't do the campaign any good and limits her best quality, which is being plain spoken and down to earth.
Yeah, I agree with Libertarian. They are definitely trying 'shoehorn' her. She's not a 'statesman' or an 'intellectual.' She's not 'smart' or 'competent.' She doesn't 'know' 'things.' She can't 'explain' any type of 'policy' details. Why are they asking her to be something she's not? Let her be herself!!
"She's definitely clueless about foreign policy, but that isn't really an issue at least for me."
I'm amazed you can be blasé.
re domestic - no, sorry - domestic meaning what the whole country is doing, not what your state can screw out of the rest of it.
As per mini - population wise, Alaska is around Bhutan, Comoros and Guyana.
She shows no sign whatsoever of knowing or caring about anything except Alaska and Sarah Palin.
Libertarian writes: "it doesn't do the campaign any good and limits her best quality, which is being plain spoken and down to earth."
Except she's not down to earth at all - she's a wackaloon who believes in "pray away the gay" and that Alaska is about to become the Great Refuge from the Antichrist. Oh, and she thinks it's cool to charge rape victims for rape kits.
The campaign doesn't want people to see who she really is because what she really is is one heinous catastrophe, and even confirmed wingnuts like McCain's staffers know it.
I find the foreign policy experience to be a silly straw man arguement since the last several presidents were also governors with little to no foreign policy experience and she isn't running for president.
I don't believe any governor lacks for a view on domestic issues because they are all there, in miniature, at the state level..crime, poverty, education, tax strategy, business regulation, all of it. Alaska is a little outside of the mainstream because there are several unique factors, but not that much.
What I think is that either the McCain camp doesn't trust her or that her actual views are at odds with McCain's and so they're keeping her tightly scripted because whatever she might say off the cuff will probably not fall in line with John McCain's views. Either way, it doesn't speak to well of their choice.
Royce, don't fret about the Emmys. The Wire needs an Emmy like any great film needs an Oscar. They just aren't credible awards.
"I find the foreign policy experience to be a silly straw man arguement since the last several presidents were also governors with little to no foreign policy experience and she isn't running for president."
A) The issue is one of experience and knowledge. Clinton had no experience, but he was a brilliant man and so he became a good statesman. Bush also had no experience, but he also lacked knowledge and curiosity, which helped him remain a terrible statesman. His evangelical world view (which Palin might call the Bush Doctrine) encouraged him to approach the rest of the world as potential enemies, while also letting him off the hook for everything because, well, the End Times are approaching either way.
B) Arguing that she's not running to be president is an admission that she isn't qualified. If she's not qualified, she shouldn't have been picked.
"I don't believe any governor lacks for a view on domestic issues because they are all there..."
You're giving Palin a lot of credit for being governor when you should actually be scrutinizing what kind of governor she has been. When you go there, you'll find the usual Republican bile: secrecy, vendettas against those who betrayed her, contempt for the legislature, and constantly sucking at the teat of the federal government and big business.
Oh, but she's ambitious. Yay.
I think a good case can be made that she is of the Dick Cheney school of government by executive fiat. I believe that is a fair assessment of her record as governor. She's not as bad as Cheney, but governors can't invoke national security...A similarly good case can be made that her view of the world and of government is MUCH closer to George Bush's view than to John McCain's view.
My entire complaint on Palin has been that MOST of the criticism of her is totally hysterical and based on gross misinterpretations of her record as governor or as personal attacks with a lot of latent sexism thrown in to boot.
Why must her record be totally distorted in order to criticize her when there is ample legitimate reasons to criticize her that are not based on misleading and out of context information?
@Libertarian: Palin couldn't come from a worse state, considering the largest problem now facing our country is a fiscal one. She's never had to make the sort of hard choices re: the budget; rather, she flippantly took her pen to the budget for seemingly ideological, rather than pragmatic, reasons.
Her domestic experience has left her worse than unprepared for the current situation.
I don't agree that she took her pen to the budget for ideological reasons, I don't see any evidence of that.
I do agree that Alaska's economy, which much more resembles that of a third world country...all based on the extraction of commodities...probably is the least reflective of national economic issues.
I also agree that Alaska's reliance on oil money has cushioned the state from many hard budget choices as has the fairly unique relationship the state has with the federal government.
All of those are legimitate reasons to question her background and her abilities on the national stage...and all done without calling her a "dummy" or a "hick"...
What are you all talking about? Of course Palin is prepared for crisis happening to about for us! Don't you see? McCain maverick to be is are, therefore plans in Congress must be for people with crisis of great proportion and predator lenders...sheesh.
The comments by tinisoli are spot on:
"When you go there, you'll find the usual Republican bile: secrecy, vendettas against those who betrayed her, contempt for the legislature, and constantly sucking at the teat of the federal government and big business."
Also add the Republicans love picking personnel with no qualifications. Look at who Palin picked for the AK AG. A lawyer who splits his time between a one-lawyer law office and a western civ college teacher. Check this article:
http://www.alaskadispatch.com/tundra-talk/1-talk-of-the-tundra/147-alaska-ags-ill-fated-experiment-with-public-service-in-wake-of-troopergate.html
You can find the same info on the AK AG own gov website.
Libertarian again: "All of those are legimitate reasons to question her background and her abilities on the national stage...and all done without calling her a "dummy" or a "hick"..."
But she is a dummy and a hick. So let's not be afraid to say so.
Calling her a hick is totally ridiculous, she's no more of a "hick" than Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter. What is the point of badmouthing her from a personal standpoint, you may not know it but it makes YOU look bad.
I also doubt she is a dummy. I've called George Bush a dummy, a moron and and imbecile...but the truth is, he's none of those things. He's anti intellectual, sees the world in starkly partisan black and white terms, uninterested in policy other than in furtherance of his own ideology, but he's not really stupid.
In fact, sad as it is to say, George W. Bush has been an incredibly effective president in getting his agenda enacted. He has outflanked his opponents time and time again. The only problem is that George Bush's agenda in large part runs counter to the U.S. Constitution, democratic traditions and the long term interests of the U.S. But, he has been wildly successful in getting his way.
I don't think "dummies" get elected governor and calling her a dummy further diminishes the already diminished political dialogue that exists in this country.
Libertarian writes: "Calling her a hick is totally ridiculous, she's no more of a "hick" than Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter. What is the point of badmouthing her from a personal standpoint, you may not know it but it makes YOU look bad."
Bullshit. Clinton went to Georgetown and Yale and had traveled extensively over the course of his entire adult life. Jimmy Carter went to the Naval Academy and also traveled extensively as a naval officer. Both men may have been born hicks, but they became something else at a very young age.
Sarah Palin went to a succession of cow colleges and then settled in a hick town before eventually becoming the head hick. When she became governor she acted like hicks do - she started appointing her high school buddies to jobs.
Hick applies. Deal with it.
I am shocked that she was not prepared for this interview better than she was. There is something seriously amiss in the McCain campaign, if it cannot do better than this. It had to be obvious that the current action in Congress would be brought up in the interview and that she needed to be prepared for the not-surprising questions asked.
Libertarian again: "I don't think "dummies" get elected governor and calling her a dummy further diminishes the already diminished political dialogue that exists in this country."
Yeah, okay, no dummy has ever been elected governor. Sure, whatever you say. They've all been bright, capable people, every last one of them.
You betcha!
Sarah Palin went to a succession of cow colleges and then settled in a hick town before eventually becoming the head hick. When she became governor she acted like hicks do - she started appointing her high school buddies to jobs.
Hick applies. Deal with it.
-----------------------------------------
Stooge: This is why the entire South and most of the Midwest votes Republican, because people like you constantly talk down to them and bad mouth their values...the line from All The King's Men about hicks comes to mind....
You strike me as the worst kind of ideologue who does nothing but denigrate anyone who does not agree with your viewpoint. Nothing more than a left wing version of Rush, name calling and snotty attitude, except instead of calling them elitists you call them hicks. Same/same.
Jeremiah...I agree...you would think that they would have had talking points on the economy, regulation of banking honed to perfection and it doesn't seem like that is the case at least from her delivery...McCain is going to have to answer for himself about his record on deregulating the financial markets, so hard to believe this is the best they could do.
Libertarian writes: "Stooge: This is why the entire South and most of the Midwest votes Republican, because people like you constantly talk down to them and bad mouth their values...the line from All The King's Men about hicks comes to mind....
You strike me as the worst kind of ideologue who does nothing but denigrate anyone who does not agree with your viewpoint. Nothing more than a left wing version of Rush, name calling and snotty attitude, except instead of calling them elitists you call them hicks. Same/same."
Okay, got it, there are no hicks and there are no dummies. And you're against namecalling except when you do it yourself. And you call yourself a libertarian even though you spend all of your time here defending big government conservatives like McCain and Palin.
I just saw Palin talking about how "sharing a border" with Russia gives her foreign policy credentials, and she's a fucking NUMBSKULL. She's also a rube and a fool, and if you think she's qualified for national office you're nuts.
And this "bad mouth their values" bit is lamer than lame, chuckles. It's not like "they" don't spend their days badmouthing MY values, so SCREW IT. I'm not going to hide my beliefs - neither are they. Don't be such a wienie. Is it your belief that if no one ever "badmouthed their values" that all of a sudden they'd stop pushing creationism and they'd stop chasing "the gays" off the farm?
Yeah, sure. That's what they would do, you betcha!
Your post speaks for itself.
Libertarian writes: "Your post speaks for itself."
Actually it speaks for me. I wrote it, and it's composed of words. Don't be afraid of words, chuckles. Words are our friends. Well, they're apparently not Sarah Palin's friends, because she doesn't know many of them, but so it goes.
Libertarian,
I'm sorry, but as someone who's lived in the rural south his whole life: the people here *deserve* to be talked down to. They're completely uninterested in learning anything new, terrified of change, and utterly proud of their ignorance. If one party wins the south by pandering to the lowest common demoninator (which is exactly what they do with the God, guns and gays crap), so be it. The rest of the country can do without such hicks and dummies (yes, I said it too) anywhere near the levers of power, regardless of how strongly the south votes for them.
Sarah Palin is astonishingly unintelligent and unable to even put on a veneer of competence with regards to any subject whatsoever. She is a pure seeker and manipulator of power. I see no reason not to call her out with every appropriate adjective.
Adam,
What benefit does talking down to them get you other than some kind of satisfaction that you're proving you are smarter than they are?
I'm not religious, I think organized religion always ends up filled with dogmatic nonsense. But, I've come to accept that MILLIONS of Americans do not share my view, the really believe that Jesus Christ is present in their lives. There is no arguing with that, so why not accept it, understand it and try and find common ground instead of demeaning it?
The Second Amendment is not ambiguious and it never was. We could debate the damage that America's gun culture has done, but its like debating the existance of the moon. It exists, it's not going away, it is fundamental to the American psyche of millions of people. Why fight it? Why not seek common ground? Why not agree that you have a right to defend yourself and own a gun but make the case that possibly everyone and their brother carrying guns into the bars and around in their vehicles is a recipe for disaster? Why just take the stance that they're a bunch of dumb hicks clinging to god and guns? What does that get you?
I can't really account for the hostility toward homosexuals since I don't see it anywhere in the New Testament and since there are ample archaic ideas in the Old Testament that everyone agrees are not civilized, I don't see why this stands out so much for conservatives. My opinion is that eventually science is going to prove that there is a biological predisposition to being gay and that will remove the idea of sin/choice/lifestyle from the discussion and it might move forward.
My real point, apparently lost on everyone, is that name calling and beating people up for what they believe in because you believe something different SHOULD BE antithetical to anyone who calls themselves a progressive or liberal and claims to wish for tolerance...it appears that you only wish for your own kind of tolerance, but not the reverse. It's also true that when you attack people they become defensive, calling millions of Americans dumb hicks isn't going to get them to listen to anything enlightening you may have to say, its counter productive if your goal is anything other than making yourself feel superior.
Libertarian writes: "My opinion is that eventually science is going to prove that there is a biological predisposition to being gay and that will remove the idea of sin/choice/lifestyle from the discussion and it might move forward."
Ri-iii-ght-ttt... because modern science has disabused these people of the notion that the Earth and humankind were created literally according to Genesis.
Sheesh. Science is just another "bad mouther of their values," haven't you heard?
"t's also true that when you attack people they become defensive, calling millions of Americans dumb hicks isn't going to get them to listen to anything enlightening you may have to say, its counter productive if your goal is anything other than making yourself feel superior."
Look, there are untold numbers of kids out there in hickland who deserve to know that there are people out there who agree with them about the sad limited worldviews of their immediate "peers." Pretending that we think faith healers and creationists aren't rubes, feebs, hicks and dummies doesn't work for anyone - they'll always think we think of them that way, anyway.
Hicks are everywhere, by the way. There are people here in my city in Massachusetts who haven't been more than 50 miles away from home in their lives, and they like it like that, and they still believe the same stupid shit their parents taught them when they were kids about other race and "those gays" and so forth.
They're no more ready for the Vice Presidency than Palin is.
I do not understand why Palin's advisors are giving her talking points that she can't elaborate on, or defend. This makes her look even more inept. And how come she can't defend McCain's record (surely they knew the deregulation question would be asked)?
And what about that answer on Rick Davis...was she instructed to answer that way? Talk about adding fuel to the story. Geez.
The wheels are coming off...
I'm getting a little tired of all the scolding and hand-wringing over how "mean" it is to accurately characterize, or god forbid make fun of the views and beliefs of certain people. If it was really such a liability to insult or attack the values of large groups of people in the context of a political campaign, then how come the republicans have dominated this country for the past thirty years or so using a strategy of doing just that?
Unless Libertarian is trolling right-wing blogs and scolding them for "attacking" liberals and big city elitists as terrorist appeasing, baby-killing, latte-sipping fags (I know I don't get all defensive and offended, fuck, I'm at least two out those four), his pearl clutching over people mocking the ludicrous beliefs of wingnut America rings a little hollow.
I know its mean and smug to point out that the earth wasn't "created" several years before the invention of agriculture, or that its insane to think gay people are a threat to civilization, but why not put the shoe on the other foot...Isn't there something more than a little smug and superior about believing that your interpretation of several thousand year old book of Jewish fairy tales will grant you everlasting life and that those who believe different will be tortured for all of eternity?
This insult thing is a two-way street, and its not like one side is any more or less vitriolic. Politics is rough shit, so can we all just drop all the fake piety about how we need to be "tolerant" of that which is patently absurd, stupid, and/or incredibly dangerous.
Liberals, progressives and Democrats claim to be the big tent party of inclusion and tolerance for all views and cultures....
Republicans and conservatives are up front about their values and beliefs, they don't sugarcoat them, they think gays are going to hell and they say so, they think abortion is murder and they say so.
That's why I finally realized that it is the liberals who are the hypocrites and the liars, not the conservatives, they don't couch their beliefs in politically correct jargon and come up with elaborate rationalizations to the huge exceptions to their rules on tolerance and inclusion when it comes to Christian conservatives.
dearleader nyc writes: "This insult thing is a two-way street, and its not like one side is any more or less vitriolic. Politics is rough shit, so can we all just drop all the fake piety about how we need to be "tolerant" of that which is patently absurd, stupid, and/or incredibly dangerous."
Fuck yeah.
Libertarian writes: "Liberals, progressives and Democrats claim to be the big tent party of inclusion and tolerance for all views and cultures....
Republicans and conservatives are up front about their values and beliefs, they don't sugarcoat them, they think gays are going to hell and they say so, they think abortion is murder and they say so.
That's why I finally realized that it is the liberals who are the hypocrites and the liars, not the conservatives, they don't couch their beliefs in politically correct jargon and come up with elaborate rationalizations to the huge exceptions to their rules on tolerance and inclusion when it comes to Christian conservatives."
Now you're just talking out of Ken Rove's ass. Being tolerant doesn't mean we have to pretend to agree with people, chuckles. And when I'm upfront with MY values and beliefs you tell me I should be worried about offending conservatives.
Are you really this stupid or is it an act?
I'm tired of being insulted and called stupid, chuckes and idiot.
What values are those? Oh yeah, anyone who doesn't agree with you is a hick and a dummy.
It would be laugh out loud funny if it wasn't so sad that you fail to see the irony in yourself.
Libertarian again: "I'm tired of being insulted and called stupid, chuckes and idiot."
I'll bet I would be, too, if I were you.
By the way, I didn't call you stupid.
"Oh yeah, anyone who doesn't agree with you is a hick and a dummy."
No, just the ones that happen to be hicks and dummies.
LIbertarian,
Would it clarify things to simply state that one should be tolerant of everything but intolerance?
Of course this means that you run smack into most everything Christian conservatives believe so...
I agree with you though, I respect wingers in so much as they don't at all try to hide what they believe (at least the ones on the internet, to get on mainstream TV you mostly have to shuck and jive a bit)and I get frustrated with online libs because they are constantly knuckling under to these fake pleas for "civility" and "respect" from the people kicking their teeth in.
I also agree that too many people do go to great lengths to rationalize/wish away real and important differences, and maybe this excludes me from the liberal/progressive club, but not every belief or value is created equally. (see: evolution vs. creationism, Iraq War: Awesome! vs. Worst Fucking Idea Ever) Tolerance and respect should be earned, not just automatically granted for fear of offending someone. They're up front with their values, I am with mine, and I'm sorry but I have very little patience for this kind of bible based ignorance.
In so much as it doesn't affect my life, I generally don't care what culture, belief, superstition or tribe anyone subscribes to,and in a perfect world that would be the case, but unfortunately I have to live in this country and the beliefs of someone like Sarah Palin specifically and the conservative fundamentalist movement in general do have HUGE real world consequences that affect my and millions of other lives.
I don't think you're stupid or that you're a rube or hick, I'm really not trying to take the piss here...I just think some very valid points have been made with regards to this discussion, but you seem to just double down on the "liberals are a bunch of big jerks!" response.
"Liberals, progressives and Democrats claim to be the big tent party of inclusion and tolerance for all views and cultures....
Republicans and conservatives are up front about their values and beliefs, they don't sugarcoat them, they think gays are going to hell and they say so, they think abortion is murder and they say so."
See how these paragraphs don't jibe. You are expecting one group of people to be tolerant of another group of people who think gays are going to 'hell.' I've never seen a liberal claim to tolerate bigotry. You truly are a silly man. If you don't want to be called names, stop saying stupid things.
dearleader,
You probably won't believe me, but its actually painfully sad, the negative view I have of liberals now. On a point by point basis, I agree with Obama on a lot more than I do with McCain, I agree with more of the Democratic platform than I do with the Republican platform, a lot more. But, I can no longer stand the politically correct, sanctimoneous attitude of most liberals. I find it extremely hypocritical and actually quite scary. The far left is exactly the same and just as dangerous as the far right. They are equally guilty of ignoring inconvenient facts that don't square with their views and equally guilty of making exceptions for their own pet projects and ideals.
I'm pro choice, pro environment, think drugs and prostitution should be legalized and despise George Bush, but still, there is no room for me in the Democratic Party because I also despise identity politics, affirmative action and the belief that the federal government can solve all problems by taxing 'the rich' and redistributing their income.
This country is doomed. Obama can't save it, McCain won't save it. We are too divided and too selfish to come together and save ourselves.
You are expecting one group of people to be tolerant of another group of people who think gays are going to 'hell.
---------------------------------------
Um, yeah, exactly.
Tolerance means nothing if you only tolerate ideas that you agree with...the entire point of the First Amendment is to allow for all viewpoints, even those that the majority finds offensive, otherwise it has no meaning.
If you don't fight just as hard for the right of an American to say he thinks gays are going to hell as to say that George Bush is a war criminal, then you are nothing but a hypocrite.
Being "tolerant" doesn't mean you have to be tolerant of hateful ideas. How can you possibly be serious? The First fucking Amendment has nothing to do with any of this. I'm not outlawing homophobes, but I am going to talk about how silly they are and look down on them. All opinions are not created equal. You've really topped yourself with this last post. You are fucking dumb. And it has nothing to do with WHAT you belive.
"you are fucking dumb"
Nice retort.
The amazing tolerance of liberals never disappoints!
Clever how you don't respond to the point of post. Not surprising. At least stop posting as "Libertarian." You are certainly not fooling anyone. Seriously.
Libertarian:
I find it interesting that you think the Democratic party is responsible for the "identity politics" you despise. "Christian Conservatives" sure sounds like an identity badge, as does "the white working class" and "small town values". These are the labels that Republicans throw around all the time to remind people that, if you identify with these labels, well then you're a Republican!
And let's not forget the most important identity badge distributed by the Republicans: "elitist".
If you can't see the measure of truth in this, than you are the one who is not being upfront and honest.
Libertarian writes: "You probably won't believe me, but its actually painfully sad, the negative view I have of liberals now. On a point by point basis, I agree with Obama on a lot more than I do with McCain, I agree with more of the Democratic platform than I do with the Republican platform, a lot more. But, I can no longer stand the politically correct, sanctimoneous attitude of most liberals. I find it extremely hypocritical and actually quite scary."
Politically correct? You're the one who was lecturing me about how I shouldn't be calling people dummies or hicks. What about YOUR political correctness reflexes, chuckles?
Like all of your other Bizarro World lectures, you have it backwards.
Wow. Either she wasn't prepped for the interview very well, they did some really evil editing to make her look bad, or she really didn't know what the hell she was talking about.
This is all consistent with the idea that she was a last-minute choice, made for whatever oddball reason. There is a non-negligible probability that, sometime in the next few years, this woman is going to be president. I am having a hard time imagining that she won't be a 100% captive to her advisors, without the background or depth of understanding or experience to make more intelligent use of their expertise without being led around by them. Why on Earth did he choose her?
Libertarian -
I agree that people shouldn't mock Palin for being from small-town Alaska or focus on the cultural issues. That's the main things that's gotten her popularity with middle America.
My problem is not where she's from, it's that she simply does not know what she's talking about in this interview. I could say more on the situation in Afghanistan, the merits of "spreading democracy", or the economic crisis than she did, and probably say it more coherently - and I'm less than half her age.
I don't expect a president or VP to have gone to the Ivy League. I expect them to have a handle on the issues they'll be dealing with, and Palin doesn't. And I think there's definitely some truth to the idea that McCain's camp has fed her talking points and told her to regurgitate them and not go off message. Which is a pity - if she's a real maverick why not let her be one?
For example, they're depriving her of her #1 positive point by not discussing her gas tax: I guarantee that 99% of Americans would approve of her taking some money from the oil companies and giving it directly to regular people. But of course 'all taxes are evil' is the Republican 'brand' and "you can't dilute the brand".
The problem with Libertarian's position: it's not good enough to say, after the past eight years, that the VP's duties beyond those stipulated in the constitution (chair Senate; keep breathing) are only what the president determine them to be.
The GOP wants her to take over from Cheney. As in, stovepiped intel, man-sized safe, fourth branch of government Cheney.
As a successor to Cheney, Palin is risible. She has Cheney's attitude towards governmental secrecy and the power of oversight (i.e. fuck 'em) without the obvious experience and capability that I grudgingly attribute to that evil man.
Liberals, progressives and Democrats claim to be the big tent party of inclusion and tolerance for all views and cultures....
Liberals don't tolerate bigots. Boo fucking hoo. Is that intolerant of us? Boo fucking hoo again.
The leftist smear campaign against Sarah Palin. They are too paranoid and they would do every dirty things to get a friend of the terrorist Bii Ayers to get elected.
The mainstream media cannot be trusted, they lie and they are bad.
The leftist character of assassination against Sarah is the cheapest shot they can get. What Katie Curic did interview Sarah was just tried to smear a good Gov. of Alaska.
Come on who is Obama? Where is his terrorist friend Bill Ayers?
McCain/Palin/08
Beatrice types: "What Katie Curic did interview Sarah was just tried to smear a good Gov. of Alaska."
Ah, the boundless eloquence of the common conservative!
This is the base they keep talking about.
Ye gods.
OK ; she stuck her finger in her mouth and licked it.
“I’m just going to ask you one more time – not to belabor the point.” A.) Belabor: argue or elaborate (a subject) in excessive detail: belabor the obvious. B.) Point: an argument or idea put forward by a person in discussion: he made the point that economic regulation involves controls on pricing. Was Katie Couric arguing a point, or was she asking a question? Beyond the two most recent examples of John McCain’s record, was Katie eliciting information in excessive detail, or just butchering syntax? Ms. Couric did ask for a laundry list, and Ms. Palin offered to oblige. What’s the proper response? You’re right Katie, John is an obvious fake and I’m totally clueless. D’oh! Sorry for wasting your time, but I thought you’d ask me to recite the Bush Doctrine while standing on my head. It’s moose season. Come-on up to the cabin; you can see the Kremlin from the rooftop. I’ve got two wonderful new moose hats, one for both you and Charlie Gibson: http://theseedsof9-11.com
Have you ever been involved with any negotiations, for example, with the Russians? –Katie Couric
Beatrice: So sorry that English isn't your first - or even third -- language. Maybe you can pick up a remedial class at your local kindergarten?