"I can see Russia from my house!"
Monday, June 13, 2011
15 comments:
Your First Amendment right to free speech is a privilege and comes with a measure of responsibility. You have the right to exercise that responsibility here but we reserve the right to inform you when you've used that right irresponsibly.
We are benevolent dictators in this regard. Enjoy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Tina Fey said it in an impersonation of Sarah Palin on Saturday Night Live.
ReplyDeleteSarah Palin said in an ABC Interview with Charlie Gibson:
"GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, 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. We will not repeat a Cold War. We must have good relationship with our allies, pressuring, also, helping us to remind Russia that it's in their benefit, also, a mutually beneficial relationship for us all to be getting along. "
And yet I'm confronted seemingly daily, even from members of my own family, with this quote as proof that Sarah Palin is an idiot.
ReplyDeleteThis was too easy. Ben's smart enough to look at the statement and say, 'This has got to be a trick question.'
We tend to question each others ability to think; daily measuring their 'tool' quotient, etc., but Ben's correct response notwithstanding I come across folk all the time who believe Palin actually said this... my entire family, friends from high school I respect, people to whom I accredit a fair measure of intelligence(before they utter this quote as proof)... all guilty of believing what they hear without bothering to find out for themselves the truth. This tendency is plainly evident on both sides of the political fence.
It has been my experience that most folk will only question 'the truth' told them when that so-called 'truth' attacks previously held beliefs and perceptions of people and issues they hold dear.
The NYTs believed there had to be something incriminating in all those Palin emails so they spent time and money to get them all released to their scrutinizing care. What they got for all their time, money, and effort was a clear portrait of an honest conscientious leader-- a genuinely morals driven leader at that... a very rare occurrence in politics these days --who worked hard to give the best she could to her state. On top of this, clear evidence of being a loving wife and mother.
One other portrait the NYTs has managed to paint, is the clear depiction of their abject and irrational hatred of Mrs. Palin. They have proven to America that they care nothing for truth, but rather, they care for their version of the truth (How many who work at the NYTs, I wonder, believe Sarah actually said she could see Russia from her house?) A version that would have been validated... had they only found something less 'vanilla' in all those emails.
Thank you New York Times for telling America the truth... for once.
What the New York Times has managed to do is ENHANCE Palin's reputation.
ReplyDeleteThat has got to gall them something fierce. And that thought alone puts a smile on my face.
You'd think the Liberals would be embarrassed by the fact that there was nothing incriminating in those 24,199 e-mails, but alas, Liberals cannot be embarrassed. They lack the gene to blush.
ReplyDeleteSad, but true
ReplyDeleteI gave you the correct quote but refrained from commentary, because I wanted to give you a chance to express your obvious viewpoint. You see the original quote in context and see an "honest conscientious leader-- a genuinely morals driven leader at that... a very rare occurrence in politics these days --who worked hard to give the best she could to her state." I see that quote and think, "My God, how was this woman chosen as a Vice Presidential candidate!"
ReplyDeleteThe answers she gave were the simplistic, small town, Pollyana pablum you would get from an uninterested sorority girl. She just does not see complexities, and that is something a President and Vice President must be able to perceive.
Foreign policy is all about multiple viewpoints, of both our national interests and the national interests of our allies and opponents. How does someone with a simple worldview negotiate between Palestine and Israel and not piss off the rest of the arab world. How do you deal with China our largest creditor, and both greatest importer of American goods, and greatest exporter of goods to America and at the same time with a repressive government? Europe, with individual countries that are our allies, but also a union whose economic health we depend upon. These are complex situations. Not amenable to simple solutions. Sarah Palin strikes me as a well meaning woman, without a drive for detail and understanding complexity. She would make a poor President and should not have been considered as a Vice Presidential candidate.
----------------------------------------
On a separate note I want to say that it is the responsibility of journalists to make sure that the faces and facts politicians present to the public are the same as in private. Our own local anchor when she was hired filed more than 80 FOIA requests with our local officials, sheriffs, jails, county commissions, etc. Not because she was looking for dirt, but because it was her job as a journalist. Remember the governors bingo ethics reports? Most of that info came from FOIA requests. And don't you think that Riley's supporters see Mrs. Zwick the same way you see the NYT?
I see Bent buys the Liberal fallacy that Sarah Palin is dumb. For all his bluster, Bent is just as stupid as all those other Liberals who think because they identify themselves as "progressive", they have some knowledge that the rest of us don't.
ReplyDeleteI suppose Bent, with his superior brain power, can explain this?
For Bent, and Jim, and all you other intellectually superior Liberals, allow me to interpret:
This article says that Sarah Palin writes (on her Blackberry, no less) at a higher intellectual level than those who AOL hired to analyze her.
So, now, Libs, Who's the real dummies?
"The answers she gave were the simplistic, small town, Pollyana pablum you would get from an uninterested sorority girl. She just does not see complexities."
ReplyDeleteThis is your own "obvious viewpoint."
When I wrote the 'conscientious leader...' portion of my remarks, I was speaking of the contents of all the emails the NYTs wasted time and money on. Your remarks are based on your impression of her from the Gibson interview (among other sources). I think you're wrong, but there it is... yet another impasse. You think she's an idiot, I don't. I give her credit, you don't. I think Obama's naivete and fecklessness only demonstrate how abecedarian he truly is... to this nation's detriment! Obama has failed at near everything to which he's applied his inexperience and ideology. Joe Biden? He's been wrong on everything. Everything. And you and the Left want to call Palin's answers to questions 'simplistic' and laden with 'Pollyanna pablum'? Why? Because Barack can read a teleprompter? What about when he's not in front of a prompter? Does he still sound suave and sophisticate? Without a prompter, Sarah Palin can deliver effective, comprehensible sentences and fully formed ideas. Obama cannot. Obama's crutch is that he can't cohesively present an argument without a teleprompter. Sarah Palin is not so handicapped.
Furthermore, your list of foreign policy requirements were wholly lost on Obama from day one. The only thing that gave him an electable edge was Biden, despite the fact that Biden's qualifications have been grossly oversold; he's been consistently wrong on everything.
Sarah Palin didn't have a firm enough grasp on Foreign Policy? Neither did Obama. But McCain had and continues to have a far greater grasp on Foreign Policy that Biden or Obama... combined. Since when does a VP's qualifications to carry a novice president outweigh the ability of a highly qualified and experienced foreign policy president's ability to carry a novice VP?
Now that the historic elation of the last election has worn off, perhaps we can elect a man who can actually govern the nation toward a brighter, more American future.
Impasse.
"It is the responsibility of journalists to make sure that the faces and facts politicians present to the public are the same as in private."
ReplyDeleteIt's a lovely sentiment Ben, but really? Journalists FAILED to do that very thing during the last presidential election. Had they done so, Barack Obama would not have won the democratic nomination. It would have been a race between Hillary Clinton and John McCain. Hillary might very well have won, but at under Hillary this nation would not be in as sad a shape as it is.
If was experience you and the Left were looking for then you failed miserably.
Some notable quotes from last election:
"When's the last time we elected a president based on one year of service in the senate before he started running?"
–Bill Clinton
"When that phone rings, whether it's 3pm or 3am, in the white house, there is no time for speeches or on-the-job training."
–Hillary Clinton
"I think he can be ready, but right now I don't believe he is, the presidency is not something that lends itself to on-the-job training."
–Joe Biden
Asked in a second interview days later…
"I stand by my statement."
–Joe Biden
"Senator McCain will bring a lifetime of experience. I will bring a lifetime of experience. And senator Obama will bring a speech that he gave in 2002."
–Hillary Clinton
And the piece de resistance...
"I am a believer in knowing what you're doing when you apply for a job. And I think that if I were to seriously consider running on the national ticket I would essentially have to start now, before having served a day in the senate. Now there are some people that might be comfortable doing that, but I'm not one of them."
–Barack Obama
However historic the last election for race in America, it has also turned out to be an historic failure.
From the above linked article...
ReplyDelete"The image of Palin as an imbecile is one created by the left/media in order to bring down the popularity of someone they consider a real threat. The fact that they’ve largely succeeded in harming Palin’s image with the public only proves how good they are at the politics of personal destruction. But as usual, left wing conventional wisdom has little to do with reality."
It also proves just how imbecilic are those who believe what the Left/Media has told them of Palin.
ReplyDeleteI think if Charlie Gibson asked Sarah Palin today about our relationship to Russia and former Soviet block countries you'd get the same simplistic answer. At the time of her nomination and still today I just don't get the sense that she is interested in discover the complexities of situations. I have never thought her dumb. When she was nominated I thought her unknowledgeable about many of the things a possible president should know. Today I think she is unwilling to work to learn the things a president needs to know. She is a normal average American. We need someone great to be president.
ReplyDelete"Since when does a VP's qualifications to carry a novice president outweigh the ability of a highly qualified and experienced foreign policy president's ability to carry a novice VP?"
Since the VP nomination is the first public staffing decision a presidential nominee makes. And when the presidential nominee is an octogenarian then the VP candidate had better be ready to assume leadership on day one. Sarah Palin wasn't nominated for her experience or leadership, John McCain chose her for purely demographic reasons placing his campaign to win the election of his duty as a possible American president.
even now Sarah Palin could be delivering speeches on Jobs, the economy, immigration or the deficit. But instead she is following the path of celebrity. Would you elect Paris Hilton, or someone from Big Brother? What qualities would make Sarah Palin a good president?
I've yet to find a liberal who can explain their attitude towards Palin. Do they just have hatred in their hearts for her or are they afraid of her? I think the answer is: both.
ReplyDeleteBen, in answer to your last question... at the very least the same qualities that made Barack Obama a "good" president.
ReplyDeleteAnd for the record, Sarah Palin is delivering speeches on jobs, the economy, etc. You're just not paying attention.
@Edwin... I agree with your answer.
"But McCain had and continues to have a far greater grasp on Foreign Policy that Biden or Obama"
ReplyDeleteBomb Iran?
"Do they just have hatred in their hearts for her or are they afraid of her? I think the answer is: both."
Neither, actually. The only one who hates Palin is her former brother-in-law. And with 60% unfavorable, I doubt there is anything for liberals to fear. I'd say most liberals find her amusing, and the fact that anybody takes her seriously weird.
"And for the record, Sarah Palin is delivering speeches on jobs, the economy, etc."
She may be giving speeches with the words "jobs" and "economy" in them, but I'd love to have you link to any that provide a feasible policy to address either.