The trashing of Sarah Palin

[Woody]

I just love seeing ANY interview with Sarah in it.

[carolaa]

Originally Posted By: Nan

The impression out there is that Sarah Palin is not informed about those things she should know before she considers public office.

And that is not by any type of accident. The opposition decided to paint her that way and defending her doesn't bring in the ratings so the media had no incentive to do so. Time is what will justify or condemn her. If she comes back in for or eight years we will see her in her own light and not under the shadow of others.

The opposition was only taking advantage of the obvious. Not saying she doesn't have potential, but I don't think anyone can honestly say she wasn't shockingly ignorant about world affairs.

[carolaa]

I don't read magazines, and am the founder of a successful roofing company for 24.5 years. Am I excluded from the realm of profesionalism somehow..? Your analogy has a fundamental incoherence - elevating as it does cursory academics over real experience.

Whether you read magazines or not, I'm sure you find a way to keep up on the latest information in your field.

[carolaa]

I just love seeing ANY interview with Sarah in it.

Yeah, she's sure purty, ain't she?

[Woody]

No. It's the Palin Doctrine that I love to hear.

[jasd]

>>oops...<<

Indeed! ...talk about taking things for granted! Upon further investigation, I’ve discovered that North America includes 23 countries and dozens of islands and territories.

I guess I have to rethink Mexico vis-à-vis ‘North America’ – as well, perhaps, temper my chauvinism - just a bit. [/oops]

Kakified.

Thanks, for the heads-up.

[Neil D]

And, lest we forget, it's the *Republicans* who are actively trashing Palin at the moment. Most Democrats are just trying to forget her.

OOOOh mmmy gooodness.....Proof, I am a republican....

[jasd]

>>I know the names of all of the Russian tzars... and Palin does not. Let it be a great comparative example of her inferior intellect. Ahahahahah<<

It’s about the living, ain it? Let the dead bury the dead.

>>The impression out there is that Sarah Palin is not informed about those things she should know before she considers public office.<<

The Supreme Court Justices have their law clerks. Senators and Congress People have their staffers. Etc. It is understood as well as accepted that the VP serves at the pleasure of the President. The canard re Palin vs the ‘proverbial heartbeat’ simply played to the biases of those predisposed. Further, it is understood as well as accepted that the best and the brightest will amply serve the POTUS in their separate fields of expertise. It has always been so and will continue to be so. The fact that this President or that one was weak in certain areas of expertise has been, forever, moot.

Speaking of which, “I’ve now been in 57 states? I think one left to go. Alaska and Hawaii, I was not allowed to go to even though I really wanted to visit, ...” -Wizard of Smart

60 States!? SIXTY!?

Theodor Herzl, recognizing the influence of the Press, encouraged monopoly of World Media. Over a hundred years ago he, the seminal Zionist from Budapest by way of Vienna, foresaw the determining effect a controlled press might have upon peoples.

Recent events validated his belief.

>>I don't read magazines,<<

Speaking of which, Newsweek portrayed Obama on its cover with soft lense and a backlite acting as a halo. Its cover of Palin was a close-up allowing only a quarter facial portrait – every pore visible, dirt PhotoShopped in the crease of a smile and facial hairs on her nose.

Good grief. Who would admit to reading such crud?

I wouldn’t admit to reading ‘national’ magazines attempting to mindf me.

>>Look, it's fairly simple: can you think of any other reason why the campaign refused to allow her to confront the press, except that it felt she was not prepared?<<

I found that she was more accessible than was Biden.

>>Whatever you want to say about Obama and experience/preparation, he was accessible to the press and talking to the press, and doing so credibly.<<

Obama, was a presidential candidate with between approx $4-6 hundred million of internet monies; $200,000,000 of it received from sources unknown – doing as he and his handlers saw fit. Palin, was McCains’s second on the ticket – in his back pocket, as it were. He was the Big Kahuna – making the decisions.

Hopefully, she’ll head her own ticket in the near future.

>>...and the press is the public's only means of deciding whether a candidate deserves the position.<<

Oh, puhleeeze...

>>Most Democrats are just trying to forget her.<<

Which do not, saying nothing of their character, include some of the list – right here on CA.

>>...shockingly ignorant about world affairs.<<

Yeah, like the Wizard of Smart’s requiring a “Get me Creds Tour”?

[Dr. Shane]

she was not able to answer a simple question about how she finds out about the world.

[Dr. Shane]

And, lest we forget, it's the *Republicans* who are actively trashing Palin at the moment. Most Democrats are just trying to forget her.

The first point is partially correct. Moderate Republicans are trashing her in order to shift the blame away from themselves. Bare in mind there is a fight for the future of the Republican party. The moderates do not want anyone to think their candidate, McCain, lost because he was a moderate. Thus they want to blame the conservative on the ticket.

The second part is simply wrong. Democrats are not trying to forget her. There are repeating the unsubstantiated gossip the moderate Republicans are spreading.

[Neil D]

To quote a person on C/A-

"I am not a top. Do not try to spin me..."

Quote:

As I have watched the clip, it seems like she was trying to avoid answering the question more than that she was stumped and unable to answer it.

Absolute rubbish... I know when a junior grade politician wonders in their replies that they are searching for something that they can reply to. Most of the time, even senior politicians, use this tactic to rephrase the question so that they can give the pat answers to calm or manipulate the public. And, in my judgement of her answers, she was POOR at it.

Quote:

The first point is partially correct. Moderate Republicans are trashing her in order to shift the blame away from themselves. Bare in mind there is a fight for the future of the Republican party. The moderates do not want anyone to think their candidate, McCain, lost because he was a moderate. Thus they want to blame the conservative on the ticket.

Or it can actually be that McCAin took "a risk" [remember those headlines?] and he lost because of it. McCain needed a woman, to win over the Hillary crowd. McCain needed a conservative to shore up his conservative base. McCain also needed someone who would not clash with his handling of the campaign.[in other words, a somewhat docile ingnoramus]. Palin fit the bill, with one exception. Like most politicans, she wanted the spotlight. And her lack of national politics was appauling and it resulted in some sqabbling in the back war room,

[jasd]

I’ve been exposed, gratis the CA forum,

to the .Org’s ‘inspired’ belief that the Remnant were/are not to engage in competitive activities.

These past few weeks have verified to my satisfaction – the absolutely nonsensical and disastrous results of such a belief. There is within the community of competition-averse ‘Remnant’ those who’ve not learned the lessons competitive (namely, sports) activities on all levels attempt to instill in those who participate and abide by its rules – that is,

the concept of discipline and fair play, and the development of an acquired sense of good grace.

The incessant logorrhea forever septically staining these pages discussing the woman candidate for the office of VP – moreover, the losing candidate for that office – is distasteful to the point of eliciting contempt for the character of its display.

Shame, on the .org that excises even the most reduced social decency from its adherents – or was it ever instilled or inherent to begin with?

Sheesh, join a Little League, folks – and learn what our smallest tykes learn; that is, the basic aspects of the culturally acceptable, such as, behavioural etiquette or simple graciousness. It is way past time to

retire some of ‘the questionable’ currently embraced as having parity with Writ.

...my observation and my considered opinion,

jasd

[Dr. Shane]

Originally Posted By: shane

it seems like she was trying to avoid answering the question...

Absolute rubbish...

[Bravus]

Or, alternative interpretation (since reading the polls is roughly as precise as reading tea leaves) McCain surged in the polls when he introduced Palin, then crashed as people got to know her. The graph for her personal approval tends to support that view... and the financial crisis hardly just began in those few weeks: my no non-existent investment portfolio can attest that it's been going on since August 2007.

[Dr. Shane]

Oh, sorry. I guess people got to know her when Freddie and Fanny needed to get bailed out. How could I have missed that?

[Bravus]

Play nice.

[Dr. Shane]

McCain moved ahead in the polls starting September 1 and went until September 11. They were tied for about a week after that. Starting September 21 Obama took a solid lead and held it until the election.

McCain announced Palin as VP pick Augest 29. The Republican Convention started September 1. The government seized control of Fannie and Freddie on September 7. Bush sent the $700 billion bail-out package to Congress on September 20.

I am not a top. I don't spin.

[Bravus]

I know, but have a look at Palin's own approval ratings in that period:

The fact that incidents occur at the same time is not proof of causality.

So yes, I'm sure the economic crisis and his perceived similarity to Bush was a factor. But it's also indubitably the case that Palin was perceived as a boon at the beginning - women! conservatives! - and came to be seen by many voters as a liability as time went on. And it's hard to blame the drop in Palin's approval, which was much more precipitate than that in McCain's, on the economic crisis.

[Dr. Shane]

The financial crisis impacted Palin's favorabilty just like it did McCain's. That is all that graph shows. Palin's disastrous interview with Couric was on September 25 and after that is when her favorabilty drastically fell. But Obama was already ahead in the polls at that time so Palin couldn't have caused Obama's lead.

Palin delivered the conservative vote for McCain which is what she was brought on the ticket to do. Without Palin, or a like-minded conservative, the conservative base would have sat the election out at the direction of some pretty influential people like Limbaugh, Coulter and Dobson. McCain hoped that the pick of a female would peel off 5% - 10% of Hillary's voters. But those Hillary voters were Democrats and when the financial crisis hit the novelty of female VP became less attractive than a Democrat in the White House.

I think trying to blame Palin for McCain's loss is very far fetched. Obama effectively tied McCain to Bush. Bush has one of the lowest approval ratings, if not the lowest, of an American President. Everyone knew from the beginning that the White House was the Democrat's to lose. All the Democrat nominee had to do was avoid any big mistakes and he or she was going to win. Obama ran a good campaign and won the prize. The moderate Republicans are blaming Palin because they fear her coming back in four or eight years and taking control of the GOP. Their blame game isn't going to work. If Palin wants to come back, she will be well prepared and all this blame going around now will be forgotten by everyone except news junkies like some of us here.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

Palin's disastrous interview with Couric was on September 25 and after that is when her favorabilty drastically fell. But Obama was already ahead in the polls at that time so Palin couldn't have caused Obama's lead.

In fact, if you look at Palin's rating from September 21 to the 24 they are going up. That is the same time that Obama started to pull away from McCain in the polls and solidify his lead. One obviously wasn't causing the other.

[Bravus]

I agree, Palin doesn't explain all of McCain's loss, not by a long shot. There are a number of factors, including McCain's campaign, his own age, character and temperament, the financial crisis, the difficulty of a Republican winning after Bush and a heap more. All I'm claiming is that Palin was one more electoral liability, rather than the asset some here seem to be claiming. And her own figures show that to be the case.

[Dr. Shane]

The case can be made that Governor Bobby Jindal would have helped McCain more. He would have delivered the base as Palin did. But again, while Palin didn't help McCain get any of the moderate votes, I don't think Jindal would have either. The moderate Republicans are very fearful of anyone like Palin or Jindal getting the nomination in four years and steering the party back to the Reagan conservatives. That is what all this present criticism of Palin is about.

[Neil D]

Originally Posted By: Neil D

Absolute rubbish...

OK' date=' she is so stupid she can't even remember the name of her hometown paper. Sorry, I don't know why I didn't realize that before.[/quote']

I never said that she was that stupid. Don't put words in my mouth that were never intended. I said that intellectually, she didn't know current politics, when questions were not according to the Republican prompter. [remember the deer in the headlights look during "thinking/hard" questions?] I said that she floundered when asked questions that tested her knowledge of current political policies. I said she didn't know political history, nor geography. All of these things were documented. She even got punked.

I also said that she played politics to her strength. Unfortunately, volunteering her daughter to babysit just didn't set well with the people.

Originally Posted By: Shane

Quote:

McCAin took "a risk" and he lost because of it.

I think George W. Bush had more to do with McCain losing than Governor Palin did. McCain surged ahead in the polls after Palin was added to the ticket and lost that lead when the financial crisis broke. Unless I am missing something, I don't think Palin was responsible for the financial crisis.

I never said that Palin was the SOLE reason McCain lost. I said that she was a factor...a part of the problem. I agree that Bush had more to do with McCain losing than Palin did. I agree that the finacial problem of the country woke people up to make some hard decisions. But the SOLE reason for McCain loosing...don't play me, Shane...I maybe be stupid, but I ain't that stupid.

Quote:

Oh, sorry. I guess people got to know her when Freddie and Fanny needed to get bailed out. How could I have missed that?

Oh, Shane, people can look at two different subjects that involve evaluating a president. F and F were the wake up call...People then looked harder at McCain. And while Palin got the recommendation from the NOW Leadership, women everwhere were looking much harder at her qualities than they were. The View was airing much of the problems and it has a wide range of political representatives. I tend to think that they reflect the minds of women in this country and 3 out of the 4 hosts didn't like her. Only the die hard conservative republican on there was defending her. They didn't especially like her.

Admit it, Shane. The people of this country don't like CONSERVATIVE RELIGIOUS politicans. Those extreme people scare us, and they now have proof of what happens in 8 years with a ubber conservative in the office.

Quote:

I am not a top. I don't spin.

Not intending to spin you. Just attempting to get you to see reason...

[phkrause]

I have to agree with you shane. Just like 8 years ago people wanted a change from the Clinton white house, so they voted in Bush instead of Gore. Now I think people had enough of Bush so they voted for Obama, and that's not to say that Obama wasn't the better candidate. I just think people were looking for change.

pk

[Tom Wetmore]

And, lest we forget, it's the *Republicans* who are actively trashing Palin at the moment. Most Democrats are just trying to forget her.

Forget who? ... Palin? Who's she?

:smilewink:

Palin is so, like, yesterday...