November 13, 2009

Sarah Palin is dumb.

By her own words, Sarah Palin is dumb. Here's the excerpt of pages 255-257 of "Going Rogue: An American Life":
By the third week in September, a “Free Sarah” campaign was under way and the press at large was growing increasingly critical of the McCain camp’s decision to keep me, my family and friends back home, and my governor’s staff all bottled up. Meanwhile, the question of which news outlet would land the first interview was a big deal, as it always is with a major party candidate.

From the beginning, Nicolle [Wallace] pushed for Katie Couric and the CBS Evening News. The campaign’s general strategy involved coming out with a network anchor, someone they felt had treated John well on the trail thus far. My suggestion was that we be consistent with that strategy and start talking to outlets like FOX and the Wall Street Journal. I really didn’t have a say in which press I was going to talk to, but for some reason Nicolle seemed compelled to get me on the Katie bandwagon.
Why didn't you have a say? There's that "really" hedging: You didn't really have a say. You're pleading passivity and impotence but you want us to think you have what it takes to be President of the United States?
“Katie really likes you,” she said to me one day. “she’s a working mom and admires you as a working mom. She has teenage daughter like you. She just relates to you,” Nicolle said. “believe me, I know her very well. I’ve worked with her.” 
It is inane to be swayed by this blather. Most of Palin's opponents would probably say the same sort of thing — or at least would have said the same thing at the time, back before any negative stories about her family had appeared. Isn't it lovely that Sarah Palin has a nice husband and kids and she has a great job too?

Women have been patted on the head like that for years. It does not express more profound respect. Indeed, it often betrays disrespect under the surface. If — back when my sons were children — someone had told me that he was impressed by my work as a law professor because I was a "working mom," I would have felt insulted. Perhaps he only meant well, but I would make a mental note to be suspicious of him. The famous Samuel Johnson quote would spring to mind: "Sir, a woman's preaching is like a dog's walking on his hind legs. It is not done well; but you are surprised to find it done at all."

If Sarah Palin did not see the limited value of Nicolle Wallace's comment about Katie Couric, then she is too pollyannaish and unsophisticated to be trusted with presidential power. Couric is a pussycat compared to the world leaders who will smile and exude pleasantries and then stab you in the back.
Nicolle had left her gig at CBS just a few months earlier to hook up with the McCain campaign. I had to trust her experience, as she had dealt with national politics more than I had.
Had to trust? Because of your limited experience? Who else would you trust? Wallace was pushing for her own former employer, CBS! Her recommendation of Couric had an element of self-interest and should have been discounted.
But something always struck me as peculiar about the way she recalled her days in the White House, when she was speaking on behalf of President George W. Bush. She didn't have much to say that was positive about her former boss or the job in general. Whenever I wanted to give a shout-out to the White House’s homeland security efforts after 9/11, we were told we couldn’t do it. I didn’t know if that was Nicolle’s call.
Why didn't you know? Why did you trust this person? Why do you now think it makes you look good to blame her for your traipse into the lioness's den?
Nicolle went on to explain that Katie really needed a career boost. “She just has such low self-esteem,” Nicolle said. She added that Katie was going through a tough time. “She just feels she can’t trust anybody.”
Katie has low self-esteem?! Bullshit! Anyone with the stuff to be President would have said bullshit. Or something like: Look, I'm running for Vice President. I can't be distracted by some TV diva's need for an emotional boost. Not unless I know it will translate into making me look great. But how would that work? Her boost is only likely to come if she makes me look terrible. Even if she has low self-esteem, #1, I don't care, it's hardly a pressing issue I need to be thinking about, and #2, that makes her more dangerous to me. She can't trust anybody? Well, I don't trust her. And Nicolle, how can you even present me with such an argument that is so specious on its face?
I was thinking, And this has to do with John McCain’s campaign how?
Nicolle said. “She wants you to like her.”
She wants me to like her or she wants America — especially the media elite — to like her? Come on, Nicolle, Katie Couric can't be that much of a sad sack. And if she is, I don't want to be seen with her.
Hearing all that, I almost started to feel sorry for her. Katie had tried to make a bold move from lively morning gal to serious anchor, but the new assignment wasn’t going very well.
You know who I feel sorry for? Kim Jong Il. I'm afraid he's lonely.
“You know what? We’ll schedule a segment with her,” Nicolle said. “If it doesn’t go well, if there’s no chemistry, we won’t do any others.”
Chemistry? What is this, a date — perhaps just a coffee, so that if you don't like her it will be over soon, and you won't need to see her again?
Meanwhile, the media blackout continued. It got so bad that a couple of times I had a friend in Anchorage track down phone numbers for me, and then I snuck in calls to folks like Rush Limbaugh, Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity and someone I thought was Larry Kudlow but turned out to be Neil Cavuto’s producer.
She had trouble getting phone numbers? She "snuck" around, relying on friends? Like it's a Nancy Drew caper. And did she not see the downside of allowing right-winger to draw her out? That wasn't fair to McCain. McCain's people locked her down? Did she think carefully about their reasons? Does she think carefully about anything? Why did she agree to be McCain's running mate? She won't take responsibility for her own difficulties.

Apparently, they were afraid you were not ready, and they were right, so why didn't you trust them or at least accept that you owed them control over the presidential campaign? You agreed to take the subordinate position, and you had to know that their reasons for picking you had to do with image and style. If you weren't prepared to do it their way, you should not have accepted the part. At the very least, you should not have been mystified about the way they were treating you. You should have been looking at the campaign strategy from every angle and building your sophistication, not just aching to burst free and expose yourself to the world — which, as you soon learned, did not go well.

It seems that Sarah Palin wasn't able or didn't want to bother to analyze whether she was ready to debut on the big media stage, and she wasn't large-minded enough to think beyond herself to what it would mean for the whole campaign. That is, she was dumb. She was too dumb to handle campaign responsibilities properly, so she was clearly too dumb to step into the role of President of the United States.

Could she build up her political intelligence? Might she have it now or by 2012? If these 2 pages of  "Going Rogue" are any evidence, she is displaying her weaknesses all over again, and she is still too dumb to be President. And, most scarily, she doesn't know how dumb she still is.

454 comments:

1 – 200 of 454   Newer›   Newest»
BJM said...

So based on two pages taken out of context she's done?

Weak tea, Althouse.

Robohobo said...

BJM - Weak tea only begins to cover it.

Hey, Ann, nice to see you out yourself as an insider wannabe. Can't wait to hang out with the kewl kidz inside the Ivy League?

OH, there you are! I forgot, a frakkin' lawyer.

Pastafarian said...

And Ronald Reagan was "dumb as a stump", according to Christopher Hitchens; and by most accounts, Jimmy Carter was very intelligent -- he had a degree in nuclear engineering.

And yet Reagan was a great president; and Jimmie, not so much.

Obama is quite intelligent -- just smart enough to be dangerous. I'll take the stupid person with good judgement every time, over the intelligent person intent on dismantling the country and remaking it according to hard-left ideology. We're hiring a president here, not a Jeopardy contestant.

Darcy said...

LOL.

How about this?: "Obama is wise!" Try that one on. Oh...we are.

She was naive, I think. That's a lot different than being dumb. Or destructively unwise (see our current administration).

SteveR said...

I think you are right Darcy.

Ann Althouse said...

1. The question of whether Obama is as smart as he and others try to make him seem is a different one, addressed in many other posts on this blog. I have not bought into the Obama is soooo smart myth, and it will be dull to comment on this post as if I have. Don't be dull.

2. I have read 2 pages because that is all that has so far been made available. Let the publisher shoot me a digital file of the whole book right now and I'll start reading. But the book isn't out until the 17th, so to accuse me of taking this out of context is ridiculous. How did these 2 pages get out first and to Drudge? Someone took this out of context, but it wasn't me. Don't you think it was somebody trying to promote the book, such as the publisher or Palin's people? Do you think her enemies selected this? I read what was given to me, and I'm saying it's embarrassing, all the more so because she/her people don't realize it's embarrassing.

shoutingthomas said...

Intellectualism appeals to you.

Intellectualism has just about nothing to do with being President. I know that you would like this to be the criteria voters focus on, but it isn't.

Intellectualism is your vanity.

Palin has some things to learn. She's busy learning them.

Politics is about self-interest. In today's victim society, politics is all about who's self-interest gets served. Palin represents the self-interest of a group of people nobody else wants to represent... white, hetero, family, religious, etc.

She will learn how to represent the self-interest of this group.

Intellectuals are dopes. In a high tech society, intellectuals are in demand for high ranking jobs. That's great, but this is not the province of politics.

Jessee Jackson and Al Sharpton are both succeeding as political shakedown artists for blacks. Intellectualism has nothing to do with these clowns.

Ronald Reagan was also constantly ridiculed for being stupid. He knew who he represented and who he wanted to defeat.

Nobody wants to represent my self interest. I'm a white, hetero, Christian man. Palin wants the job of representing my self-interest. McCain refused to represent me, instead cowering before Obama lest he be accused of being racist.

The dumb intellectuals who frequent this blow will now commence to debate their favorite vanity subject: their incredible intellectualism.

This is the problem.

Ann, intellectualism is the foundation of your trade. It is not the foundation of politics. Unconfuse yourself.

sonicfrog said...

Nicolle had left her gig at CBS just a few months earlier to hook up with the McCain campaign. I had to trust her experience, as she had dealt with national politics more than I had.

Yes. Sarah Palin actually admits some former network lackey has more national experience than she does. And this woman almost became the Vice President! WHere are Palins advisors? Or does Palin only listen to women who she identifies with?

Wow. Am I really glad I left the Republican party a few years ago. If Palin get the nom for 2012, this is going to be the most spectacular political train wreck in history,topping even the Obama administration.

Kirk Parker said...

I certainly agree with Althouse that it doesn't look good for Palin to be saying this now, after the fact.

But back when this was happening (in the initial days of the campaign), apparently it did not occur to Palin that she needed to watch out for enemies within her own camp.

Maybe that's just as damning, but it is a somewhat different question than is being asked here. Or maybe it's just a way to link this issue to the Ft Hood shooting... :-)

Ann Althouse said...

"She was naive, I think. That's a lot different than being dumb."

If you are naive and you go ahead and do things that you are not prepared to do, especially things you don't have to do and in front of the whole world, you are dumb.

Ann Althouse said...

Plus, she is dumb in this book, a year later, when she has had time to reflect and lots of people to help her present herself in writing. This text absolutely deserves dissection and unflinching analysis.

Ann Althouse said...

"apparently it did not occur to Palin that she needed to watch out for enemies within her own camp"

I want leaders who know the enemies can be inside the camp and who take them down before they do their damage.

(Cf. Fort Hood.)

AllenS said...

Sarah Palin is dumb

Your words, not hers.

kathleen said...

"Like it's a Nancy Drew caper."

meow! feel like piling on today, Ann, eh?

Obviously the media created the necessity for Palin's sneaking around, not Palin herself. Are you saying it would have been "less dumb" of Palin to just sit back and let herself be muzzled?

kathleen said...

"If you are naive and you go ahead and do things that you are not prepared to do, especially things you don't have to do and in front of the whole world, you are dumb."

You're talking about Obama here, right? Or maybe anyone who runs for president is "dumb"

Ann Althouse said...

@ shoutingthomas There is no way that my analysis is about failing to be an intellectual. I think intellectuals are stupid in many of the same ways that Sarah Palin is. I'm talking about *political intelligence*, a phrase that appears in the last paragraph of the post. You're attacking a straw man.

Freder Frederson said...

You really turn on people quickly, don't you Ann?

But better late than never--you are going to piss off a good portion of your fan base with this post though.

Don't worry Ann. I still love you! But if you had any hope of luring Simon back, I think this post has killed it.

It does make one wonder though. You were such a fan of Palin for so long. It makes me wonder if you are as smart as you think you are.

Mark said...

Not to put too fine a point on it, but my faith in your ability to sus out who would and wouldn't be fit to be President is somewhat undercut by your support for Obama.

The obvious retort is well, McCain would have been worse. I don't agree, but if I had I would have either voted third party or written in a name (which is actually what I would have done).

Maguro said...

Great post, Althouse. I don't want someone that trusting of the media anywhere close to the Presidency. Her blame-shifting and finger-pointing just reveals her own inadequacy.

edutcher said...

Have to agree with those who say read the whole thing. You are jumping to a lot of conclusions (an expert speaking here) without a whole lot of material to go on.

For the record, I've always thought - and said - Miss Sarah needed more experience. Two years as governor, even of a state where that post has some actual authority, is not enough for the Presidency - she should have gone the full two terms, if possible. I can appreciate the reasons why she resigned, although I'm inclined to go along with those (such as The Anchoress) who think we don't know the whole story (medical issues, etc.).

In any case, when (not if) we have a Republican President in 2012 (maybe sooner), give her a Cabinet post (God knows she's better qualified than Hillary) and let's see what she can do.

Darcy said...

The point is that you may be holding her to a different standard than the man you voted for as President.

Unless you're saying they are both dumb. In which case, I'd be sympathetic to that as far as experience/seasoning goes. But still would trust Palin far more than what we have now.

I don't think, in the long run, she'll be thought of as dumb. I think there will always be people who want to call her that, though.

I don't think a "dumb" person could be given credit for successfully pointing out the "death panels". She showed she was far smarter than Obama and the Obamacare pushers.

I'm just objecting to calling her "dumb". Dumb actions? Yes. Do we all do this at some point in our lives? I think so. I don't think it makes us dumb overall.

sonicfrog said...

Nicolle went on to explain that Katie really needed a career boost. “She just has such low self-esteem,” Nicolle said. She added that Katie was going through a tough time. “She just feels she can’t trust anybody.”

And, yet, through all that difficulty, Katie never quit! She had the courage to stay and ride out the hard times. It's called perseverance, a quality Palin seems to lack. Is Katie Couric more qualified to the Vice President than Palin.

PS. I'm just kidding on that last bit.

sonicfrog said...

I can already tell this is going to be one doosey of a thread!

Cedarford said...

Althouse!! How many times have people warned you to stop thinking like a man???

This is the sort of vacuous gossipy treacle that NORMAL women lap up on Oprah and the view and which really, really sells books.

And your post attracts the usual right wing worshippers of the Great Goddess who as usual, fall all overthemselves to say how The Goddess will learn them all elitist too smart people a thing or two, you betcha! Or like quitting the Governorship..see her as an absolute genius making brilliant tactical moves that show she can outwit any "furriner" or rival.

AllenS said...

What this brief example of what's in her book shows, is that the McCain campaign staff were not making good decisions. McCain all by himself lost the election moreso than Obama won it. In spite of the idiocy of choosing Biden.

traditionalguy said...

Then Sarah Palin Train Wreck is becoming a runaway train just because we need her force of popular appeal to win the election. If her opponent was a normal democrat like John Edwards, then her smarts at politics compared to his would be the issue. But we are at midnight and Obama's illusion of redistributing America's power and wealth to create a victorious new day is about to turn into the great pumpkin of Depression II. If it takes a "Dumb Woman" to win our country back, then we chose to win and suffer the consequences of having a president that is not a Gore Vidal intellectual.

Slow Joe said...

This is a good criticism.

But this is normal language for a politician. Palin is pretty obviously noting that she screwed up with this interview. She also notes that she was not in command of this campaign... John Mccain was.

YES, we do want good followers to be president, because good followers tend to understand how to be good leaders. I know that's not the way comic books tell it, but it's true.

Regardless, it's a good bash on her... I hope people read this book for themselves instead of trusting these little snippits.

Fact is, Althouse said she will stir the pot, as her goal. This is a good stirring, but it's not a holistic analysis. Palin's book tells a larger story, but most people will just read these types of snippy little accounts, obviously intended to find fault.

Althouse based her support of Obama on her attack on Mccain... that's kinda part of a pattern. It's EASY to find faults with people... we are human. Palin has faults. She also has positive qualities. If you focus only on the faults we've found, of course she's an easy target and we'll wind up with a very slippery politician who simply hides their true nature.

Anyway, not a bash on Althouse... just noting that this is not a good way to decide who isn't gonna be a good president. It's just stirring the pot again and again, which is how we got to Obama.

master cylinder said...

Sarah Palin should be a perfect fit for those who feel government is always bad and therefore should be drowned in that tub. Look at what you are saying in your defense of her-"yeah she's dumb!-we don't need smart!" She is smart enough to have attained status
in the entertainment/media world and so has Levi Johnson. She is not to be taken seriously. Seriously.

AJ Lynch said...

I saw snippets of Palin's interview with Oprah yesterday.

Palin did a lot of loud, nervous laughter which sounded dumb to me and I am a Palin fan.

former law student said...

I appreciate the professor scrutinizing Palin. Now I must defend her:

You're pleading passivity and impotence but you want us to think you have what it takes to be President of the United States?

Palin's narrative is humble hockey mom rides a rocket to stardom. She became freakin' governor of the largest state of the Union, for pete's sake. John McCain -- who oughtta know -- picked her to join him in the White House. Does she have what it takes to be President -- you betcha!

Her ego would not let her believe she was in any way incapable. She was the Anointed One, chosen by fate. The media would be cake: she had been on TV herself, in her youth. She had handled the media in Alaska for years. Who would expect any problems now?

Of course it was reasonable to trust the advice of your media advisor. Like the Governor herself, who would pick someone for the job who wasn't qualified in every way? If you can't trust your advisors, you might as well go home. These people had run campaigns before -- you have to put your trust in the professionals. Besides, as VP candidate she was largely just along for the ride. And the famously gaffe-prone Biden was hardly stiff competition.

Darcy said...

LOL, AJ.

Bart Hall (Kansas, USA) said...

Having lived in the sub-Arctic, I think Palin was a very good governor of Alaska, and she kicked some ass that desperately deserved it.

The unfortunate thing about Palin is that of all the Presidents and Vice Presidents -- as well as opposing candidates for those offices -- since 1988 she's probably the third most qualified to be President.

I'm not talking partisan politics here, but real executive experience and tangling with tough actions. Of the two dozen candidates for President and VP in the last 20 years, Dick Cheney was by far the most qualified.

Bush 41, with his CIA and ambassadorial experience would probably be #2. Bush 43, by comparison, was governor in a state where the governor has little real power, and Clinton was governor of a state that doesn't matter.

To identify Palin as one of the most qualified to be President is not to praise her so much as it is a condemnation of the poorly qualified people coughed up by both parties for the last 20 years.

It is quite depressingly reminiscent of the 1850s -- Taylor, Fillmore, Pierce, and Buchanan -- unqualified, dithering weaklings all. For all his ineptitude to date, Obama is as yet a long ways from being as dismal an occupant of the office as Buchanan.

Palin, unfortunately, is one of the best in a sorry litany.

Andrea said...

LOL. Althouse's response to the idea of someone complimenting her on being a "working mom" is typical of her generation. "How dare you attach my accomplishments to the fact that I have children! Male chauvinist oppressor!" I wonder how many hapless men she's left standing, puzzled once again that their efforts to be nice to a woman got them savaged. And distrusted!

Anyway, women of Palin's generation (mine) are less cynical about praise for their parental status because they grew up in a time when it wasn't automatically accepted that women become mothers. Having children is now a lifestyle choice (or a calling), and thus it is permissible to compliment someone on being a mother where once it would have been considered odd to praise a woman for doing what she had to do. (That includes working while being a mother, by the way -- women who had children and jobs were not at all unknown to previous generations, but no one would have thought to praise a woman for choosing to work while she had kids -- it was instead considered to be a necessity, or a misfortune, depending upon circumstances; and mothers who could stayed home because who wanted to work outside the home if they didn't have to? Jobs weren't always in cushy air-conditioned office buildings with soda machines, access to fun bistros for lunch, and available by a comfy car commute.)

sonicfrog said...

Anyway, not a bash on Althouse... just noting that this is not a good way to decide who isn't gonna be a good president. It's just stirring the pot again and again, which is how we got to Obama.

No, we got Obama because a majority of the People were sick of the Republican leadership. The Dems will almost certainly lose their majority in congress in 2010 and Presidency in 2012 for the same reason - people are already sick of the Democratic leadership.

We live in interesting times.

former law student said...

Could she build up her political intelligence?

She should have watched "Mean Girls" before going on Katie Couric. Being a beauty pageant contestant should have taught her that people are out to torpedo the successful, and that being cute is no free pass.

shoutingthomas said...

I'll bet Palin will learn to be as vicious and underhanded as a University of Wisconsin liberal by the time the next election rolls around.

The representative of my self interest (once again white, male, hetero, Christian) is going to emerge from one of those unfashionable places like Alaska.

Palin probably had never spent much time in the milieu of a place like Madison liberal circles. I'll bet she was surprised to discover that in those circles a majority of people think that having five kids is laughable and backward.

Ann, you've been around this moronic shit in a university town all your life. You assume that you will be surrounded by nihilists and assholes. Palin is probably accustomed to the Alaska version of asshole. The fag/fag hag version you're used to is quite a surprise when first encountered.

Palin is tough. She knows now just how vicious and evil the opposition can be. You already know this because you live in the middle of that steaming pile of shit. I've done the same thing for the past 40 years.

And, just to illustrate my point, 95% of the voters haven't got a clue what you mean by a "straw man." Erecting a "straw man" and setting about destroying him... hell, that's politics.

Now, back to the basics. Palin is willing to represent my self-interest. She's the only available presidential candidate who will. As far as I'm concerned, nothing else matters.

Go Sarah!

Paul said...

We're to trust the analytical acumen of someone who was hornswoggled by Obama? Really?

Sorry professor. Your credibility is shot. Many of us knew for certain that this creep was exactly what he has turned out to be. You couldn't figure it out, but it was obvious.

We also know that Palin has the smarts, but more importantly the values, character, and spine to be a great president.

Palin is admitting up front that she was too trusting and naive entering into the campaign. Does anyone still think she could be fooled in such a way again? Besides trusting your "allies" does not equal trusting your enemies. I don't think she ever would have been bamboozled by hostile foreign heads of state. Unlike President Prissypants. Who YOU voted for.

So spare us the Sarah Palin is too dumb to be president. How about Althouse is too dumb to vote?

Cedarford said...

edutcher - In any case, when (not if) we have a Republican President in 2012 (maybe sooner), give her a Cabinet post (God knows she's better qualified than Hillary) and let's see what she can do.

Just don't make it Secretary of State.

Palin's confirmation Hearing:

"If you become Secretary of State, Ms. Palin, will you ensure our long-neglected allies like Chile, Peru, and Uruguay may expect a visit?

"Africa is very important to me. I plan on visiting all those gosh darn good people in their good ol little countries there." (Wink. Wink)

"What are the prospects of a sort of Glastnoz with Iran."

"There ya go! They have a lot of sand, and if they give up there thar nukliar ambitions we can help them make glass bottles and all sorts of new things that new Freedom-Lovers!! the world over love!"

How about perestroika with N Korea?

"Pere-whatta?"

traditionalguy said...

Any history majors like to jump in here and explain what a non-intellectual and near dufuss we had in a former President named George that barely won a battle as a General until the French showed up. He was a poseur and married money and learned on the job the hard way his few military and political skills. But he was committed to his country's protection from enemies domestic and foreign. What a great new day in DC that would be to have a President like that once again. We happen to see that right stuff in the poor dumb soccer Mom Palin. And if she wins in a landslide, they cannot cheat with the 2% ballot fraud the the Demo's start with as theirs for a handicap.

Henry said...

"apparently it did not occur to Palin that she needed to watch out for enemies within her own camp"

She wasn't reading Peggy Noonan then. Noonan wrote a column way back then warning her about the very thing.

Funny to watch the Palinites throw their cloaks over the puddle.

Henry said...

Guys, when you compare Palin to Ronald Reagan or George Washington in embryo, you look like fools.

former law student said...

I think Reagan's political career would be a good model for Palin. At her age, Reagan was still hosting General Electric Theater, and still honing his oratorical skills. Reagan did not even get into politics until he was in his fifties. Getting on the lecture circuit, and perhaps moving to a more populous red state would serve Palin very well.

vbspurs said...

Sigh.

Well, I don't know about Ann, but the moment it comes out, I'll have it at 3 AM next Tuesday, downloaded on my Kindle.

I'll be reading this book with alacrity -- not to mention a fine-tooth comb so that ridiculous phrases like "Sarah Palin is dumb" based on two excerpts from a book I haven't read yet don't flow from my keyboard.

...still waiting for any blogger to post, "Barack Obama is dumb" based on skimming the book after reading he did drugs in his youth and was friends with a hatemongering minister.

Now that's dumb, but is he DUMB? No.

Cheers,
Victoria

Pastafarian said...

Palin is pro-business and anti-tax; she has a better understanding of the constitution (particularly the second amendment, but really the entire notion of what a constitution is) than many constitutional "scholars", including our president.

She wouldn't be trying to nationalize health care. She wouldn't be looking to pass cap-and-tax, or card check. She wouldn't be pushing to have terrorists at war with the US tried in civilian court. She wouldn't have wasted $700 billion to prevent 8% unemployment from reaching 9%, only to have it reach 10%.

She wouldn't have tried to put ACORN and Rahm Emmanuel in charge of the census. She wouldn't have killed missile defense or the stealth fighter. She wouldn't project weakness to our enemies and belligerence to our friends.

But she's dumb.

Because she agreed to an interview with Katie Couric, when it was suggested by a high-level experienced political operative within the McCain campaign, for whom Palin was merely second on the ticket. And because she isn't cynical enough to suspect political shenanigans from people within her own campaign.

OK.

This post tells me more about Althouse's judgement than it does Palin's.

Dark Eden said...

Sarah Palin should be a perfect fit for those who feel government is always bad and therefore should be drowned in that tub. Look at what you are saying in your defense of her-"yeah she's dumb!-we don't need smart!" She is smart enough to have attained status
in the entertainment/media world and so has Levi Johnson. She is not to be taken seriously. Seriously.
>>>

I think this more shows that you don't really understand Palin Supporters, or Republicans, all that much really, and what we mean when we complement her and criticize Obama and people of his type.

You call Palin and Bush dumb, and Obama, Kerry, etc smart. But this means something different to us. To us there's two different things: Intelligence and Education. Education represents the facts that have been drilled into your head and you can recite by rote. Intelligence represents problem solving, good judgement, and the ability to take the knowledge of your education and apply it in new and unexpected ways to the problem at hand.

Republicans tend to think Obama, Kerry, etc, the political establishment, tends to be very high on the Education and very low on the actual Intelligence. To us they represent a sort of faux aristocracy which preens on about their education, their breeding. They went to ivy league schools they were born and bred by their politician parents to be little politibots themselves, they never held real jobs, they never knew any 'normal' people and couldn't handle going to the grocery store and buying milk without an assistant to help them. But they can name you every African Ambassador to the US in the proper local inflection.

We also tend to think Bush and Palin and that sort tend to be perhaps low on Education, but pretty high on Intelligence. They don't know a lot of book learning (which we tend to not respect that much anyway) but they tend to make sound judgements when the time comes. We tend to go with Bush's much criticized description of the President being the Decider. You don't really need to be an expert in things, you have advisers who fill that role. Your job is to be able to make tough decisions after taking in all the relevant information.

Now, Althouse's critique here is a good one because by my crappy little definitions here she's not criticizing Palin's Education but her Intelligence. You don't have to have gone to Harvard to have smelled a rat in this situation. Its common sense. By what is written in this passage, it doesn't look good for Palin's judgement. That is a pretty reasonable criticism and one that I don't have a glib answer for. It goes right to the heart of what we eville rethuglikkkans think are the true qualifications of a president. If she couldn't handle Katie Couric, how can she handle Putin or Chavez?

Its much tougher to answer than the typical Obamabot bilge.

miller said...

Uh, let's just step back a little.

If Palin was in the running for VP, she deserves to be scrutinized. Carefully.

We didn't scrutinize The Big OH! and look where we are now.

So, fire away. If she wants to play with the big boys, she'd better be able to play with them.

Slow Joe said...

Althouse hasn't even read the book. None of the people in here, saying they have proof that Palin is dumb, have bothered to read her book first.

I get the rush to geto n this story, but Althouse is showing a lot of naivety to trust these dumb early attacks. They are obviously hatchet jobs.

If any of you have written a good piece about yourself, you know the value of honesty and self deprecation and self criticism. It's critical to such writings being interesting and intelligent. That Palin has a few of those kinds of sections is not a sign that she's dumb... it's a sign that she's imperfect and aware of it.

What's unfortunate about this is that Althouse, for saying this book proves Sarah Palin is dumb, without reading this book, now has absolutely no credibility on this subject. I was looking forward to her analysis of this book, and now I will have to remember that she will draw conclusions before even analyzing the facts. She just wants to stir the pot, which is very primitive.

And I like Althouse! I almost always am praising her when I comment here. I don't really like Palin that much, either. I think she's an interesting person, but not as experiences as many other contenders (and Obama's record doesn't make that better... it makes it worse).

Why must Althouse join the unison chorus of people who call Palin dumb when they don't really know what they are talking about yet? Has she gotten lazy with this blog?

What would have been great was an analysis of these points in her book, by people who read the whole book and understand if it was foreshadowed or part of a larger narrative. But she will get a lot of attention. Just as she got a ton of attention for endorsing Obama by bashing Mccain a lot. It's a very unfortunate way of thinking.

former law student said...

Having constructed an idealized mental image of Palin, Pastafarian rushes to praise it. Why not look -- and Nobama fans love to urge us -- at what she actually did?

blake said...

People tell me I'm pretty smart. But I've also been called intimidating, because (whether by intelligence or ego) I tend to have strong opinions about the way things should be done.

So I took this to heart once, joining a project that I was told was "six months away from completion".

Operating on that data, I registered a few objections but quickly set them aside because I, a newcomer, was going on the information provided to me by people who were more experienced.

Plus, I was trying to be a "team player".

It was a dumb thing to do.

But that's what happens when you jump into something as the #2 guy, and a project is, well, in this case 2 months from completion.

Deconstructing someone else's description of dumb things they did isn't really assisted by calling them dumb.

It probably leads to things like people never being able to admit when they do something dumb, and thus doing them over and over again.

See the "pragmatic" fellow in charge.

wv: fismsism

(The worst -ism of all.)

Invisible Man said...

Any history majors like to jump in here and explain what a non-intellectual and near dufuss we had in a former President named George that barely won a battle as a General until the French showed up. He was a poseur and married money and learned on the job the hard way his few military and political skills. But he was committed to his country's protection from enemies domestic and foreign. What a great new day in DC that would be to have a President like that once again. We happen to see that right stuff in the poor dumb soccer Mom Palin. And if she wins in a landslide, they cannot cheat with the 2% ballot fraud the the Demo's start with as theirs for a handicap.

I really thought that this was a parody at first, but I guess I'm naive too. Are you comparing her time serving as a governor of Alaska for a couple of years and twittering to being a General in the Army? Really? Palin couldn't handle a few slings from the media and liberals, and yet you would compare this to leading men into war. Some of you have literally gone insane over this woman.

sonicfrog said...

Bart. + 1

Superb comment. When she was nominated I did an analysis of the governmental experience of all the VP's in the nations history. Palin was a little less than middle of the pact. Obama's was at about the same level. In that regard she was not "unqualified. But the middling quality of that experience meant that she had to show something some skills to go along with her experience, after all, Alaska's population is not even twice the size of Fresno, and I certainly wouldn't consider Fresno's two term mayor Allan Autrey as being ready for the VP slot. I waited and waited and never got any confirmation that she was ready for the position of VP.

Anyway, here's the post detailing the experience levels of our VP's.

dcm said...

"She became freakin' governor of the largest state of the Union, for pete's sake"

???? she was gov. of people not square miles. smallest state in the union.

Comrade X said...

she should have wrote a book about her father's dreams. oh wait. he stayed and paid the bills. that's boring.

jaltcoh said...

She became freakin' governor of the largest state of the Union, for pete's sake.

Ahem...

former law student said...

it's a sign that she's imperfect and aware of it.

Is she even aware she made mistakes? Or is she just making excuses? Even saying "I goofed" does not fill one with confidence that she will try not to goof in the future.

Shanna said...

Apparently, they were afraid you were not ready, and they were right, so why didn't you trust them or at least accept that you owed them control over the presidential campaign?

But... you just complained that she did do what they say and let them control things. Is she dumb because she followed the lead of the more experienced folks, or is she dumb because she didn’t?

former law student said...

Hey, I know the difference between "largest" and "most populous." ;)

Invisible Man said...

she should have wrote a book about her father's dreams. oh wait. he stayed and paid the bills. that's boring.

I'm guessing the stage of reflection is coming soon to you.

blake said...

Well, Victoria, I did run a couple of "Obama is stupid and lazy" comments, but those were based on his actions in office.

Slow Joe said...

miller, bringing up Althouse's treatment of Obama would be DULL!

According to Althouse, anyway. I'll tell you what's dull: another vicious attacker refusing to withstand scrutiny.

the idea that Althouse gave this level of scrutiny to Obama is absolutely untrue. She endorsed him for president because of various problems she had with Mccain.

Of course, many support Palin due to various problems they have with Obama, but that's not my point (they shouldn't do that, though).

the point is that Althouse titled this post 'Palin is dumb'. She cannot tell us not to be dull, when that's a very boorish way to stir up a lot of controversy.

I have a hard time with the kind of ugly attacks Althouse has to deal with. I am sure she thinks this is cute, but it's pretty unfair and unintelligent... read the book before you decide that Palin is dumb, please. Saying someone is dumb, on this basis, is itself much dumber than anything I've seen Palin do, and as I've said, I'm not in her corner so much as I'm sick of blogs acting like hostility is the ultimate goal.

TexMex said...

I disagree with your read on this Professor.

What I understand from this brief passage is that Palin felt Wallace's statements regarding Couric were extremely strange, but wanting to be a good team player moved forward with the interview.Palin soon after realized this blunder. Clearly, there was no rapport between her and Couric, and admittedly, Palin gave a poor performance. She gave some incoherent answers, wasn’t assertive and probably was too touchy about the “what do you read” question.
As another poster stated, she was naïve to think that her own team would be out for her, and who could blame her? You expect to be cheated by your opponent, but not your own team. You state, “I want leaders who know the enemies can be inside the camp and who take them down before they do their damage,” i.e. Ft. Hood. This argument seems to suggest that within their particular situation, Palin and Obama should be able to root out enemies among them. I would no more blame Obama for that snake in the Army than I would Palin for the snake in the campaign. These teams were in place prior to either Palin or Obama signed on. If there is any difference here, at least Obama has the power to remove these snakes, whereas Palin being the number two and kept on a tight leash had no power to remove Wallace. Naïve, yes, dumb no, and whatever naivety Palin had regarding media is surely replaced with stone cold cynicism and hopefully a thicker skin.
You also state that she’s dumb because “a year later, when she has had time to reflect” and there were people to help her present her self better. Professor, are you taking issue here with her presentation, her “voice” or are you mad that she’s rehashing the campaign? I mean, it’s her memoir and of course what went on during the 2008 campaign is going to figure prominently. I’ve been anxious to hear her version of events. “This text absolutely deserves dissection and unflinching analysis,” and I agree, but I’d like to see dissection and analysis of the ENTIRE text not this little snippet. I’m curious to see how she explains her poor performance, what happened immediately after the interview and so forth, but I think you should hold fire until you read the entire chapter.
Finally, Professor, I can’t help but think that if at the end of the day, when you’ve read the book, and your opinion of Mrs. Palin remains the same, that you must admit that these criticisms of Mrs. Palin surely do apply to the current President. He’s been extremely naïve in his actions toward various foreign countries, and I very much wished you would’ve called him out on those wide-eyed foreign policy positions of his BEFORE be became President so that he would’ve taken the time to develop an attitude like Pres. Reagan: Trust but verify.

Sorry, but I had to address this from Maguro : “Her blame-shifting and finger-pointing just reveals her own inadequacy.” See Obama vs. Bush and Fox News vs. Obama and any other entity who disagrees with the Administration.

Pastafarian said...

FLS said: "Having constructed an idealized mental image of Palin, Pastafarian rushes to praise it. Why not look -- and Nobama fans love to urge us -- at what she actually did?"

An idealized mental image? Her stands on all of these issues are well-documented. Are you suggesting that her actions as governor were anti-business, pro-tax, or anti-second-amendment?

Or do you suppose that a candidate's stance on actual issues shouldn't be considered in an evaluation of what sort of president they make? Maybe we should just get all the candidates together for a game of Trivial Pursuit to decide the winner.

Slow Joe said...

Blake said "Deconstructing someone else's description of dumb things they did isn't really assisted by calling them dumb.

It probably leads to things like people never being able to admit when they do something dumb, and thus doing them over and over again."

and Blake is right.

This kind of thing, though I doubt it's even quoted accurately, is why Palin's so beloved. Most politicians aren't human... look at Romney's analysis of his record, or Obama's sneering arrogance.

Althouse, though I am sure she doesn't understand this, is demanding that politicians lie to us. That's not dull, I admit.

traditionalguy said...

Invisable man...The "woman" has never been a General or a President. That was my point. The Father of our country got where he got by character traits and not by having experience prior to the job where he was faking it until he was making it. It was his never failing commitment to do the right thing and use the few skills he did learn along the way that has always been America's key to success...it has never been seeking leadership among the aritocracy, be they lawyers or academics.

Richard Dolan said...

I read these two pages and was also struck by how foolish it sounded -- how foolish it was -- both when it was happening and now in the retelling (and the way it is retold).

Ann focuses on the pathetic way the women -- all of them in this story -- come off. For me, Palin's take brings home how some politicians (and newsies) have internalized the 'campaign as TV show' idea. Palin wants to gravitate to Hannity and O'Reilly because she knows that would be all protective soft-ball stuff for her. Nicolle pushes CBS/Couric for inane reasons, as demeaning to Couric as they are to Palin. It's all applause lines and packaging and fluff, ridiculous in the same way that Edwards was in his 'Breck girl' moment.

What's completely missing from the Palin narrative (at least these two pages) is any sense of politics as a way to engage with voters as adults about things that matter. People running for high leadership positions need to show a capacity to lead. Far from doing that, this excerpt does the opposite.

Andre said...

I'm surprised, so much of Anne's insights come in seeing the subtexts, but I think she betrays her roots in Academia in failing to understand the nature of Palin's appeal.

Sarah Palin has become the voice of millions of populist conservatives in large part because she so successfully embodies the image of Everywoman Made Good. The tone of her writing should be part of this understanding. She's talking about her screw-up (because objectively that's what this was) in the ways your coworker would at the water cooler and not the traditional way a politician would speak to her supporters or even the undecided.

Whether the narrative that what Washington needs is more Every(wo)men is true or not is of secondary importance to the the writing of this book then whether or not it will appeal to people. It would be political suicide, in fact, for her to write a book that had the usual suspects thinking she was more Presidential then they originally presumed.

Did she display poor judgement in the handling of the Couric interview? Probably. Did she display poor judgement in how she chose to explain that poor judgement? It depends on who your audience and your narrative is. For all the talk of Obama's oratorical prowess, he really does nothing new or innovative. The Palin conversational style of narrative is something new and fascinating in American politics. That is not to say it'll work. Only time (and the full story of the book) can tell.

Jason (the commenter) said...

Palin can give a good speech, other than that she has no qualities whatsoever that would make her a good leader. I agree with Althouse.

Also, people should be focusing less on Althouse calling Palin dumb and more on Althouse saying she lacks personal responsibility. I think that is the root of all Palin's problems, including those with her family.

People can complain about the media unfairly attacking Palin, but all the good will she had when she was first introduced to the country, that was a media myth, too.

Wake up!

EDH said...

Althouse makes a point on the whole "mom" thing. But rather than the "pat on the head" condescension of yore, whenever I hear the word "mom" today, especially in a political context, my radar goes up. Today, "mom" is now one of those PC shibboleths used to invoke unassailability. Indeed, I think that's one of the reasons why Palin's very status as a mother came under such withering attack from her opponents -- to make her assailable as “a mom.”

Next, for context I'd like to know what other national politicians Althouse considers "dumb." I think there is a big difference between being dumb, and being too dumb to be president of the US.

Personally, I don't think Palin has what it takes to be president. A lot of really gifted people – more gifted than Palin – don’t meet that hurdle. I think Palin herself knows that, but will "keep that option open" to maintain her influence, which is not dumb.

I imagine there's a great deal of pressure on any VP candidate not to "blow it" for the top of the ticket who's invested so much up to that point, especially under the circumstances Palin was drafted.

A lack of national media savvy may indicate someone is too dumb to be president, but I'm not sure it makes that person dumb.

wv - "repir" = one not to be feared, baby take my hand

wv - "tabile" = what left-wing Chicago Bears fans spew at Sarah Palin

ricpic said...

Palin's a genuinely nice person who was naive about the deep down shittiness of the MSM and Couric. The operative word is was. She ain't naive no more. I have absolutely no doubt that from now on she'll handle those knee-jerk Republican haters politely but firmly, as did Reagan. It drives them wild.

Henry said...

Palin's appeal and Palin's smarts are two very different things.

Palin's smarts and Obama's smarts are as well. It seems silly to have to point that out.

TraditionalGuy -- If you're talking character, one thing Washington never did was quit on the job.

rcocean said...

Palin's trying to be honest and show how naive and trusting she was. She was in a box. VP's do what the Presidental candidate says. Its really his campaign.

The mistake was hiding her, then giving her a big network interview with a hostile Leftie anchor. Should have done Fox and Rush, but to McCain those were "right wing extremists".

McCain campaign managers are as stupid as they are dishonest. The good thing is Palin has learned.

Pastafarian said...

Shanna wins the thread at 11:17AM.

And Althouse, I'm a little annoyed at some of your choices of words and analogies here. Mysoginistic is too strong a word; but there's a consistent unpleasantness here that could be called mysoginistic, had it been used by a man to criticize a woman. Examples: "Chemistry? What is this, a date..." and "Like it's a Nancy Drew caper."

Dark Eden said...

Palin can give a good speech, other than that she has no qualities whatsoever that would make her a good leader. I agree with Althouse.
>>>

You're describing Obama, not Palin. She has a lot of actual accomplishments, the primary being fighting corruption within her own party. This alone puts her on a different plateau than anything we've seen in Washington in a generation.

Chip Ahoy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
AllenS said...

Henry,

In 1758, Washington participated as a Brigadier General in the Forbes expedition that prompted French evacuation of Fort Duquesne, and British establishment of Pittsburgh. Later that year, Washington resigned from active military service and spent the next sixteen years as a Virginia planter and politician.

Resigned, isn't that what Palin did?

Chip Ahoy said...

I too still have things to learn. That's right, I said it.

Why, there are things that I don't know that even grade school children know. Just yesterday, for example, there I was solving a WSJ crossword puzzle by Elizabeth Gorski, she's brilliant don'tchaknow, and I get to this clue that goes, "Rawanda's capital," and I try to visualize Rawanda on a map and figure it's somewhere down there around the central-bottom, land locked, but for the life of me cannot think of its capital, and the whole time I'm thinking, "One of those little kids on the Geography Bee would know this one right off. Boy, do I ever feel stupid." Turns out to be "Kigali," and I don't even remember ever having heard of the place. So there ya go.

sonicfrog said...

Palin is tough. She knows now just how vicious and evil the opposition can be.

So tough, that she quits before her first term is even over, breaking the commitment she made to serve the public.

We also know that Palin has the smarts, but more importantly the values, character, and spine to be a great president..

I though it was a virtue that she wasn't an intellectual. And she has soooo much spine she quits before her first term is even over, breaking the commitment she made to serve the public.

You call Palin and Bush dumb, and Obama, Kerry, etc smart. But this means something different to us. To us there's two different things: Intelligence and Education. Education represents the facts that have been drilled into your head and you can recite by rote. Intelligence represents problem solving, good judgement, and the ability to take the knowledge of your education and apply it in new and unexpected ways to the problem at hand.

And yet, this snippet from the book demonstrates that she did not show good judgment during the campaign, which is precisely WHEN you need to show the world that you have good judgment.

Palin is pro-business and anti-tax; she has a better understanding of the constitution (particularly the second amendment, but really the entire notion of what a constitution is) than many constitutional "scholars", including our president.

Better understanding of the constitution? Palin's version of the VP They’re in charge of the U.S. Senate so if they want to they can really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes that will make life better for Brandon and his family and his classroom,"

The Constitution's version of the VP - eh, well I assume you know... or should I?

(Just in case you forgot - The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided)

And need I remind the resident Washington scholar that A) Washington didn't quit being General and Commander of the Revolutionary Army until his job was done and B) Washington never really wanted to be President, especially for a second term, and would have been happy spending the rest of his life at Mt. Vernon.

Man, I knew this thread was going to be fun!

Invisible Man said...

The "woman" has never been a General or a President. That was my point. The Father of our country got where he got by character traits and not by having experience prior to the job where he was faking it until he was making it. It was his never failing commitment to do the right thing and use the few skills he did learn along the way that has always been America's key to success...it has never been seeking leadership among the aritocracy, be they lawyers or academics.

I get your point on the General part, but still what has Palin done that would lead you to even let an analogy with Washington pop into your head. Her career doesn't suggest someone who went through a hard scrabble and elevated themselves to the top by pure grit and determination. She's a beauty queen for god's sake. Sarah Palin's gotten by on her looks about as much any actor working in Hollywood.

George Washington didn't need to have his supporters whine every time some criticized him and I doubt he would be complaining about trivial shit like an interview with Katie Couric. He was a serious person who dealt with serious stuff. And I doubt he would have left his post for a career on the chicken dinner circuit because it got to hard.

Andrea said...

One thing the authority-craving intelligentsia love about Obama is that he will never, ever admit he ever made a mistake. In other words, he'll never do what Palin is doing: admit she was naive about the McCain campaign people. ("You fucked up. You trusted us.") The academics and other chatterati who voted Obama in love that Mr. Cool act of his, and as much as any primitive street thug they hate a loser. The hatred is based on fear, the idea that "if they could lose, so could we at some important endeavor in our own lives!"

Josh Painter said...

How much "say" does any vice presidential candidatate have in media appearance that the campaign staff advises her or him to make? Especially a candidate like Sarah Palin, whose own teamin Alaska was immediately made subserviant to the McCain people.

After all, McCain had already made a GOP presidential primary before against GWB. His people were the ones with national campaign experience, while Palin's team were just (in the eyes of Tem McCain) a bunch of ignorant snowbillies.

Snap conclusions, MS. Althouse are some time just that. The ones which later cause you to go "Oh, snap!"

- JP

Freder Frederson said...

Republicans tend to think Obama, Kerry, etc, the political establishment, tends to be very high on the Education and very low on the actual Intelligence. To us they represent a sort of faux aristocracy which preens on about their education, their breeding. They went to ivy league schools they were born and bred by their politician parents to be little politibots themselves, they never held real jobs, they never knew any 'normal' people and couldn't handle going to the grocery store and buying milk without an assistant to help them.

The only problem with your whole thesis is that this description fits George W. Bush (son of a president, grandson of a senator Andover, Yale--43rd in his family--and Harvard Alum, Skull and Bones man, owner of the Texas Rangers) more than any post war president.

Dark Eden said...

I though it was a virtue that she wasn't an intellectual. And she has soooo much spine she quits before her first term is even over, breaking the commitment she made to serve the public.
>>>>

Again for most people, 'intellectual' doesn't mean you're intelligent. To me it has more to do with ego than anything useful.

To most people Intellectual may as well be a synonym of Useless.

wv: pinglyth. Not sure on definition but its a fun word.

former law student said...

"One of those little kids on the Geography Bee would know this one right off. Boy, do I ever feel stupid." Turns out to be "Kigali,"

I forget exactly how old I was, maybe 40, when I realized my grammar school education had essentially expired as the last fact I learned was then obsolete. But geographically speaking, things may be relatively stable now. I probably could buy a new globe, one that doesn't say "Belgian Congo" on it.

Paddy O. said...

"We're to trust the analytical acumen of someone who was hornswoggled by Obama?"

Paul does have a point here. It's not about intelligence, about smart or dumb, it's about trust.

Very smart people can be naive or lack discernment. Very smart people can show trust out of loyalty, opportunity, whatever. Or because we want people to be how we see them.

The difference between smart and dumb is the dumb people hold on to their trust after it has been proven wrong.

Palin had a whirlwind opportunity, and she took it, which launched her onto the national stage even with the loss. She has used alternative media to effectively alter the national debate on topics of vital importance.

Which suggests she has learned from her naive trust.

But, she still certainly has a lot left to prove.

So does Obama.

Obama proved himself to be more smart at campaigning. Unfortunately for him his proving grounds for leadership are on the job and will result in enormous costs if he is not, in fact, smart.

Pastafarian said...

Sonicfrog, the superficiality of your example of Palin's poor grasp of the constitution belies the shallowness of your argument.

I don't give a fig whether she can recite the Bill of Rights verbatim from memory. It's more important that she knows that the constitution is the underlying foundation of all US law, and not just an ass-wipe with smudges of ink from 300 year old white men, the words of which can be magically reinterpreted according to whim.

Dark Eden said...

The only problem with your whole thesis is that this description fits George W. Bush (son of a president, grandson of a senator Andover, Yale--43rd in his family--and Harvard Alum, Skull and Bones man, owner of the Texas Rangers) more than any post war president.
>>>>>>

Absolutely it does. I don't particularly want any Bushes running for prez any time soon, same with the Clintons, Gores, etc.

Still I think Bush is the exception that proves the rule. He's from an 'aristocratic' family but doesn't seem particularly of that breed. Obama is definitely not from an aristocratic family and yet he does.

George Galt said...

Flash! A year later than most of the population, Althouse figures out that Palin is painfully dumb.

What took you so long, Althouse?

I still rememebr you fawning over this idiotic woman.

Grovel, grovel.

Happy thanksgiving.

Pastafarian said...

Freder, I remember well all those times that GWB would preen on about his education while clearing brush on his ranch. What an egghead.

rcocean said...

Very few good Presidents have been "intellectuals"

Hoover was, FDR wasn't
Madison was, Washington Wasn't
Wilson was, Coolidge wasn't
Taft was, Reagan wasn't
Adams was, Jackson wasn't
Nixon was, Ike wasn't

Lincoln was extremely intelligent but no "intellectual". His formal education was limited to grade school.

chickenlittle said...

It seems to me that this post and ensuing comments are just a big Althousian experiment in polemics.

Carrie on!

Arturius said...

Well at least we're lucky we have a President who can handle pussycats like Couric.

Putins and Achmedenejads not so much.

Mark said...

There's a real-world test of Palin's political smarts. It's called the 2010 elections. Palin nearly delivered NY23 to a third party candidate. If she provides the same kind of lift to enough challengers (or challenged incumbents) in 2010, she won't ever again have to rely on anyone else's rolodex.

wv: "fierst" -- sounds good to me.

TennGoodBoy said...

Ann, calm down. Maybe you shouldnt write on certain times of the month. Lets see, exactly four weeks ago you went off on Megan McCain's tits. Will be watching to see what December 11 brings our way. Seriously, tho, dont you think a regular person might be a better president than the commie prick we got now?

Freder Frederson said...

He's from an 'aristocratic' family but doesn't seem particularly of that breed.

Not particularly of that breed!? Hilarious! He reeked of that sense of entitlement. He carried himself in the typical "I am not the brightest bulb in the box, but my daddy is rich and powerful so I can do whatever I want--even become president" And goddamn it--he was charming enough to convince dumbshits like you, Ann and Pastafarian that a preppie from Maine was a good 'ol boy from Texas who was just like them (even though as Laura admitted he didn't know a cow from a bull).

Bruce Hayden said...

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. My feeling right now is that this was the sort of admission that real people make, and career politicians don't. And, in the end, I don't see the American people condemning her for trying to be a good team player. But, we shall see.

I think though that her experiences with Couric may be one reason that Palin is so much more comfortable with non-traditional media than traditional media. She felt sand bagged by her own people, and realized, for the first time probably, that the MSM is willing to do what it takes, above board or below, to get their candidate elected, and, in the end, have little interest in reporting facts, and a lot of interest in getting their agenda enacted and candidates elected.

Hoosier Daddy said...

Fredo Corleone: I'm your older brother, Mike, and I was stepped over!

Michael Corleone: That's the way Pop wanted it.

Fredo Corleone: It ain't the way I wanted it! I can handle things! I'm smart! Not like everybody says... like dumb... I'm smart and I want respect!

Godfather II, 1974

Bruce Hayden said...

Well at least we're lucky we have a President who can handle pussycats like Couric.

I would use the phrase "liberal sycophant" instead of "pussycat" when describing Couric.

XWL said...

Political books aren't sold for content, but as a marker of identity for the customer when displayed on their bookshelf.

As that kind of object, this book is already tremendously successful.

If the content were, "All work and no play make Sarah a dull girl" repeated over, and over, and over some more, it would still be a success (though creepy).

As far as the specifics, I think Palin wants to position herself as the normal, common-sensical, person thrown into the nightmare world of politics and media.

She presents her naïveté as a badge of honor, one she wears as she represents the common man, and by extension, the way she gets used and abused by the McCain campaign staff, and the media is exactly how any other normal person would be treated.

She's not writing this to make herself look smart, she's writing this to highlight the grotesque lack of normality and integrity inherent in the political/media landscape.

I think you are too hard on her with regards to the incoherence of her being picked to be a VP candidate by McCain, and then being over managed by his team. I think she was promised one thing when being courted, and the reality of the actual campaign became something very different. She said yes to something that evaporated soon after she joined the campaign.

The McCain team was terrible. Effective enough to pick up the pieces as other GOP candidates crumbled, but totally incompetent at waging a general election campaign.

No outsider could have known just how bad they were from the outside, and once Palin was inside, it was too late to do anything but what she ended up doing.

rcocean said...

It seems to me that this post and ensuing comments are just a big Althousian experiment in polemics.

Such big words, you must be an intellectual.

Henry said...

Lincoln was extremely intelligent but no "intellectual". His formal education was limited to grade school.

Oh Jaysus. At the time of his run for president Lincoln was one of the lead railroad attorneys in the country -- which was one of the country's largest industries.

In his 20s Lincoln had taught himself law and was accepted to the Illinois bar. In his 40s he had worked his way through Euclid's geometry as a way to sharpen his mind.

Parse all you want whether he was or wasn't an "intellectual" but the guy had a brilliant mind and worked hard at improving it.

Kirby Olson said...

But smart here isn't about being intellectual it's about being able to read people through their phrasing, and Althouse is right that Palin misread Couric's phrasing.

This is probably part of Alaskan frontier logic where infighting over women wouldn't be the same as it was in Madison, or at the University of Wisconsin.

Palin didn't know what hit her. I think that in-fighting over femniist disciourse is probably less prevalent in Alaska than it would be at the University of Wisconsin law school at Madison. Palin may not have been used to the nuances of meaning within that discourse.

She and McCain were comparatively tone-deaf compared to Obama, who's been in academia much longer, and has down all the various lingos and what they mean in a larger sense.

On the other hand, I imagine that Palin's language will be able to connect with rural America in a way that almost cost Obama the election ("clinging to God and guns" was said too late in the primaries, unfortunately).

Redistribution sounds good in urban academia, but in rural areas, it sounds bad.

Obama stepped in it again when he went against the Cambridge police.

His vocabulary and vision do have distinct limits. They will become more and more visible as time goes on. His lousy speech at Fort Hood will be part of that ongoing discovery of how lame his vision is, over the next three years.

Smartest vocabulary among the right: Huckabee.

Bruce Hayden said...

Republicans tend to think Obama, Kerry, etc, the political establishment, tends to be very high on the Education and very low on the actual Intelligence. To us they represent a sort of faux aristocracy which preens on about their education, their breeding. They went to ivy league schools they were born and bred by their politician parents to be little politibots themselves, they never held real jobs, they never knew any 'normal' people and couldn't handle going to the grocery store and buying milk without an assistant to help them.

I will agree that to some extent, GWB (43) fits this, but not as well as either Kerry or Gore. While he (Bush) was not brain, by all evidence, he is smarter than his two opponents. Plus, he actually did a couple of things before running for a national office.

That said, the place where I disagree is the idea that those on the populist right dislike the Kerrys and Gores of this world because of their lack of IQ and their pretensions. Rather, it is just the pretensions that grate. Obama is very likely smarter than Kerry, Gore, and Bush, and yet grates the exact same way. It is the idea that because someone graduated from an Ivy League school, they are somehow better qualified to lead us, than any one else. I think that it is more than the intellectual/ non-intellectual divide, and rather one of credentials and elitism.

Paddy O. said...

"It seems to me that this post and ensuing comments are just a big Althousian experiment in polemics."

That's it!

She's once again tossing arugula to the Althouse oppidans.

Darcy said...

Thank you, Slow Joe.

sonicfrog said...

In 1758, Washington participated as a Brigadier General in the Forbes expedition that prompted French evacuation of Fort Duquesne, and British establishment of Pittsburgh. Later that year, Washington resigned from active military service and spent the next sixteen years as a Virginia planter and politician.

I love it when someone tries to use selectivist history to bolster their case. After the victory at Ft Du Quesne, the French began a pull-back from the Virginia territories (and from the American Colonies for that matter). Washington resigned because his job of protecting Virginia from the French, was for the most part, done.

BTW: There was no actual "victory" at Ft Du Quense. The French, knowing they were about to be outrun by Forbes and Washington's much larger force, had retreated to the Ohio Valley the previous day.

rcocean said...

Henry,

Maybe you need a reading comprehension course. Also look up the meaning of "formal education" and "intellecutal".

I wrote Lincoln was extremely intelligent. And that he had NO FORMAL EDUCATION. He didn't go to law school for 3 years, he didn't go to college, he didn't even go to High school.

Brilliant mind and 19th century law degree - doesn't equal "intellectual".

Meade said...

Freder Frederson said...
It does make one wonder though. You were such a fan of Palin for so long. It makes me wonder if you are as smart as you think you are.

I doubt Althouse has ever been a "fan" of anyone.

Meade said...

And she never "endorsed" Obama for president.

Joe M. said...

Throw a firecracker and see which way everyone jumps.

former law student said...

exactly four weeks ago you went off on Megan McCain's tits.

Hey, nix the h4rdc0r3 pr0n. This is a family blog.

chickenlittle said...

Such big words, you must be an intellectual.
And smart too.

Althouse said: Sarah Palin is dumb

@Althouse: The problem with what you wrote is your use of "is" instead of saying Sarah Palin "acted" dumb. Using "is" cuts to the very essence and I guess for you, that means there is no more use for her. I mean, why would anyone want to support someone who is essentially dumb?

But I don't believe that you meant what you wrote, so I'm OK with it-for now.

OTOH, if you really did mean it as you wrote it, it will be nothing short of amusing to hang around and see you get on with your new best friends. :)

Henry said...

rcocean -- I saw what you did and didn't buy it.

It seems odd to me to apply the word "intellectual" across multiple centuries of presidents. The word in current discourse doesn't even mean what it meant 50 years ago, let alone 150 or 200.

miller said...

Maybe you all should withhold a little bit until the book actually comes out.

And again, perhaps Sarah's goal isn't to be president right now.

You have to admire someone who posts a few times on Facebook and has the President of the United States sputtering. Can you imagine Bush with such a thin skin & curious lack of appreciation for his opponents?

Arturius said...

We didn't scrutinize The Big OH! and look where we are now.

On the contrary, Obama was scrutinized. The problem was nearly 54% of the electorate chose to ignore the overwhelming evidence showing what a complete novice he is.

You can keep telling your 5 year old that the stovetop is hot but sometimes you just have to let the little dork find out on her own. It will hurt for a while but most likely she won't do it again.

Pastafarian said...

Freder, I was under no illusion that GWB was "a good 'ol boy from Texas who was just like (me)".

I'm not from Texas, and I'm not really a "good ol' boy". For example, I know where to put that apostrophe in "ol'". But I'm sure I'm not nearly as scary-smart as you are, Freder. I'm just a "dumbshit".

Although I was smart enough to vote against the intellectual who's now going about dismantling our republic. And I usually vote according to the stands candidates take on issues, and their stated plans, rather than whether or not they belong to the same "good ol' boy" or "non-good ol' boy" group as me.

I guess you scary-smart people base your vote on what demographic groups the candidates belong to; and sling unprovoked insults like a monkey flinging its shit.

Triangle Man said...

This two page segment reveals that she made a mistake and seems to be aware that she did. Maybe it's a one-off. However, if she doesn't learn from this, or continues to make mistakes like this, then she is dumb in a way that does not befit a major political figure.

AlphaLiberal said...

Wow. Ann, just wow. Not very elliptical!

The evidence of Palin's stupidity was pretty clear to me a long time ago, but, hey , welcome to the obvious conclusion. (turkey anyone?)

"two pages out of context." Ha-ha. Good one. Next you'll say a whole chapter is taken out of context.

jaltcoh said...

Hey, I know the difference between "largest" and "most populous." ;)

"Largest" is very vague -- there are many different things it could mean depending on the context. If we're talking about assessing who are the most important governors in the US, population would seem to be a lot more important than land area. By population, Palin was governor of one of the very tiniest states in the country, with about .2% -- not 2%, but 2 thousandths -- of the population.

Triangle Man said...

I guess you scary-smart people base your vote on what demographic groups the candidates belong to; and sling unprovoked insults like a monkey flinging its shit.

Would a geniune believing Pastafarian, not a caffeteria Pastafarian, write something like this? Honestly, what would FSM say?

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Her career doesn't suggest someone who went through a hard scrabble and elevated themselves to the top by pure grit and determination.

You're joking right?

There is a distinct difference between being dumb/stupid and being naive. One you can't fix. The other you can.

Some of the dumbest people I know have college degrees. Some even teach in schools.

Some of the smartest people I know, who are self made business owners, have high school educations.

When push comes to shove, I'll take the smart action oriented high school graduate over the educated, navel gazing useless academic, any time.

chickenlittle said...

Meade wrote:
I doubt Althouse has ever been a "fan" of anyone.

Not even you, or Bob Dylan?

rhhardin said...

Mostly it's women who are impressed with themselves for doing a traditional man's job.

A man simply finds the same job interesting.

Arturius said...

Are you comparing her time serving as a governor of Alaska for a couple of years and twittering to being a General in the Army? Really?

No I think he was comparing the 'intellectual capacity' of Washington and Palin.

It doesn't take an intellectual to lead an army, it takes leadership, a grasp of tactics, logistics and a pretty good sized set of balls.

I also wouldn't be too gracious in heaping laurels on being a General in the Army. History is replete with a whole lot of really bad ones and a mere handful of good ones.

Pastafarian said...

Triangle Man, are you questioning whether I've been touched by His noodly appendages, based on my use of expletives, or based on my politics?

Because as far as I know, FSM takes stands on neither.

AlphaLiberal said...

"I think on a national level your Department of Law there in the White House would look at some of the things that we've been charged with and automatically throw them out."

Brilliant!

"How sad that Washington and the media will never understand; it's about country. And though it's honorable for countless others to leave their positions for a higher calling and without finishing a term, of course we know by now, for some reason a different standard applies for the decisions I make." --Sarah Palin, July 4, 2009

Not paranoid at all!

"It may be tempting and more comfortable to just keep your head down, plod along, and appease those who demand: 'Sit down and shut up,' but that's the worthless, easy path; that's a quitter's way out." --Sarah Palin, announcing her resignation as governor, July 3, 2009

Yes! Winner's quit and quitters win!

"Only dead fish go with the flow." --Sarah Palin, quitting, July 3, 2009

WTF?

"Absolutely not. I think that, if I were to give up and wave a white flag of surrender against some of the political shots that we've taken, that ... that would ... bring this whole ... I'm not doing this for naught." --Sarah Palin

Got it!

Palin 2012!

rhhardin said...

John and Ken (KFI) have always been unimpressed with Palin; nothing she says makes any real sense, is their criticism.

Cliches and platitudes.

I imagine that starting to make sense would overcome it.

sonicfrog said...

Sonicfrog, the superficiality of your example of Palin's poor grasp of the constitution belies the shallowness of your argument.

I don't give a fig whether she can recite the Bill of Rights verbatim from memory. It's more important that she knows that the constitution is the underlying foundation of all US law, and not just an ass-wipe with smudges of ink from 300 year old white men, the words of which can be magically reinterpreted according to whim.


Now who doesn't know that the Constitution underlying foundation of all US law? Once again, here is Palin's interpretation, in her own word, of the role of the VP according to the Constitution: "They’re in charge of the U.S. Senate so if they want to they can really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes that will make life better for Brandon and his family and his classroom," One might consider this answer a magical reinterpretation according to whim. Look, I don't claim to be a Constitutional scholar of any sort. She gave an answer that I might have given on any day if I were caught off guard in a Hannity "man-on-the-street interview.

But here's the thing. I'm not running for Vice President. I DON'T WANT that candidate to be merely an average joe. I want someone who shows a broad intelligence and intellect greater than my own. Folksey wisdom and being telegenic is no substitute for knowledge and experience - both of which Palin is lacking.

PS. And I know there will be comments about the unconstitutionality of the government taking over GM and some of the banks. OK. If it's unconstitutional, where are the lawsuits? Did you try and bring them? What about those with money, resources and the knowledge of law, such as Mark Levin. The only one that was filed was by the unions, and the suit was not about the constitutionality of the move, but about the loss of their pensions. Levin talks a good game, but he did NOTHING to legally stop the unconstitutional take-over. Wonder why.

AlphaLiberal said...

"And our congressional delegation, God bless 'em. They do a great job for us. Representative Don Young, especially God bless him, with transportation -- Alaska did so well under the very basic provisions of the transportation act that he wrote just a couple of years ago. We had a nice bump there. We're very, very fortunate to receive the largesse that Don Young was able to put together for Alaska." --Sarah Palin, on federal pork and earmarks secured by Rep. Don Young (R-AK)

She's against earmarks! Except when she's for them! Okay!

"When I hear a statement like that coming from a woman candidate with any kind of perceived whine about that excess criticism, or maybe a sharper microscope put on her, I think, 'Man, that doesn't do us any good, women in politics, or women in general, trying to progress this country." --Sarah Palin, on complaints from Hillary Clinton's campaign about sexist coverage, Spring 2008

Okey dokey!


"I don't know if you're going to use the word 'terrorist' there." --Sarah Palin, asked if people who bomb abortion clinics are terrorists, NBC News interview, Oct. 23, 2008

IOKIYAR!

"We believe that the best of America is not all in Washington, D.C. ...We believe that the best of America is in these small towns that we get to visit, and in these wonderful little pockets of what I call the real America, being here with all of you hard working very patriotic, um, very, um, pro-America areas of this great nation." --Sarah Palin, speaking at a fundraiser in Greensoboro, N.C., Oct. 16, 2008

Urban dwellers aren't real Americans! (but have a lot of votes? Hullo? McFly?)

"I may not answer the questions that either the moderator or you want to hear, but I'm going to talk straight to the American people and let them know my track record also." --Sarah Palin, on not answering the questions in the vice presidential debate, St. Louis, Missouri, Oct. 2, 2008

You're special! Why should the American people expect a candidate for VP to answer questions? Who do we think we are?

chickenlittle said...

John and Ken (KFI) have always been unimpressed with Palin; nothing she says makes any real sense, is their criticism.

@rh: in all the years I've listened to John and Ken on my drive home evenings, I can't remember them ever being "for" something. The point of John and Ken is that they're against most everything (except their ratings) because the world is going to hell in a handbasket. They are a crankyman's tonic!

AlphaLiberal said...

Katie Couric: "What other Supreme Court decisions do you disagree with?"
Sarah Palin: "Well, let's see. There's --of course --in the great history of America rulings there have been rulings, there's never going to be absolute consensus by every American. And there are -- those issues, again, like Roe v Wade where I believe are best held on a state level and addressed there. So you know -- going through the history of America, there would be others but--"
Couric: "Can you think of any?"
Palin: "Well, I could think of -- of any again, that could be best dealt with on a more local level. Maybe I would take issue with. But you know, as mayor, and then as governor and even as a Vice President, if I'm so privileged to serve, wouldn't be in a position of changing those things but in supporting the law of the land as it reads today." --unable to name any Supreme Court decisions other than Roe v. Wade, CBS News interview, Oct. 1, 2008

Mean old Katie Couric!! Asking a candidate for Vice President difficult questions!

Moral of the story:
At this point, "Sarah Palin is dumb" is actually a compliment.

traditionalguy said...

Invisable Man...Maybe the George washinton example is a stretch. But George actually did get by early on as a Beauty Queen in looks and uniform as a military man that asked for the job from a group of mostly strangers in Philadelphia. His experiences in the French and Indian war were the best experiences because they were failures, and failures teach the best lessons. Sarah was not a beauty queen except for one teenage attempt to earn a scholarship, and she lost. Her lessons in hard ball politics among the Republican monopoly and the wild and crazy Democrats in Alaska were good trials by fire for a George washinton style ethics commitment. But she is a flawed human just like Martha Washington's husband, the slave owner, was. God bless him anyway for his endurance and refusal to cash in on his victory, which is how you know a Rino from a conservative

Meade said...

No, chicklit, not even me or Bob Dylan.

Wait. I've just been corrected.

Apparently, there was a short period during the early 60's when she believed that if she could not marry Frankie Valli, life would cease to be worth living.

AlphaLiberal said...

"We-- we do-- it's very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia as Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where-- where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border. It is-- from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there. They are right next to-- to our state." --Sarah Palin, asked by Katie Couric how Alaska's proximity to Russia gives her foreign policy experience, CBS News interview, Sept. 24, 2008

That Putin! Rearing his head over Alaska!

Oh, man. Who follows a person like this?

Ann Althouse said...

Freder Frederson said...”You really turn on people quickly, don't you Ann? 

But better late than never…”

I voted against McCain. Don’t ever forget that. He is responsible for what Palin was. It wasn’t so much her fault as his. She should have known better than to accept, and we will see how well she explains her decisions.

Mark said... “Not to put too fine a point on it, but my faith in your ability to sus out who would and wouldn't be fit to be President is somewhat undercut by your support for Obama. 

The obvious retort is well, McCain would have been worse.”

Yes, it’s so obvious that I wrote up my reasons – “How McCain Lost Me” – before I voted. I never said Obama wasn’t deficient. I just thought McCain was worse. I have always said that. I wasn’t a sucker for what the Obamans were selling.

Slow Joe said... “…the idea that Althouse gave this level of scrutiny to Obama is absolutely untrue. She endorsed him for president because of various problems she had with Mccain.”

“Endorsed” is hardly the right word. Point to an old post of mine where I did something that even came close to an “endorsement.”

TexMex said... “…I would no more blame Obama for that snake in the Army than I would Palin for the snake in the campaign.”

I blame them both.

“Finally, Professor, I can’t help but think that if at the end of the day, when you’ve read the book, and your opinion of Mrs. Palin remains the same, that you must admit that these criticisms of Mrs. Palin surely do apply to the current President. He’s been extremely naïve in his actions toward various foreign countries, and I very much wished you would’ve called him out on those wide-eyed foreign policy positions of his BEFORE be became President so that he would’ve taken the time to develop an attitude like Pres. Reagan: Trust but verify.”

I do criticize Obama in the same way, though I think some of his problems are different. He probably has a much higher IQ, but he’s a ditherer or he has an ideology that he can’t simply admit to and follow. He’s more highly educated and has been surrounded by highly educated persons for a long time. That gives him a polish and aloofness that Palin doesn’t have. Etc. etc. Basically, I’m into cruel neutrality. Remember? But I had to vote for one or the other objects of my cruelty, and I went for Obama. I still think McCain would have been worse.

Andre said... “I'm surprised, so much of Anne's insights come in seeing the subtexts, but I think she betrays her roots in Academia in failing to understand the nature of Palin's appeal.

Sarah Palin has become the voice of millions of populist conservatives in large part because she so successfully embodies the image of Everywoman Made Good. The tone of her writing should be part of this understanding…”

This is an excellent point. The best argument that the text I read doesn’t show dumbness is that it is all a savvy Common Woman pose.

Jason (the commenter) said... “people should be focusing less on Althouse calling Palin dumb and more on Althouse saying she lacks personal responsibility.”

Good point.

rhhardin said...

@chickenlittle: John and Ken used to be more whimsy and not all outrage all the time.

You have to pick and choose.

But sometimes John nails something elegantly, as a stirring of the whimsy usually suppressed.

Their KABC morning show was probably the high point of whimsy, and died in the ratings.

Outrage equals ratings, unfortunately.

There's lots of John and Ken clips I've saved here that tend to reflect more on the whimsy, since about 1998. (Scoll down past about a thousand Imus clips.)

somecamerunning said...

I've got a very, um, intellectual alternate title for this thread:

"The Circus Animals' Desertion."

Thanks, here all week, etc...

chickenlittle said...

I voted against McCain. Don’t ever forget that.

Voting against something is something I've just never believed worth doing. It's not a civic value, or something I'd teach my kids. It is passive aggressive though.

Arturius said...

Moral of the story:
At this point, "Sarah Palin is dumb" is actually a compliment.


Personally I would refrain from that kind of game lest you wish to look foolish. Particularly when the sitting Commander in Chief doesn't know the difference between the Medal of Freedom and the Medal of Honor, an especially idiotic mistake when we've been at war for the last eight years.

sonicfrog said...

By population, Palin was governor of one of the very tiniest states in the country, with about .2% -- not 2%, but 2 thousandths -- of the population.

Not to denigrate Alaska, but it's population is about 700,000, Fresno is at around 500,000. Would you elect two term folksey mayor Allan Autrey to be VP?

(All in all, he was a pretty good mayor too)

David said...

I don't think you have to read the book to reach the conclusion Althouse has.

Here's what I said in the previous post on Palin"

One thing I don't get about Palin, whom I generally like, is why she and her gang keep saying that the McCain campaign "would not let them" do something or other.

Why--especially in something as personal as her daughter's pregnancy--didn't she just say "Fuck You" and put out her own statement before "The Campaign" acted?

This might have gotten her more respect and more leeway from McCain's handlers.


Dumb? Naive? Whatever you attribute the inaction too, she wasn't forceful and decisive. She let them push her around. This is not Presidential.

AlphaLiberal said...

This whole "Obama is dumb" line is crazy talk. Do you think dumb people attend Harvard Law School (and graduate with honors) and are elected President of the Harvard Law Review? Or teach at University of Chicago?

Anyone can misspeak, Arturo.

What am I doing? Facts don't matter to this bilious gang in the slightest.

Buh-bye!

Synova said...

"By what is written in this passage, it doesn't look good for Palin's judgement. That is a pretty reasonable criticism and one that I don't have a glib answer for. It goes right to the heart of what we eville rethuglikkkans think are the true qualifications of a president."

Honestly assessing their own performance. Admitting mistakes in judgment?

I know people are saying that she's pointing fingers and blaming others here, but certainly she does realize the old "one finger pointing at you, three fingers pointing at me" thing.

Althouse seems to be complaining that she is not spinning this to make herself look better, considering all the leisure and opportunity for expert help enabling her to do so.

But I think that Palin has enough political-intelligence to realize that the people she wants and needs to appeal to appreciate that she seems to *not* be trying over hard to make herself look good.

"If she couldn't handle Katie Couric, how can she handle Putin or Chavez?"

Compared to Oprah, Couric is a piker.

On those couple clips Palin seems warm, if not particularly relaxed, but genuinely pleased to be talking to a woman who made her personal feelings and preferences absolutely clear. Just like with the Couric interview... look at Oprah's face.

We tend to concentrate on Palin, which makes sense, but look at Oprah's expression. (Someone did a comparison of Couric talking to Obama and Couric talking to Palin that was utterly hysterical.)

Palin has talked extensively with various people who could be expected to be... I'm not sure what "not hostile" is the same thing as "on her side"... but either "for" her or "not hostile."

Oprah is the opposite of that.

Ann Althouse said...

TennGoodBoy said... “Ann, calm down. Maybe you shouldnt write on certain times of the month.”

Maybe you piss off a lot of women with that lame-ass wisecrack, but it really doesn’t work on a lady in her late 50s. We take it as a compliment.

Freder Frederson said... “And goddamn it--he was charming enough to convince dumbshits like you, Ann and Pastafarian that a preppie from Maine was a good 'ol boy from Texas who was just like them (even though as Laura admitted he didn't know a cow from a bull).”

Oh, bullshit. I voted for Gore. I also voted for Dukakis.

And what Laura said is he tried to milk the horse:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQ3HIozYPJs

Which, I don’t know about you, but that had me picturing him masturbating a stallion.

Paddy O. said...”"It seems to me that this post and ensuing comments are just a big Althousian experiment in polemics."

That's it!

She's once again tossing arugula to the Althouse oppidans.”

Oppidans. Cool. That was absolutely new to me!

edutcher said...

Cedarford said...

edutcher - In any case, when (not if) we have a Republican President in 2012 (maybe sooner), give her a Cabinet post (God knows she's better qualified than Hillary) and let's see what she can do.

Just don't make it Secretary of State.


Spare me the recycled Tina Fey. In any case, I was thinking Interior or Energy, but I don't doubt she'd be an improvement on the Hildebeast or Jean Francois Kerry (when Hilla is finally forced to resign)

sonicfrog said...

BTW: There was no actual "victory" at Ft Du Quense. The French, knowing they were about to be outrun by Forbes and Washington's much larger force, had retreated to the Ohio Valley the previous day.

The only "victory" in the area was when Braddock had his head handed to him (literally), starting the first true world war. Duquesne, unlike, say, Louisbourg or William Henry, was never contested.

Meade said...

I doubt Althouse has ever been a "fan" of anyone.

She's a fan of her 'adorable' (her word) husband. (Oh, come on, admit it.)

sonicfrog said...

Now who doesn't know that the Constitution underlying foundation of all US law?

For openers, there's most of the current Administration, including the Law-Professor-In-Chief, and most of the Democrat caucus in Congress.

sonicfrog said...

God bless him anyway for his endurance and refusal to cash in on his victory, which is how you know a Rino from a conservative

And God Bless Sarah Palin for cashing in on her failed run at VP AND getting the check earlier than she would normally have by quiting the Governorship of Alaska to do so. God Bless Her!

I knew this thread would be fun!

jaltcoh said...

Voting against something is something I've just never believed worth doing. It's not a civic value, or something I'd teach my kids. It is passive aggressive though.

"Passive aggressive"? How does that concept even apply to voting by secret ballot? Anytime you vote for a candidate, you're necessarily deciding that the opposing candidates aren't as good -- i.e., voting against them. That's how things work. It is a civic value, and I don't see what's wrong with informing kids of these facts.

Kirk Parker said...

dcm,

No, Alaska is not the least-populated state in the Union: North Dakota, Wyoming, and Vermont are smaller.

Speaking of Vermont, do you remember all the criticism of Howard Dean's candidacy based on the fact that Vermont was so small? Me neither.

Oh, and our current serving VP? He's from a state that's just only 27% more populous than Alaska--not that he ever governed it, for that matter.


Henry,

"I saw what you did and didn't buy it"

Indeed; how sneaky of him to rely on the ordinary meaning of words.

Synova said...

"But here's the thing. I'm not running for Vice President. I DON'T WANT that candidate to be merely an average joe. I want someone who shows a broad intelligence and intellect greater than my own."

Sonicfrog, does it make any difference that she seemed to be talking to children?

I recall we went on about this at the time. My conclusion was that no one really knows what the VP does except that the President tends to define it a bit. (Biden got a puppy so he'd have something to do with his time. I'm certain Darth Cheney had very busy days.)

Certainly the VP *could* chose to wield influence, if not authority, in the Senate. Even someone who just brings sessions to order and votes to break ties could use their visibility to say what they felt the Senate ought to be working on.

Triangle Man said...

Triangle Man, are you questioning whether I've been touched by His noodly appendages, based on my use of expletives, or based on my politics?

Honestly, neither, just a whimsical provocation of an avowed Pastafarian based on something ricpic wrote about sodomites a few threads back. Thank you for playing along.

AlphaLiberal said...

Josh Marshall asks:

Who can blame Palin for trashing the McCain folks? What have they ever done for her? .

Good point! She could have been nominated VP without them!

Synova said...

"We-- we do-- it's very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia as Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where-- where do they go? It's Alaska..."

AL has apparently never been in an Air National Guard ready room along our Northern Border. Not that I'd expect him to have been.

If he had, though, he'd have seen various prettily framed pictures of Russian fighters taken by our pilots. (In the one I saw you could see the Russian pilot's polaroid as he did the same thing.)

What Palin is describing is the regular meet-and-greets between our military and theirs, which I would suppose is far more common in Alaska than North Dakota, just for proximity's sake.

As the CiC of the Alaska National Guard Palin would be made aware of all contact between the two militaries and every event where Russian air forces dip into our air space.

Every time this is brought up by people who try to portray this as Palin being stupid, I think it portrays the person who brings it up as very stupid.

chickenlittle said...

Anytime you vote for a candidate, you're necessarily deciding that the opposing candidates aren't as good

There's a huge difference between deciding to vote for someone and deciding to vote against someone. Whethere or not you vote gainst someone when you decide to vote for someone is utterly beside the point.

I don't see what's wrong with informing kids of these facts.

Well you're wrong about teaching that value and WTF do you know about raising kids anyway?

Invisible Man said...

Speaking of Vermont, do you remember all the criticism of Howard Dean's candidacy based on the fact that Vermont was so small? Me neither.

This is a needless game of semantics. In just about any job situation one looks at a combination of experience and ability. Howard Dean was never thought of as a lightweight even by his critics and spent about 20 years between the Vermont legislature, lieutenant gov. and Governor for 8 full years. Sarah was barely governor for over a year, had a few state jobs and no one but her fiercest allies believes that she's some wonderkind. Compare her to a guy like Eric Cantor who despite his minimal experience does seem to be a guy who has some intellectual curiousity and a temperment to fit a higher office.

AlphaLiberal said...

how can anyone possibly watch this video and still think Palin is anything but dumb?

From a blog post on the same topic.

"Ever since the election Palin has been seeking to blame others for the campaign’s failure. Other than elements of the McCain campaign, the press has been her favorite whipping boy. We journalists deserve and need criticism. But it was obvious in the watching that Palin flubbed the Couric interview all on her own, and the longer the former governor so publicly nurses an unjustified sense of grievance, the more Americans will have to question how someone with such thin skin could possibly succeed in Washington."

Meade said...

Speaking of George W. Bush...

Althouse is someone (who voted for Gore) who absolutely appreciates W's service.

She even appreciated his service while he was in office.

And admired his choice for vice president.

AlphaLiberal said...

Synova, even your improved argument for Palin's foreign policy experience is weak. So she was, maybe, aware of border flights.

That's not foreign policy experience. That's, maybe, being told about something.

Watch the video at the link I just posted. That she continues to blame other people for her miserable performance speaks very ill of her.

AlphaLiberal said...

Meade:

Althouse is someone (who voted for Gore) who absolutely appreciates W's service. .

Really? Well she could probably claim the $5k prize from Garry Trudeau if she can prove W showed up for Air Guard duty in Alabama.

Oddly, no-one ever has provided that proof and claimed the prize money. Because W completely blew off his responsibilities and got special treatment.

Triangle Man said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Tyrone Slothrop said...

And if you had been the VP nominee, Althouse, you would have torn everybody a new asshole and had everything your "I Am Woman" way, right? Because you're so damned smart. Please. I suspect the brilliant Barack Obama did everything Axelrod told him to do, don't you? OR IS HE TOO FUCKING BRILLIANT? Must be. After all, Althouse voted for him.

Tyrone Slothrop said...

P.S. Sorry for being dull.

You know what else is dull? Conventional wisdom.

miller said...

I sometimes wonder if the so-called Palin supporters here are Mobys.

Because if someone wants to run for President, (s)he'd better be able to withstand scrutiny.

It's too bad Palin doesn't have the media sycophants to gloss over her flaws and mistakes.

I'm sure that if she had a real estate developer make a cozy deal for her house the media would scream, but our limp national news thinks it's perfectly fine for the Man-child President.

As for Palin, I think she can handle the scrutiny just fine.

Who knows, maybe she'll spook the Man-child President again with a Facebook posting. Heaven only knows what might happen if she published a Twitter pointing out a flaw in the health-care abomination.

Weezie said...

This is a case in point of why everyone hates you, Ann. You are a "useful female taking unit" for the Troglodytes (your commenters) when you are whispering sweet nothings about how awful Teh Leeebrulls are...but if you display any use of your intellect, then you are back to being Satan's Own Handmaiden (and a perfesser! we all know perfessers are just wicked fag hags!!!1!). Just stop trying to woo these cretins....it is embarrassing.

Synova said...

AL, she could walk on water and you'd find a way to say it was evidence she's a moron.

I'm far more likely to listen to those who don't so obviously hate the fact she's stealing air.

The *fact* is that what Palin presented as foreign policy experience may have been limited, but it wasn't made-up BS. Because of proximity, yes, the activities of Russia and Putin were something she paid attention to because they mattered to her job. Those who don't understand that the proximity is practically sharing a border are not the cosmopolitan sophisticates they like to pretend they are.

She also dealt directly and extensively with Canada.

Obama lived in Indonesia when he was a child.

Wow.

Darcy said...

Not sure what you mean, miller. She didn't run for President, and I don't think she will. Whether she is dumb or not is a different argument.

I think I've simply said I'd have preferred her as President to what we got and will stand by that. I've determined that according to her thoughts on the various issues that are important to me, and her actual record.

Seems to me her Facebook takedown of Obamacare was a big clue about her smarts. But time will tell. I don't think 2 pages of her book will, necessarily.

former law student said...

She also dealt directly and extensively with Canada.

Yep. Palin favors the Canadian route to get natural gas to the US, instead of the much shorter Valdez All-Alaskan pipeline + LNG tankers.

Weezie said...

Seriously:

Heap praise upon Palin's attractive head. WE WANT HER TO RUN. And maybe even run Michelle Bachmann as her running mate (or Orly Taitz?).

Seriously, a candidate who appeals to these mouthbreathers is a candidate that is election gold for the Democratic Party.

victoria said...

Ann, it is actually nice to see some unbiased criticism of this book and of her. All I get is either she is the best thing ever or the ultimate threat to our society.I believe she is neither. I don't care if she is not super intelligent, I care that she can see, really see things. I think that this is her fatal flaw. Even when she is being "reflective" she is posing, preening and looking at the camera. There is no there, there. Her reflections don't seem to go any further than the surface ,with no desire or intellect to go beyond what is there. No depth.

If I were a republican I would want a more "in depth" person to represent me, someone who at least looks like they have thought about something and reasoned it out. Women like Olympia Snow come to mind, a thoughtful and deliberate woman, who actually looks below the surface and is willing to see the other side while sticking to her beliefs. Palin is like a Jack Russell Terrier, always darting the to the first bright shiny object. And the fact that she doesn't want to be interviewed (other than Oprah) by anyone who she does not allign herself with. No GMA, Today or CBS. For god sake, lets see her get into a good tussle with Rachel Maddow. I'd pay to see that. I would have more respect for her if she goes in to the lions den instead of her comfortable living room.

This love fest is chicken shit.

kathleen said...

Even at the ripe old age of 50-something I wouldn't take accusations of being hormonal as a compliment. Because what someone is really trying to say is that you sound irrational. It's unfortunate that you exhibit this when confronted with the exploits of a flawed yet talented female politician like Palin. You seem positively desirous of diminishing her, hence the catty phrase about her "nancy drew caper".

Not A Hillbilly said...

Boy Ann, you got the Althouse Hillbillies frothing at the mouth today! You need to yank these dogs' chains every now and then. HaHaHaHa!

"Good Jethros. Good Jethros. Calm down and come over here so I can pat you on the head."

sonicfrog said...

As the CiC of the Alaska National Guard Palin would be made aware of all contact between the two militaries and every event where Russian air forces dip into our air space.

I can hear the conversation now:

Nat Guard Official: "Hey, Gov Palin, the Russians just flew into our airspace."

Gov Palin: "Okey Dokey!".

OK. That's just not nice on my part. I retract. And it's not a criticism of Palin, it's a jab at the phrasing you used.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

If I were a republican I would want a more "in depth" person to represent me, someone who at least looks like they have thought about something and reasoned it out. Women like Olympia Snow come to mind, a thoughtful and deliberate woman, who actually looks below the surface and is willing to see the other side while sticking to her beliefs

Well, thank God you aren't a Republican if you think Olympia Snow is a shining example. You ever let your husband buy that book? Can he pee standing up now?

Inquiring minds want to know. :-D

John said...

I think naive is the proper term. She had no idea how awful people in national politics are and how much they hated her. She was naive and inexperienced. In an ideal world she would have crushed losers like Couric.

The question is whether going forward she learned anything from this experience. If she didn't, she is indeed dumb.

John said...

"Women like Olympia Snow come to mind"

I would be suprised if Olympia Snow has an IQ above 100. Worse still she believes in absolutely nothing except cravenly doing what it takes to stay in office. If shallow and craven is your idea of "depth" then I guess she fits the bill. Otherwise not so much.

Matt said...

Ann, you make no sense: when Palin did what she was told you say she was idiot. When she didn't do what she was told you say she was an idiot. You can't have it both ways.

As a New Yorker, I can tell you that Giuliani made was the city's worst political campaigner and its best mayor. Conversely, Obama was a great campaigner and is now a horrible president.

With Sarah Palin, we don't need all your hypothetical questions about if she'd be tough enough for the job of President. As the Alaskan governor, she ran against and won the incumbent in her own party. She threw out the old guard and their entrenched interest groups, turned down federal payola (grants) and put the executive jet on eBay. That's the kind of president I want. (That was Giuliani's style as well, and it sure as hell worked.) So she has a track record as an executive. The fact that she made a lousy subordinate, especially to turd like McCain, only proves she's a born leader, not a follower.

Besides, I find it ironic that a former Pom Pom girl for Obama is lecturing us on someone's naivete.

Darcy said...

Oh. LOL. I had forgotten about that, DBQ.

Olympia Snowe! Ohhh. I needed to laugh. Nice.

Weezie said...

This is delicious. Oooooh the venom. The Afternoon of a Thousand Knives, for Althouse.

miller said...

Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins bring to mind the adage of "the soft bigotry of low expectations."

I include Patty Murray in that group of senators who represent and embody the Peter Principle in action.

Synova said...

"I can hear the conversation now:

Nat Guard Official: "Hey, Gov Palin, the Russians just flew into our airspace."

Gov Palin: "Okey Dokey!".

OK. That's just not nice on my part. I retract. And it's not a criticism of Palin, it's a jab at the phrasing you used.
"

No, actually. That made me laugh. :-)

LLORT3 said...

Ann has stepped on the fourth rail of teabagger politics: dissing Saint Sarah.

Anthony Andolini said...

This is one of the most ridiculous article ever. You are calling her dumb and unfit based on her interactions with the people she thought McCain entrusted her with. She is far more intelligent than the current POTUS as well as the current VP and her running mate. The 3 of them are/have been in the Senate for decades combined and still have not managed anything worthy in terms of legislative and with 2 of them, now executive roles within Govt. You all will be surprised in the coming years when The One collapses totally and Sarah is the one left standing. As far as wokem go, you all surprise me with your cattiness and the way you love to attack when one of you appear to be successful as a real leader!

John Stodder said...

There's this dichotomy in some of the comments about Obama's qualifications vs. Palin's.

I think Obama's poor performance as president proves why Palin would have been a disaster if McCain had won and then died, hence why it was such a bad, reckless choice.

BTW, I didn't think so at the time.

And further, I think the door is open as to whether a future Palin campaign might present the country with a more plausible choice than Palin was in '08. She might have learned something.

Clearly she's got some animal instincts for politics that Obama lacks. He's been in office almost a year and has yet to come up with anything as game-changing as "death panels." I imagine that instinct served her well until she accepted the nomination. But this excerpt shows that in the day-to-day tactical process of serving as president, she was and perhaps still is deficient. She didn't ask the right questions and was weak when confronted with choices she wasn't happy with, and she is trying to rationalize it now as if decisions like this were above her pay grade. It is very much like what we see as the problem with Obama.

blog reeper said...

Let's just see what the rest of the book has, but I agree with you on this excerpt...

May this be the last hurrah of of the palinites and lets move on...

elHombre said...

The premise of the original post is ridiculous.

I don't know that Palin is smart enough to be President, but the conclusion that "she is dumb" from the excerpts reproduced on Drudge just ignores the nature of a vice presidential political campaign.

The defining factor is that a vice presidential candidate agrees to subordinate herself to the presidential candidate and staff.

"Why didn't [she] have a say?"

She didn't have a say, because that's the deal. It was not her separate campaign. Even Biden, with national campaign experience, got smacked down, albeit mildly, by the Obama people for overstepping.

The McC campaign should have prepped her like a trial lawyer preps a key witness and started her with "friendlier" interviews. The excerpts indicate that she had the sense to see that, not that she was prepared to jump right in as implied by the Professor's post.

She was not a seasoned national campaigner and might have foreseen some media hostility -- not that anyone could have anticipated the level of vitriol that would be directed against herself and family. Nevertheless, her decision to accept McC's offer, despite the risks, catapulted her into the national spotlight and probably made her rich.

She's dumb like a fox.

Sara (Pal2Pal) said...

So, Ann, you have been spot on perfect from Day One on every job you've ever had, you've never had to have a "get up to speed" period, you have never followed advice from a mentor or more experienced colleague, you've never changed your operating mode one time since you were first thrust out of school and into teaching or a real job. Every blog post you write, every podcast you make, every interview you make, every column you submit, all exactly as the first you ever did, no improvement, no new insights, no betterment due to years of experience.

Sarah Palin is not dumb by a long shot and you know it. You know she could run rings around the likes of an airhead like Katie Couric. This is a giant backhanded dig at Katie, not an admission she did Sarah in. Sarah's crime, she was inexperienced as a national campaigner, she took the advice of people she thought had been thru it all before and probably knew better than she.

Do you think she had to get burned by Wallace more than once? The whole "going rogue" thing comes from her finally saying, "I'm going to do it my way, the way I know has worked for me in the past, I'm going to use sense." Her sin was in deference to John McCain and those he trusted. Her sin was passivity, an unnatural state for Sarah Palin that didn't last long. Dumb never.

John said...

Who is more stupid Ann, Palin who didn't understand that one of her own staffers was a lyin snake or all of the alledgedly smart people like who believed that Obama wasn't what he appeared to be? Honestly Ann, you are going to have to do a lot more genuflecting about your vote in the 08 elections before you have the chops to call people on on naivity again.

Synova said...

"She was naive and inexperienced. In an ideal world she would have crushed losers like Couric.

The question is whether going forward she learned anything from this experience. If she didn't, she is indeed dumb.
"

Did you watch the Oprah clip about Levi?

Oprah asks... is he welcome for Thanksgiving?

Palin says... Oh, wouldn't it be wonderful if he was willing to do that. And then goes on about how he's family after all... etc.,

Then Oprah sort of scowls and demands... is that a Yes or a No?

And the clip ends.

Oprah is pulling a Couric, disapproving scowl and all. Palin answered her question in a "nuanced" way but that wasn't the answer Oprah wanted so it didn't count.

Well, the clip ended so we don't know how Palin responded to that.

When we find out how Palin responded to that we'll have a better idea if Palin "learned anything" from the Couric experience.

Lem said...

I have a hard time explaining why I like Palin.. (beside her conservative stands)
Much less defending her against a..

I think 'dumb' is a weak charge.
Maybe this is Althouse way of 'toughening us up'.

On December 10th, 2006 Barack Obama told Maureen Dowd to stop making fun of his big ears. From Rush Limbaugh and Free Republic: “After his speech was over he made a beeline for Maureen Dowd and the audience. The camera kept rolling…this is what he said to Maureen Dowd. OBAMA (off mic): “You talked about my ears, and I just want to put you on notice: I’m very sensitive about — What at I told them was, ”I was teased relentlessly when I was a kid about my big ears.’” DOWD (purring): We’re trying to toughen you up.” - So it was off limits.

Is a tougf assignment ;)

Sara (Pal2Pal) said...

Dumb is what is in the White House now. Dumb is someone who gets thrust in front of a mic and 60 million people and can't utter one word that someone else didn't write for him or even give out a shout out without a teleprompter to tell him what to say. Dumb is thinking you can solve national financial problems by raising taxes and giving handouts to losers.

Dumb is Barbara Boxer or Nancy Pelosi. Dumb are Gibson, Couric, Olbermann, Maddow, and many others that pop up on the TV.

And dumb is anyone who misunderestimates Sarah Palin.

Synova said...

Also, clearly, Oprah is implying that Palin ducked the question when she didn't. So what many people will take away from that is that Palin ducked the question.

Oprah is not a piker.

The *answer* was pretty clearly, "He's not coming but I wish that he would and that he'd be involved in the life of his beautiful son."

Palin didn't duck the question. She just failed to answer the way that Oprah wanted her to.

Invisible Man said...

Oprah is pulling a Couric, disapproving scowl and all. Palin answered her question in a "nuanced" way but that wasn't the answer Oprah wanted so it didn't count.

Disapproving scowl? You treat her like an insecure 12 year old who must be given a gold star for not eating the paste. Palin is right to have a bunch of interviews with Hannity and Beck. A journalist who isn't willing to pat her on the back and tell her how great she is would be just too much for your genteel sensibilities to withstand.

AllenS said...

Something that I learned a long time ago, is this: women can be real hard on other women. Why? I don't know.

Lem said...

Besides..

It is smart people who do some of the dumbest things all the time.

sonicfrog said...

You know she could run rings around the likes of an airhead like Katie Couric.

I'm being serious here. What exactly is the evidence that shows that Couric is an airhead? She may be, but I don't want to assume that just because she's a talking head on TV.

Darcy said...

Synova: I'm pretty sure I've read a fuller answer to that Levi question, and it is perfect. Loving and kind. I think you'll like it.

John said...

"Oprah asks... is he welcome for Thanksgiving?"

What the hell kind of question is that? My response would have been "it is none of your God Damned business you silly cow". I guess that is why I will never be in politics.

Bart DePalma said...

Ann:

To sum up, you believe that Palin is "dumb" because she treats others as regular folks and does not automatically assume those around her will stab her in the back to aggrandize themselves. Believe it or not, in that regard, Palin is pretty much like the rest of us in the heartland outside the snake pits in DC and Chicago.

Don't fret, though. I am sure an ambitious and intelligent woman like Palin will develop the cynicism you mistake for "political intelligence" and learn to distrust everyone. Too bad.

elHombre said...

Synova wrote: Well, the clip ended so we don't know how Palin responded to that.

"Oh, wouldn't it be wonderful if he was willing to do that," would normally be thought of as an affirmative, would it not?

miller said...

This so-called "dumb" woman stampeded the US House, Senate, and President just by making a few posts on Facebook.

Who's dumb in this situation?

Invisible Man said...

Clearly she's got some animal instincts for politics that Obama lacks. He's been in office almost a year and has yet to come up with anything as game-changing as "death panels."

Death panels fits in a long illustrious history of conservative "game changers" like "Double down on Gitmo", "Joe the Plumber", "The Chicago Way" or "Porkulus". This is truly the stuff that generations will write about.

elHombre said...

@Synova: About my 2:22: Sorry. I missed your 2:15.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 454   Newer› Newest»