Palin: pretty, charming, and 1/4" deep

[KarateCowboy]

Sarah Palin's interview with Charlie Gibson revealed what many expected, a pageant queen's forced charisma trying to cover a basic ignorance of world events. I've never seen Gibson look or sound so frustrated, unable to elicit a single intelligent response to his reasonable questions. Time and again Palin would reduce a question to a pre-school complexity and earnestly pursue the logic - Russia is very close to Alaska, terrorists are bad people, energy conservation is important. Clearly, this woman realized long ago that charm and perkiness would get her through life in place of intelligence and competence. The Republicans seem to seek out these shallow personalities.

The right will seize upon Palin's juvenile answers as representative of Palin's commitment, proof of her competence and qualifications. The rest of us stare open-mouthed, like Charlie Gibson, amazed that a candidate for vice president could demonstrate less insight than your average babysitter. Once again the Wizard of Oz analogy comes to mind. Charlie Gibson has peeked behind the curtain and is disgusted by what he found. Hopefully the truth of Palin's incompetence will prevail over the Republicans efforts to spin her as a qualified candidate.

In my opinion, this type of reaction is born from arrogance. The cosmopolitan, self flattering contempt for what is perceived as the small-mindedness of people who are able to make clear cut judgments. To perceive as quaint and naive those who draw a moral bottom line and perceive and reject evil immediately and without question, rather than reconciling themselves to its acceptance through many bizarre and twisted pseudo-intellectual arguments so that they do not have to work up the gumption to confront it with a spine and perseverance. Terrorists are bad, and the refusal to accept basic, naked truths without hand wringing is a token characteristic of morally corrupt enablers.

 

[JoshuaW]

In my opinion, this type of reaction is born from arrogance. The cosmopolitan, self flattering contempt for what is perceived as the small-mindedness of people who are able to make clear cut judgments. To perceive as quaint and naive those who draw a moral bottom line and perceive and reject evil immediately and without question, rather than reconciling themselves to its acceptance through many bizarre and twisted pseudo-intellectual arguments so that they do not have to work up the gumption to confront it with a spine and perseverance. Terrorists are bad, and the refusal to accept basic, naked truths without hand wringing is a token characteristic of morally corrupt enablers.

Calling me an "arrogant cosmopolitan" spouting "bizarre and twisted pseudo intellectual argunements" is not going to help your candidate grow a brain. It is not sexist, elitist, or self-flattering to identify Sarah Palin as woefully inadequate to the requirements of high office. Belittling those who point out her shortcomings will not save the Republican party from the consequences of yet another bad decision.

 

[KarateCowboy]

Calling me an "arrogant cosmopolitan" spouting "bizarre and twisted pseudo intellectual argunements" is not going to help your candidate grow a brain. It is not sexist, elitist, or self-flattering to identify Sarah Palin as woefully inadequate to the requirements of high office. Belittling those who point out her shortcomings will not save the Republican party from the consequences of yet another bad decision.

Well, I think you are not pointing out any flaw. I think you draw false conclusions because of contempt for her honest, genuine, and clear demeanor.

 

[JoshuaW]

Well, I think you are not pointing out any flaw. I think you draw false conclusions because of contempt for her honest, genuine, and clear demeanor. I think you perceive flaws in her because of a haughty, misguided contempt.

For the last time, it's not about me. Palin is unable to answer questions because she lacks the most basic knowledge of world events required of a candidate for high office. Her bumper sticker answers may be sufficient for the Republican faithful, but to most people they only demonstrate a shallow intellect.

 

[Chaplain David]

For the last time, it's not about me. Palin is unable to answer questions because she lacks the most basic knowledge of world events required of a candidate for high office. Her bumper sticker answers may be sufficient for the Republican faithful, but to most people they only demonstrate a shallow intellect.

I heard she had her first townhall meeting today. She has been supervised like a grade schooler by the McCain camp, not allowed to do interviews except the one with CG, not allowed to answer questions from reporters, really makes you wonder.

 

[flicka]

I feel bad for her. She was completely unprepared for all this. I really wonder what she and McCain were thinking?

 

[eves_adam]

The mccain campaign is all about marketing. They know that there is an embittered camp of hillary faithfuls who want to take out their revenge on obama. They know mccain is unable to draw spectators to rallies, meaning that there will be little media interest. Why not put a pretty and younger face in front of the camera? mccain has been down this road countless times. It's like watching the same episode of seinfeld over and over again. It may be a good show, but the boredom factor still creeps in. So put on a new episode, of anything. This is about ratings and popularity and has nothing to do with substance.

 

[JoshuaW]

and what happens when one 1/4" deep Republican is interviewed by another? You get a litany of talking points like this, a funny summary of the Palin/Hannity interview.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RuwIf4Rblc

 

[MachZer0]

and what happens when one 1/4" deep Republican is interviewed by another? You get a litany of talking points like this, a funny summary of the Palin/Hannity interview.

I have to say that if you were to accuse the commentator there, meaning Olberman, of being 1/4" deep, you would be very generous indeed

 

[JoshuaW]

I have to say that if you were to accuse the commentator there, meaning Olberman, of being 1/4" deep, you would be very generous indeed

you could accuse Keith Olbermann of many things, having a shallow intellect would not be one of them. Or can you not tell the difference?

 

[MachZer0]

you could accuse Keith Olbermann of many things, having a shallow intellect would not be one of them. Or can you not tell the difference?

If you confuse anger with intellect, I could see your point. But I've never found him to be anything but shallow. Hopefully, he'll find a job outside of either news or sports where we don't have to have our own intellects insulted by his shallow intellect