billvon 3,116 #51 November 14, 2008 > But as long as you keep talking shit, like Sarah Palin is SO "trailer," you aren't > nothing but a liability to your own ideology, your own party, your own beliefs. Agreed. And I'd add that even most of the shit-talkers are not the misogynists or racists their words would seem to paint them as - they are just following the (poor) lead set for them by their respective parties. You could see it happen here most days in the leadup to the election. Limbaugh or Kos would say something especially offensive, and a few hours later it would show up here almost word for word. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #52 November 14, 2008 QuoteAnd ignorance can be fixed. Will it change your opinion about her if she comes out in 2012 well informed? Or will you still see her as a "snowbilly?" That's a lot of knowledge to pick up in less than 4 years. She'd really need a new job, out of Alaska, to make any headway. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
downwardspiral 0 #53 November 14, 2008 Do you think Obama has the level of knowledge you're suggesting?www.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #54 November 14, 2008 Quote [reply She is a dirct threat to the libs. Hence, the vitriolic (mostly false) attacks You're way off base here. Liberals (myself included) thought on the whole that she was best thing to happen to the Obama/Biden ticket. She was a direct threat to the GOP ticket, not the Democratic one. Also, after her first two disasterous interviews where she appeared woefully clueless, the campaign basically shut her off from the media so she couldn't insert her foot in her mouth. Added to that, McCain staffers trashing her anonymously, and what do expect the media had left to report about her ? She was a glorious goldmine of ignorance though. (I particularly like the video of her having a witch doctor pull witches out of her head.) And her husband ? I think I'll miss that clueless oaf almost as much. I hope the GOP wheels that ignorant snowbilly out again as a candidate in 2012. I can't think of any better way to ensure a second Obama term. Let me just clarify one thing though. I don't think she's stupid. I think she's ignorant. You can be born stupid, but ignorance is choice. It's a trait displayed to full effect by the current occupant of the White House. Gareth is correct. McC's choice of Palin was the clincher for Obama.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gjhdiver 0 #55 November 14, 2008 QuoteAnd ignorance can be fixed. Will it change your opinion about her if she comes out in 2012 well informed? Or will you still see her as a "snowbilly?" I doubt she can overcome 40 odd years of ignorance and superstition in just four years, especially when she'll have a mountain to climb in the public perception of her as a monumental doofus. Bill Clinton had a great quite about George W. "He doesn't know anything, doesn't want to know anything, but he isn't stupid". I think this could also apply perfectly to Palin. If she gets a basic education in the next four years, I'll giver her credit for it, but her basic smarts are just one side of the equation that make her unpalatable to a lot of centrist voters. Her fundamentalist religious views, and her determination to overturn Roe vs Wade amongst other things make her toxic to huge swaths of the electorate on both sides of the partisan divide. I think religious conservatives should form a third party. The GOP is no longer a good fit for them, and there aren't enough of them around any more to take it over as they did 25 years ago. They would be happier, and they wouldn't keep torpedoing the Republicans with their voodoo bullshit come election time. They could even hold a certain balance of power with just a few seats. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #56 November 14, 2008 QuoteDo you think Obama has the level of knowledge you're suggesting? He clearly has a greater depth of knowledge. He lacks experience. I would have preferred him 8 years later. But given a choice of inexperience or dumb experience (McCain), the path was clear. Meanwhile, Palin lacks both, her claim of executive experience notwithstanding. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riddler 0 #57 November 14, 2008 Quote The paper that says Palin was qualified is softer and more absorbent. Now that was funny Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites