[quote]Mufasa wrote:
By the way:
My “favorites” (in no particular order):
-
Washington
-
Lincoln
-
Truman
Mufasa[/quote]
Lincoln? So you’re a fan of dictators?
[quote]reddog6376 wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
By the way:
My “favorites” (in no particular order):
-
Washington
-
Lincoln
-
Truman
Mufasa[/quote]
Lincoln? So you’re a fan of dictators?
[/quote]
Try somebody else, reddog.
I’m not going there.
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
[quote]reddog6376 wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
By the way:
My “favorites” (in no particular order):
-
Washington
-
Lincoln
-
Truman
Mufasa[/quote]
Lincoln? So you’re a fan of dictators?
[/quote]
Try somebody else, reddog.
I’m not going there.
Mufasa
[/quote]
I just thought I should point out your 2nd favorite President completely trashed the constitution, suspended the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 10th amendments, and successfully circumvented the seperation of powers.
The ends justifies the means though, eh?
[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
True one heart beat away from the Presidency is not where I would want Palin. But a more important question, one that was never asked was this: Is Barrack Obama qualified to be President. He has since proven that he is not!
One more point, I’ve heard Obama ramble like a drunk asking for another beer, when he isn’t hooked up to his tele-prompter. But of course that is not replayed dozens of times. Funny how that works. [/quote]
How is he not qualified? You mean because of the birth certificate shit?[/quote]
Birth certificate? I never looked at that as a real issue. I am talking about his lack of experience. He had no executive experience. And he had no real world experience, community organizer? PULLLEASE!
The guy started running for President two years after elected to the senate. He doesn’t even have much experience as a Senator.
And Obama was never, not once, questioned because of his lack of experience. The press embraced him gave him a big warm hug and they’ve not let go since.
Fine, Palin should not be President, but Obama was just as unqualified. And as I’ve said, he’s proven it through his many inept decisions.
I like what Dennis Miller basically said last night - Palin is clumsily right most of the time - Obama is brilliantly wrong most of the time. I’ll take clumsily right.
[quote]bald eagle wrote:
I like what Dennis Miller basically said last night - Palin is clumsily right most of the time - Obama is brilliantly wrong most of the time. I’ll take clumsily right.[/quote]
In this case the words ‘clumsily right’ fit pretty well. Her answer was stupid–the details she, for God knows what reason, chose to maunder on about were jumbled and insignificant in relation to the many other things that could have been said. However, they weren’t lies, and she can’t technically be said to be wrong.
I think it boils down to public speaking ability. Palin is not a smooth orater, so people focus on how she says it rather than what she says, and conclude she’s stupid. GWB had the same problem. Because he fumbled his words or mis-pronounced a word, everyone thinks he’s stupid, regardless of the point he was making.
Obama, who is smooth as silk (or as Tagart from Blazing Saddles says, he uses his tongue prettier than a twenty dollar whore) people think he’s brilliant, even though the ideas he is presenting are stupid. Classic case of style over substance.
[quote]reddog6376 wrote:
I think it boils down to public speaking ability. Palin is not a smooth orater, so people focus on how she says it rather than what she says, and conclude she’s stupid. GWB had the same problem. Because he fumbled his words or mis-pronounced a word, everyone thinks he’s stupid, regardless of the point he was making.
Obama, who is smooth as silk (or as Tagart from Blazing Saddles says, he uses his tongue prettier than a twenty dollar whore) people think he’s brilliant, even though the ideas he is presenting are stupid. Classic case of style over substance.[/quote]
Although - without the teleprompter there is a very noticeable difference. Something the mainstream media ignores. I think she does better than he does without his teleprompter - the difference - I think - is in her mannerisms.
[quote]reddog6376 wrote:
I think it boils down to public speaking ability. Palin is not a smooth orater, so people focus on how she says it rather than what she says, and conclude she’s stupid. GWB had the same problem. Because he fumbled his words or mis-pronounced a word, everyone thinks he’s stupid, regardless of the point he was making.
[/quote]
I agree with regard to Bush. His ineloquence sat at the root of many of the accusations of stupidity, despite the fact that the intelligent can be horrid public speakers.
Palin seems to be more fundamentally ignorant. Ineloquence doesn’t help, but the substance of her gaffes is often deeper than a mere inability to communicate.
[quote]reddog6376 wrote:
I think it boils down to public speaking ability. Palin is not a smooth orater, so people focus on how she says it rather than what she says, and conclude she’s stupid. GWB had the same problem. Because he fumbled his words or mis-pronounced a word, everyone thinks he’s stupid, regardless of the point he was making.
Obama, who is smooth as silk (or as Tagart from Blazing Saddles says, he uses his tongue prettier than a twenty dollar whore) people think he’s brilliant, even though the ideas he is presenting are stupid. Classic case of style over substance.[/quote]
Although - without the teleprompter there is a very noticeable difference. Something the mainstream media ignores. I think she does better than he does without his teleprompter - the difference - I think - is in her mannerisms.
[quote]bald eagle wrote:
[quote]reddog6376 wrote:
I think it boils down to public speaking ability. Palin is not a smooth orater, so people focus on how she says it rather than what she says, and conclude she’s stupid. GWB had the same problem. Because he fumbled his words or mis-pronounced a word, everyone thinks he’s stupid, regardless of the point he was making.
Obama, who is smooth as silk (or as Tagart from Blazing Saddles says, he uses his tongue prettier than a twenty dollar whore) people think he’s brilliant, even though the ideas he is presenting are stupid. Classic case of style over substance.[/quote]
Although - without the teleprompter there is a very noticeable difference. Something the mainstream media ignores. I think she does better than he does without his teleprompter - the difference - I think - is in her mannerisms. [/quote]
She does use the old fashioned PALM PILOT 
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]bald eagle wrote:
[quote]reddog6376 wrote:
I think it boils down to public speaking ability. Palin is not a smooth orater, so people focus on how she says it rather than what she says, and conclude she’s stupid. GWB had the same problem. Because he fumbled his words or mis-pronounced a word, everyone thinks he’s stupid, regardless of the point he was making.
Obama, who is smooth as silk (or as Tagart from Blazing Saddles says, he uses his tongue prettier than a twenty dollar whore) people think he’s brilliant, even though the ideas he is presenting are stupid. Classic case of style over substance.[/quote]
Although - without the teleprompter there is a very noticeable difference. Something the mainstream media ignores. I think she does better than he does without his teleprompter - the difference - I think - is in her mannerisms. [/quote]
She does use the old fashioned PALM PILOT :)[/quote]
So do I, and I don’t think it reflects on my IQ…
Sarah Palin is one of the savviest women I have ever seen
[quote]Bambi wrote:
Sarah Palin is one of the savviest women I have ever seen[/quote]
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]reddog6376 wrote:
I think it boils down to public speaking ability. Palin is not a smooth orater, so people focus on how she says it rather than what she says, and conclude she’s stupid. GWB had the same problem. Because he fumbled his words or mis-pronounced a word, everyone thinks he’s stupid, regardless of the point he was making.
[/quote]
I agree with regard to Bush. His ineloquence sat at the root of many of the accusations of stupidity, despite the fact that the intelligent can be horrid public speakers.
Palin seems to be more fundamentally ignorant. Ineloquence doesn’t help, but the substance of her gaffes is often deeper than a mere inability to communicate.[/quote]
What this country needs is a good administrator/executive not just another good speaker. The “good speaker thing” more or less started with FDR when the movers and shakers including FDR himself realized that oratory can often trump competency.
It was no coincidence that oratory trumping competency gained its traction at the time the first “instant” MSM, i.e., radio, was introduced.
Obviously I disagree with your assumption that Palin is fundamentally ignorant. Few get to her societal/political position by being fundamentally ignorant. Fundamentally ignorant people don’t end up effectively governing states and passing through the vetting process of a major presidential campaign. She’s not even close to being stupid but the snobby MSM certainly wants YOU to think she is. Your failure to make that distinction casts the aspersion of stupidity at YOU because you are not savvy enough to understand you are being manipulated.
The summary of the above implies that in an intellectual duel between you (and others like you) and Palin…she most likely kicks your oblivious ass. The true sucker is the babe who sits in the high chair while Mama MSM spoon feeds his pureed carrots to him.[/quote]
I put up a list earlier (in this thread, a few pages back) of some of the reasons I’ve concluded that she is rather ignorant. It includes a Fox News report that, at the outset of the 2008 presidential campaign, she did not understand that Africa was a continent. Not that she slipped up and said it wasn’t–that SHE ACTUALLY HAD TO BE SAT DOWN AND EXPLAINED THE CONCEPT. Assuming the report was true: that takes a level of stupidity so profound as to be almost impressive.
The list also included her inability during an interview to name a single piece of literature she reads/a single supreme court case other than Roe v. Wade.
That’s what I know of her. That, and a bunch of superficially-patriotic speeches filled with empty allusions to middle-America buzzwords such as the founding fathers, the troops, the flag, Joe six pack (whoever the fuck that is), little league hockey…all spoken by the star of a fucking reality TV show.
So yeah, I think she’s ignorant. You can argue back by assertion all you’d like, but these things are enough for me to pencil her in as stupid in my book. At least until she comes out and starts saying intelligent things.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Fundamentally ignorant people don’t end up effectively governing states and passing through the vetting process of a major presidential campaign.[/quote]
Come on. You think her intellect got her there, or because the GOP thought it would be great way to get the female vote? Surely, it’s a combination of several factors, but I don’t see intelligence being the greatest factor. Political strategy? Sounds more logical.
I agree with you about blue collar politicians, but this woman is an honest to god moron. She is just flat out ignorant on too many issues, which is (experience and worldliness) the same damn metric people are using to bash Obama (who I am not entirely fond of, either).
I find the irony in your post amusing.
[quote]reddog6376 wrote:
Obama, who is smooth as silk (or as Tagart from Blazing Saddles says, he uses his tongue prettier than a twenty dollar whore) people think he’s brilliant, even though the ideas he is presenting are stupid. Classic case of style over substance.[/quote]
Agreed.