Monday, June 06, 2011
...before mocking Sarah Palin.
Liberals are so disrespectful of Palin that they cannot even imagine that she might be right in her understanding of history. It is just at that point that the overconfidence of the left slips in to arrogance.
I don't really think she intended it the way the apologists are putting it, based on the transcript. On the other hand, given the amount of in-group 'smug' created by deriding Palin kind of deserves this.
Turing word "fistsube"
"He who warned uh… the… the British that they weren’t going to be takin’ away our arms. Uh, by reading those bills. And um, making sure as he’s ridin’ his horse through town to… send those warning shots and bells that uh, we were going to be secure and we were going to be free."
Pretty hard to get from 'unintentionally captured by the British and warned them' to that mess, even without the "warning shots and bells"
I still think it's funny that she called it a "gotcha question". I thought it was totally innocent. What did you see today? What did you get from it? IF she considers that a gotcha question, heaven help us all. Lamestream? LamePalin.
Oh, BTW, the legend is Paul Revere, it wasn't him at all.
Hi all. I'm having a blast being Positively Impactful. The bus tour worked. MSM took the bait -- I'm now back in the game without having to be in the game. I tweaked Romney, and boxed out Bachmann, while still keeping my options open. And Piper got a ton of historical stuff to write her school papers on! If I do run -- more likely than not -- I can wait a bit and not burn out early.
The Paul Revere thing was kinda impromptu. But it worked too. I'm starting to get this viral social media -- ju-jitsuing the MSM -- thing down.
But I still don't get the time of day when I talk substance. I may be the only wannabe candidate who endorsed the Ryan Plan early and often. I've been all over Energy. I've been beating on the Fed's QE plans for months. I just called Obama the Captain of the Titanic about our fiscal problems. But all that gets played is "will she or won't she run" and "is she or isn't she stupid." As Forrest Gump would say, "Stupid is as stupid does." Bite me.
That's part of why I want to wait some before committing. When the economy starts to tank so that Obama can't keep lying about how much worse he's made things -- even MSM will have to report it and I'll have my soap box on substance. I'm going to make Mitt stand in for Obama when I do -- Mitt gets closer to the O-man every day.
And now I get to mostly enjoy the summer. Hey, the last Harry Potter comes out in July! About fucking time!
I think the Palin supporters better be very careful that they don't get over confident in her ability to express herself off the cuff. If this is any example of her studied eloquence, give me a canned speech anytime.
Meanwhile, earlier today Barbara Walters defended Congressman Weiner: "If Sarah Palin can still ride around on her bus and be considered as a possible president, this man can override this, stay in congress"
Lest we forget, once upon a time, Barbara was considered a serious journalist -- the Katie Couric of her day.
ps. Good to see you back Vicky
The yentas on The View -- Barbara Walters as Mother Hen -- were yakking about Sarah and Paul Revere today. It's an amazing tell that they made such a big deal of it -- with vitriol and snark -- while aplogizing for Weiner.
With this set-up, if and when Sarah ever gets on a serious debate stage -- she'll kill. Doesn't the left see this?
It's hard to imagine anyone could be worse without a teleprompter than Obama, but she manages. Yet her opponents are so impatient to drink her blood and bay at the moon that they end up making worse mistakes trying to criticise her.
"With this set-up, if and when Sarah ever gets on a serious debate stage -- she'll kill. Doesn't the left see this?"
Ye of little faith. The media will lie. Whether thru ignorance or malice they will lie. The lies will be bipartisan because hating and lying about Palin is the new all American elitist sport.
Even here, a number of you refuse to accept that she was correct. You nreally should take a few munutes out of your day to read Revere's letter where he said he told the British.
I'd love to believe Palin would be a tough debater, but I'm not confident. She mangles language so badly when she talks that I sometimes have a hard time figuring out what she intends to say.
As Dreck points out earlier on this incident is a great example of that problem. Maybe she intended to say what her defenders are claiming but maybe she mangled her way through a half remembered historical story too. Hard to say.
What is easy to see here is what TH said originally: whatever the truth of Palins intention, the press is so arrogant and quick to judge her that they overlook their own ignorance of the history, and jump right into the soup themselves without a second thought.
Anon ... Bush wasn't exactly a tough debater either. The vast majority of the electorate is of ordinary lifestyle and straightforward speech and thought. I think Sarah speaks to that far better than the One, and the election will be Obama vs. Obama. His record is SO bad, only by pumping billions into Acorn will be win. Seriously ... how many young folks, sitting in mama's kitchen taking smack when they think they should masters of the universe, or about to graduate, will vote for this job killing, country killing disaster?
"Burn her ... she's a witch!" My god, that's how some of you people think of me.
I said here before that I wanted my bus touring to get me in the Top 3 in polling, and I'm now already comfortably at #2. I'll pick up more over time than Romney will, as he'll look even less like a Republican or a Tea Partier.
Pawlenty should emerge as #3 over time. He's got a shot. I'm too hot, Romney's too cold.
After the bus tour, I'll hang back and wait.
And Anon is right. I've got to get more polished in what I'm saying. I've been better than expected before -- I need to do it again.
And JT makes a good point. A lot of you folks probably thought Al Gore won the debates back in 2000. LOL.
"how many young folks, sitting in mama's kitchen taking smack when they think they should masters of the universe, or about to graduate, will vote for this job killing, country killing disaster? "
Fewer will, I hope and expect. But we should never underestimate the ability of "mainstream" Republican leaders to screw up (in both the election and, should the party make it through the election, in governing).
Ace is just over the top awesome on this subject, if augmenting our host's own very well stated opinion with another (though wordier, for sure) blogger is permitted.
Then there is this: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/wintour-and-watt/2011/jun/07/margaretthatcher-sarahpalin
Margaret Thatcher's handlers are right: "Sarah Palin is nuts." None of this "debate" about Paul Revere is about historical facts, it's about Sarah Palin being off the reservation - in complete incoherence and incurious narcissism. That people would trot out "experts" to support her absurd take on history (including sending out a sortee to amend the wikipedia account of Paul Revere's ride) is beyond depressing. Yawn.
Though I can't say I blame you, TH, for playing the usual "circle the wagons" card here. When anyone on the Right makes a move that could be construed as eating their own young, they have to bear the wrath of all three cans of crazy. To wit, see the comments here: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/268933/what-sarah-palin-got-wrong-and-we-did-too-joel-j-miller
Good luck with that.
"Burn her ... she's a witch!", indeed ... when you have to use quotes from British papers to argue that Sarah's "nuts" "off the reservation" "incoherent" "narcissistic". In a world where the likes of Anthony Weiner and John Edwards define our new normal, spot on I say.
There's a link above to an NPR interview with a Boston local area historian. He agrees that "basically, on the whole, Sarah Palin got her history right." But here's the interesting take-away:
"And, you know, Sarah Palin is a lightning rod. I just was thinking about how many times, you know, I've spoken about Paul Revere. I've organized events about the American Revolution. No one ever pays any attention. Suddenly, Sarah Palin comes to town, makes an off-the-cuff remark about what she learned, and suddenly, you're calling me to find out what I think about Paul Revere and the American Revolution."
I bet Piper gets an "A" on her next history paper.
Ed Rollins just got hired by Michelle Bachmann as campaign director. I bet he asked for most of his pay upfront.
I think she got it right because she had just taken the tour and had actually paid attention to what was being said, rather than trying to fit it in with the more usual narrative about Revere.
That said, it's still just not an impressive little off-the-cuff comment. I'd love for her to do well, but she didn't.
Yogi Berra has said "we have deep depth".....Sarah, not so much. A lightweight who hates to look stupid and digs in whether she is right or wrong, since on many subjects she doesn't know the difference.
Village idiot--I think she got it right because she had just taken the tour and had actually paid attention to what was being said
And you say this because? She was in Boston? and remembered Paul Revere's name? Well, blow me down.
The most ridiculous footnote to this already ridiculous story is Palin's claims on Fox News that this was yet another "gotcha question" hurled her way by the lamestream media.
And what was the gotcha question that ambushed Ms. Palin? What have you seen so far today, and what are you going to take away from your visit?”
shoot me now.
Back to reality for a moment folks. Today's news item:
"Lack of buyers may force Treasury to boost interest rates"
"Though a significant rise in interest rates could be toxic for a softening U.S. economy, the Federal Reserve has said it will end its program of purchasing $600 billion in U.S. Treasury bonds as planned on June 30. The Fed is estimated to have bought about 85 percent of Treasury’s securities offerings in the past eight months."
No shit. We've got a perfect storm of bad fundamentals about to hit. The only thing that's been saving our ass until now is that most of the rest of the world sucks more. But that's not a long term answer. There will be blood.
Austan Goolsbee just left Obama's economic team. That's a small item that was ignored during Weinergate, but it's a tell. Except for Geithner -- who's playing his own Deep Game -- no one sticks around. You can't tell Obama anything -- he won't listen.
Whatever you think of Sarah, she has been speaking to some of our big issues and has been for sometime. But that hardly gets reported.
Hockey Dad Pawlenty has gone "all in" by starting to "speak the truth." He's got potential.
Herman Cain will be another great voice on this stuff.
Romney will try to avoid taking any tough positions -- that's his plan for how to get elected. Which is why we hate him as a candidate.
And now back to our regularly scheduled programming.
Anonymous 07:20:00 AM: "shoot me now"
Geez, can I !
@ Bomber Girl:
Sarah, not so much. A lightweight who hates to look stupid and digs in whether she is right or wrong, since on many subjects she doesn't know the difference.
I suggest you apply the same standards to him whom you voted for. “speaking Austrian”….“57 states”… “profit-earnings ratio”….”But we could save all the oil that they’re talking about getting off drilling if everybody was just inflating their tires? And getting regular tune-ups? You’d actually save just as much.” Seems to me like your guy does pretty well in the ignoramus department, himself. The difference being that the POTUS considers himself a know-it-all, and Sarah doesn't have such an exalted opinion of herself, so the POTUS beats Sarah in the pretentious ignoramus department.
I will agree that her remark on Paul Revere could have been better expressed.
My comment referred to Palin, clearly and solely. I did not say anything about Obama.
Correct. At this website you have made multiple disparaging remarks about Palin. To the best of my knowledge, in your various remarks about the POTUS at this website you have never pointed out his ability to shine in the Ignoramus Department -not to mention the Pretentious Ignoramus Department- nor in the Inarticulate Spontaneous Remark Department.
You put down Palin for a given attribute which the POTUS possesses in ample amounts, yet you have not [to the best of my knowledge at this website] put down the POTUS for the same attribute.
That is why I made the comment I did.
However, I do think Yogi Berra knew what he was talking about, when he talked about it.
I am a native citizen of Red Sox Nation with a corresponding attitude towards the Evil Empire. However, I consider Yogi Berra a national treasure for his contributions to the language. If Yogi is dumb, a tree can run.
I have also made positive comments about Sarah. I try to give credit where it is due, although I clearly have major concerns about her as a Presidential candidate. My point in commenting here about her is my hope that the Republicans will come up with a candidate that an independent such as myself could support. I believe it is TH posters who decide these things, right?
Anonymous 7:20 - Because she got the info right about Paul Revere, that's why.
As to whether it was a gotcha question (I don't know if your claim is true, but it doesn't matter), that is no longer an excuse she can use. If you want to be president, you have to show you are ready for bad stuff 24/7.
As a self-proclaimed Ignoramus, I resemble that remark.
I used to worry that Sarah couldn't get elected without the Bomber Girl vote (college educated woman). I still have concerns, but not so much.
Firstly -- as I keep repeating -- when Sarah says something serious and well, she's been ignored. If she runs, that'll change. Whether she can do a good enough job at sounding like a statesman remains to be seen. But there is truth that she communicates well with ordinary people. It's like a dog whistle. Credibility will likely be a big selling point in 2012 -- she has it. She's also a fighter -- normally we don't want "hot" in a candidate but 2012 won't be normal. When Sarah speaks there can be a cringe factor. She needs a voice coach -- seriously. Think Eliza Dolittle in Pygmalion/My Fair Lady.
Sarah probably can't win New Jersey (Pawlenty might). But she could do well in PA and OH. Could she win Florida? Big test. She might do decently with Hispanics -- in a way Romney won't -- that means 40% without super high turnout. Sarah has high negatives, but they're concentrated in the Blue Blue states Obama's sure to win.
On paper I'd expect Pawlenty to do better. He's got less negatives. Wish he'd change his name.
But Sarah starts with a following. You can't buy that -- although Romney will try.
The election is a long way away. I expect we'll be in a double dip or worse as we go into 2012, and that'll affect how this plays out. That'd be an additional reason for why Romney would actually be a bad choice.
Independents will decide it -- but they're not a block. Bomber Girl hardly represents them all -- far from it. If you think of the constituency Reagan built -- it's there again for the taking -- even bigger now. Catholics and non-college whites can swing. Sarah can win these demographics, Pawlenty might, Romney won't.
I expect a three man race -- Sarah's too hot, Mitt's too cold. I actually expect T-Paw to be the Goldilocks choice. But never underestimate Sarah. Negatives don't work on her anymore. Come 2012, if she steps up to the mike and keeps knocking them down, get used to saying Madame President.
I have also made positive comments about Sarah.
In looking, I HAVE found some somewhat positive comments of yours on Palin to balance out the negatives. Moreover, your negative comments do not approach the moonbattery of some commenters on the blogosphere. For example your stating that Gov. Christie is a better spontaneous articulator than Palin of why a certain policy position is a good one- no argument there. Gov. Christie is an amazing extemporaneous speaker.
To the best of my knowledge, in your various remarks about the POTUS at this website you have never pointed out his ability to shine in the Ignoramus Department -not to mention the Pretentious Ignoramus Department- nor in the Inarticulate Spontaneous Remark Department. [in contrast to your criticisms of Sarah Palin.]
Please show me I am wrong.
I have not commented much on Obama since he is already in office and will clearly run again. I am looking for alternatives which reflect my political beliefs which tend towards fiscal conservatism, a hands off approach to "social issues"/nanny statism, and socially liberal/accepting of different lifestyles and beliefs.
Unless your beliefs differ from mine, of course.
p.s. to BT, if I were to comment on Obama it would more likely be about policies, not "style" since with someone in office that should be more relevant. Since Sarah is running (or not) for office, we have nothing but "style" to comment on. I frankly think she should have stayed on as Guv of Alaska, would have built her resume.
At the time Revere rode in April 1775 everyone was a British subject, including Revere.
The rebellions started out as a defense of the rights of British subjects and only later became a revolution.
The Declaration of Independence was not made until July 1776 and was not effective until the Treaty of Paris was signed on September 3, 1783.
So everyone that Revere warned, both friendly and otherwise, was British.
Yes, the Democratic Partisan hatred is absurd and ugly. Their hatred is part of the bigotry which creates their political effort, vs. embracing sound policy and ethical endeavors.
But Mrs. Palin simply embarrassed herself once again. Not on the finer points about history, but the complete vacant effort in responding off script - outside of the simple talking points. Her response was revealing again, much like the vacant "Bush Doctrine" effort. It was the tongue tied manner, and was not sound.
When you put yourself out there, as all knowing, sideline critic of all - as an ideal fantasy, (even using terms like "capitulated" for the likes of Boehner, Cantor, Ryan - when you fully embraced the disastrous Maverick Ticket with Cap & Trade taxation), you best have your game together. Or it will dramatically backfire.
Again, the fashion on Our side, this desperate sense of belonging guided by a passionate - emotive few, is not conservative. It just isn't honest about the reality. This is a political Celebrity Player who has not offered any plans, who continues to bash those in the trenches, while playing the base fashion in the most obvious way - and the end result is not growing those to the 'conservative' cause, but is sending them away. The cheap stereotyping is not helping. And is ironically a contradiction of the Hockey Mom's moderate tax increasing record.
Enabling this fashion is not helping, it is growing into Delaware - O'Donnell like self destructive denials.
We best do better.
I do have to fully agree with Victoria as well.
Mrs. Palin calling this a "gotcha question" is utterly embarrassing.
No wonder she is censoring her engagements with all sources - only to appear on sympathetic "coached" media offerings.
This is supposed to be a tough political force, finding a question about Paul Revere a "Gotcha" moment?