Comments on: (((Sarah Palin))) is ((Poaching))

By: (((Billy)))

(((Billy))) — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 11:35:18 +0000

Rox1: The bit about the parentheses was an attempt at humour. If you read my writings (both on my blog and commenting on other blogs), you’ll notice that I tend to be rather parenthetical. As a matter of fact, for a while, this blog was called “The Parenthetical Atheist.”

And no, she is not dumb. She is semi-literate, she is uneducated, she is ignorant, and she is stupid. If she were dumb, we’d never hear her speak (which would be nice).

By: Rox1SMF

Rox1SMF — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 06:04:30 +0000

For the record, I loves me some parentheses! If you write as though you’re speaking (as I tend to in rants), sorta stream-of-consciousness-like, they’re quite useful. Even in excess, they’re less annoying than ellipses…

Palin’s a fundy & a hack. Bryan Suits (@kfibryan) said on his radio show that he couldn’t imagine that someone who sat in one of his college classes, without EVER raising her hand, was smart enough to be seriously considered for the VP (much less President!). She’s dumb as the proverbial stump, and I think I’d be more outraged and ashamed of having HER as the public face of America to the world than I was of George Bush, simply because she shares my gender – and sets it back a few centuries even as she enjoys the perks of holding office.

I’m appalled that the Governor of any State in the Union would write, or sign off on, this sentence:

“Here’s some of the things we’ve done:”

There’s folksy, and then there’s illiterate. Sheesh.

By: (((Billy)))

(((Billy))) — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 02:27:41 +0000

Dan: I think part of her appeal is that the media and religious right put her on a pedestal and neither group is real good at ever admitting a mistake. So now they must defend anything she does, no matter how bizarre. Absolutist authoritarianism tends to reinforce mistakes (see W. Bush, 2001-2009 for a good example).

By: Dan Gilbert

Dan Gilbert — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 01:13:05 +0000

One other thing I find amusing in that little exerpt from her speech is the contradictory keeping your head down and plodding along to appease those who demand that you sit down and shut up. If you were appeasing them, wouldn’t you STOP plodding along and sit down (and shut up)?

I just have a really hard time understanding her appeal. Well… let me rephrase that. I can understand why she appeals to some people. I just have a hard time accepting it.