Why won't she just go away?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And isn't it endlessly fascinating how the DCUM posters just keep this thread front and center?

Yeah. Purportedly because they dislike her so much. But DCUMs find her endlessly fascinating!

Sorry, but I'm with Camille Paglia. I still like Palin. Not as VP, but I like her.

[Anonymous]

What did Camille have to say? I missed that.

Yes CP really turns things on their head doesn't she? I love her....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What did Camille have to say? I missed that.

Yes CP really turns things on their head doesn't she? I love her....

Oh c'mon, Camille Paglia is her own show! She likes to be contrarian to get attention.

[Anonymous]

Given that Obama had served on a Chicago board with Ayers and approved funding of a leftist educational project sponsored by Ayers, one might think that the unrepentant Ayers-Dohrn couple might be of some interest to the national media. But no, reporters have been too busy playing mini-badminton with every random spitball about Sarah Palin, who has been subjected to an atrocious and at times delusional level of defamation merely because she has the temerity to hold pro-life views.

How dare Palin not embrace abortion as the ultimate civilized ideal of modern culture? How tacky that she speaks in a vivacious regional accent indistinguishable from that of Western Canada! How risible that she graduated from the University of Idaho and not one of those plush, pampered commodes of received opinion whose graduates, in their rush to believe the worst about her, have demonstrated that, when it comes to sifting evidence, they don't know their asses from their elbows.

Liberal Democrats are going to wake up from their sadomasochistic, anti-Palin orgy with a very big hangover. The evil genie released during this sorry episode will not so easily go back into its bottle. A shocking level of irrational emotionalism and at times infantile rage was exposed at the heart of current Democratic ideology -- contradicting Democratic core principles of compassion, tolerance and independent thought. One would have to look back to the Eisenhower 1950s for parallels to this grotesque lock-step parade of bourgeois provincialism, shallow groupthink and blind prejudice.

I like Sarah Palin, and I've heartily enjoyed her arrival on the national stage. As a career classroom teacher, I can see how smart she is -- and quite frankly, I think the people who don't see it are the stupid ones, wrapped in the fuzzy mummy-gauze of their own worn-out partisan dogma. So she doesn't speak the King's English -- big whoop! There is a powerful clarity of consciousness in her eyes. She uses language with the jumps, breaks and rippling momentum of a be-bop saxophonist. I stand on what I said (as a staunch pro-choice advocate) in my last two columns -- that Palin as a pro-life wife, mother and ambitious professional represents the next big shift in feminism. Pro-life women will save feminism by expanding it, particularly into the more traditional Third World.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2008/11/12/palin/index.html is the link to the complete essay.

Flame away!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Given that Obama had served on a Chicago board with Ayers and approved funding of a leftist educational project sponsored by Ayers, one might think that the unrepentant Ayers-Dohrn couple might be of some interest to the national media. But no, reporters have been too busy playing mini-badminton with every random spitball about Sarah Palin, who has been subjected to an atrocious and at times delusional level of defamation merely because she has the temerity to hold pro-life views.

How dare Palin not embrace abortion as the ultimate civilized ideal of modern culture? How tacky that she speaks in a vivacious regional accent indistinguishable from that of Western Canada! How risible that she graduated from the University of Idaho and not one of those plush, pampered commodes of received opinion whose graduates, in their rush to believe the worst about her, have demonstrated that, when it comes to sifting evidence, they don't know their asses from their elbows.

Liberal Democrats are going to wake up from their sadomasochistic, anti-Palin orgy with a very big hangover. The evil genie released during this sorry episode will not so easily go back into its bottle. A shocking level of irrational emotionalism and at times infantile rage was exposed at the heart of current Democratic ideology -- contradicting Democratic core principles of compassion, tolerance and independent thought. One would have to look back to the Eisenhower 1950s for parallels to this grotesque lock-step parade of bourgeois provincialism, shallow groupthink and blind prejudice.

I like Sarah Palin, and I've heartily enjoyed her arrival on the national stage. As a career classroom teacher, I can see how smart she is -- and quite frankly, I think the people who don't see it are the stupid ones, wrapped in the fuzzy mummy-gauze of their own worn-out partisan dogma. So she doesn't speak the King's English -- big whoop! There is a powerful clarity of consciousness in her eyes. She uses language with the jumps, breaks and rippling momentum of a be-bop saxophonist. I stand on what I said (as a staunch pro-choice advocate) in my last two columns -- that Palin as a pro-life wife, mother and ambitious professional represents the next big shift in feminism. Pro-life women will save feminism by expanding it, particularly into the more traditional Third World.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2008/11/12/palin/index.html is the link to the complete essay.

Flame away!

It is not infantile to be so upset that such an incompetent and ideological individual was presented to us as vice president, and that we were supposed to get on board with her because she is a woman. I'm sorry, but Paglia can't just call it partisan dogma, either, because the polls show that a good number of Republicans felt the same way. Her negatives were in the cellar.

Paglia is so enamored of the idea that feminism can be a big tent concept that she fails to recognize what most Americans (Republican and Democrat alike) did: that this woman was not qualified to be President of the United States.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Given that Obama had served on a Chicago board with Ayers and approved funding of a leftist educational project sponsored by Ayers, one might think that the unrepentant Ayers-Dohrn couple might be of some interest to the national media. But no, reporters have been too busy playing mini-badminton with every random spitball about Sarah Palin, who has been subjected to an atrocious and at times delusional level of defamation merely because she has the temerity to hold pro-life views.

How dare Palin not embrace abortion as the ultimate civilized ideal of modern culture? How tacky that she speaks in a vivacious regional accent indistinguishable from that of Western Canada! How risible that she graduated from the University of Idaho and not one of those plush, pampered commodes of received opinion whose graduates, in their rush to believe the worst about her, have demonstrated that, when it comes to sifting evidence, they don't know their asses from their elbows.

Liberal Democrats are going to wake up from their sadomasochistic, anti-Palin orgy with a very big hangover. The evil genie released during this sorry episode will not so easily go back into its bottle. A shocking level of irrational emotionalism and at times infantile rage was exposed at the heart of current Democratic ideology -- contradicting Democratic core principles of compassion, tolerance and independent thought. One would have to look back to the Eisenhower 1950s for parallels to this grotesque lock-step parade of bourgeois provincialism, shallow groupthink and blind prejudice.

I like Sarah Palin, and I've heartily enjoyed her arrival on the national stage. As a career classroom teacher, I can see how smart she is -- and quite frankly, I think the people who don't see it are the stupid ones, wrapped in the fuzzy mummy-gauze of their own worn-out partisan dogma. So she doesn't speak the King's English -- big whoop! There is a powerful clarity of consciousness in her eyes. She uses language with the jumps, breaks and rippling momentum of a be-bop saxophonist. I stand on what I said (as a staunch pro-choice advocate) in my last two columns -- that Palin as a pro-life wife, mother and ambitious professional represents the next big shift in feminism. Pro-life women will save feminism by expanding it, particularly into the more traditional Third World.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2008/11/12/palin/index.html is the link to the complete essay.

Flame away!

It is not infantile to be so upset that such an incompetent and ideological individual was presented to us as vice president, and that we were supposed to get on board with her because she is a woman. I'm sorry, but Paglia can't just call it partisan dogma, either, because the polls show that a good number of Republicans felt the same way. Her negatives were in the cellar.

Paglia is so enamored of the idea that feminism can be a big tent concept that she fails to recognize what most Americans (Republican and Democrat alike) did: that this woman was not qualified to be President of the United States.

Thank you - you hit the nail on the head. I don't care about Palin's accent or her college, her pregnant daugher, her clothes or her glasses, and while I disagree with her pro-life stance, even that I can understand in a politician. To me the problem was she made me feel.... ashamed of being a professional woman. She was an embarassment to me because she was so STUPID. (or maybe ignorant is more accurate.)

I hope the first female VP or Pres is SMARTER than any other male president we've ever had. She'll have to be.

Can you imagine if Bush was female? Everyone'd be saying the last eight years have been a disaster because of the gender of the president.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
It is not infantile to be so upset that such an incompetent and ideological individual was presented to us as vice president, and that we were supposed to get on board with her because she is a woman. I'm sorry, but Paglia can't just call it partisan dogma, either, because the polls show that a good number of Republicans felt the same way. Her negatives were in the cellar.

Paglia is so enamored of the idea that feminism can be a big tent concept that she fails to recognize what most Americans (Republican and Democrat alike) did: that this woman was not qualified to be President of the United States.

Actually, you're not quite accurate here. I'm a Democrat and Obama voter (of course), but I do want to point out two facts. First, Palin's current favorable rating among Republicans is an astonishing 91%, according to the latest Rasmussen poll. It's true that her negatives were high after the initial introduction, but toward the end she had pulled up quite a bit. In exit polling, the majority of those who said Palin was important in their decisionmaking actually voted for McCain. She hurt McCain with independents, according to those exit poll data, but not with Republicans. Not in the end.

Out of curiosity, did you mind that "ideological individuals" such as Obama and Biden were presented to us as president and vice president? Or do you just dislike Palin's ideology? I dislike it myself, but you couch it as disliking such an "incompetent and ideological individual." Is all ideology bad? Or just hers? Because if it's just hers, and you mentioned it as affecting you so strongly, you're proving Paglia's point.

[Anonymous]

What a revolutionary idea -- judging someone based on her qualifications!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
It is not infantile to be so upset that such an incompetent and ideological individual was presented to us as vice president, and that we were supposed to get on board with her because she is a woman. I'm sorry, but Paglia can't just call it partisan dogma, either, because the polls show that a good number of Republicans felt the same way. Her negatives were in the cellar.

Paglia is so enamored of the idea that feminism can be a big tent concept that she fails to recognize what most Americans (Republican and Democrat alike) did: that this woman was not qualified to be President of the United States.

Actually, you're not quite accurate here. I'm a Democrat and Obama voter (of course), but I do want to point out two facts. First, Palin's current favorable rating among Republicans is an astonishing 91%, according to the latest Rasmussen poll. It's true that her negatives were high after the initial introduction, but toward the end she had pulled up quite a bit. In exit polling, the majority of those who said Palin was important in their decisionmaking actually voted for McCain. She hurt McCain with independents, according to those exit poll data, but not with Republicans. Not in the end.

Out of curiosity, did you mind that "ideological individuals" such as Obama and Biden were presented to us as president and vice president? Or do you just dislike Palin's ideology? I dislike it myself, but you couch it as disliking such an "and ideological individual." Is all ideology bad? Or just hers? Because if it's just hers, and you mentioned it as affecting you so strongly, you're proving Paglia's point.

incompetent

I don't have a problem with ideology. The GOP put up a candidate who was not qualified and very far to the right, and they expected to draw HRC supporters despite all this, because of gender. It is maddening that they think women can be so easily manipulated. As for the numbers, I think you are right. Her negatives were awful, and I thought that required the disapproval of a large number of Republicans. But I now realize that the number of people who even call themselves Republican shrank 20% between 2004 and 2008, which is how majorities can dislike her and yet large majorities of Republicans can approve of her.

[Anonymous]

PP. Sorry, that word "incompetent" was not directed at you. I cut and pasted wrong. I did not intend to be so rude to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Thank you - you hit the nail on the head. I don't care about Palin's accent or her college, her pregnant daugher, her clothes or her glasses, and while I disagree with her pro-life stance, even that I can understand in a politician. To me the problem was she made me feel.... ashamed of being a professional woman. She was an embarassment to me because she was so STUPID. (or maybe ignorant is more accurate.)

I hope the first female VP or Pres is SMARTER than any other male president we've ever had. She'll have to be.

Can you imagine if Bush was female? Everyone'd be saying the last eight years have been a disaster because of the gender of the president.

Funny, have you seen the number of anti-Palin threads - pages and pages long- posted on her college (Potato league anyone?), accent, daughter (the GOP didn't start the rumor that Trig was the daughter's child after all), and her pro-life stance? It appears that was VERY important to a lot of people, making Paglia's point.

Smart or stupid is yet to be known IMO. She didn't seem so stupid in 'friendly' interviews, and she was an incredibly disciplined campaigner. She certainly has a lot to learn about national and world events outside what impacts Alaska, I will grant you that. But a lack of knowledge does not equal a lack if intellect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Funny, have you seen the number of anti-Palin threads - pages and pages long- posted on her college (Potato league anyone?), accent, daughter (the GOP didn't start the rumor that Trig was the daughter's child after all), and her pro-life stance? It appears that was VERY important to a lot of people, making Paglia's point.

Smart or stupid is yet to be known IMO. She didn't seem so stupid in 'friendly' interviews, and she was an incredibly disciplined campaigner. She certainly has a lot to learn about national and world events outside what impacts Alaska, I will grant you that. But a lack of knowledge does not equal a lack if intellect.

No, I disagree with you on the friendly interviews. I saw the Hannity interview and she still seemed quite inarticulate. Maybe she is not stupid underneath all that but she is not a good speaker when she gets off her written speech and it comes across as stupid. And that's too bad for her but it's not my fault. I'm not 6'5" and can't dunk a basketball but I don't expect to play in the final four just because I'm "spunky" and work hard.

On the other hand, I was one of those who defended her against the classist attacks on her colleges, her daughter's pregnancy, etc., etc., and a number of people on these boards did that as well. Yes, it's outrageous how many liberals feel that class snobbery is acceptable and we need to call each other on that.

But it is possible to judge Palin for her abilities and not for her lifestyle choices. Her abilities are not what they should be to run for national office and I don't see why she should get a pass when other people don't. Like I said earlier, I think Paglia is more interested in getting attention for being a contrarian. She's not so good at the nuance thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Thank you - you hit the nail on the head. I don't care about Palin's accent or her college, her pregnant daugher, her clothes or her glasses, and while I disagree with her pro-life stance, even that I can understand in a politician. To me the problem was she made me feel.... ashamed of being a professional woman. She was an embarassment to me because she was so STUPID. (or maybe ignorant is more accurate.)

I hope the first female VP or Pres is SMARTER than any other male president we've ever had. She'll have to be.

Can you imagine if Bush was female? Everyone'd be saying the last eight years have been a disaster because of the gender of the president.

Funny, have you seen the number of anti-Palin threads - pages and pages long- posted on her college (Potato league anyone?), accent, daughter (the GOP didn't start the rumor that Trig was the daughter's child after all), and her pro-life stance? It appears that was VERY important to a lot of people, making Paglia's point.

Smart or stupid is yet to be known IMO. She didn't seem so stupid in 'friendly' interviews, and she was an incredibly disciplined campaigner. She certainly has a lot to learn about national and world events outside what impacts Alaska, I will grant you that. But a lack of knowledge does not equal a lack if intellect.

Paglia's commentary was directed at mainline Democrats, who are not the fringe wacko's pushing the Trig rumors. She deserved some gentle ribbing for the way she used her accent because she was trying too hard to do the "folksy" thing. Trust me, we have a similar accent back home, and you can tell when someone is milking it on purpose, laying it on thick as we would say. BTW, Hillary got called out every time she went down South and started developing a "twang" in her speech.

Her pro-life position is entirely fair game. It is one of the defining political issues of the last thirty years.

I agree that her education is not a big deal, but then wasn't she the one punching Obama for his elite education? I think she brought that on herself. She chose an anti-elite path and should take her medicine for not having an elite education.

I will agree with the PP who pointed out that she may be smart but just not knowledgeable. I do think she has something upstairs, but she suffered from a lack of working knowledge about national politics, including the very role of the vice president.

[Anonymous]

She is so clueless.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-kjM1asH-8&eurl

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She is so clueless.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-kjM1asH-8&eurl

Sorry, I'm one of her critics who posted earlier but I didn't find her to be any more vapid than the average politician in this piece. Her problem is that she isn't very good at concealing it -- while some other politicians are really good at saying nothing and making you think they were smart or cool.