CPAC 2014

Master

2802

Minnetonka, Minnesota

Bronze member

Subject: RE: CPAC 2014

Palin did not need any help destroying her image with the general public or solidifying her image as a policy lightweight.
I believe this is an accurate statement about that now famous quote/SNL skit:

"The basis for this line comes from a September 2008 interview with ABC News's Charles Gibson, who asked Palin what insights she had from her state being so close to Russia. She responded: "They're our next-door neighbors, and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska."

Yes, very insightful pointing out that you can see Russia from an unpopulated island - wow. If she had at least known the name of the island, I would have given her a little credit.

Remember the question about what magazines or newspapers she read:

COURIC: And when it comes to establishing your world view, I was curious, what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this — to stay informed and to understand the world?
PALIN: I’ve read most of them again with a great appreciation for the press, for the media, coming f—

COURIC: But like which ones specifically? I’m curious that you—

PALIN: Um, all of 'em, any of 'em that, um, have, have been in front of me over all these years. Um, I have a va—

COURIC: Can you name a few?

PALIN: I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news too. Alaska isn't a foreign country, where, it's kind of suggested and it seems like, 'Wow, how could you keep in touch with what the rest of Washington, D.C. may be thinking and doing when you live up there in Alaska?' Believe me, Alaska is like a microcosm of America.

And then the whole "quitter" thing, baling out on Alaska before her term was up. That went over real well. No, she did not need any help form the media, nor did she get any...this is America, remember? Bootstraps, tough, make-it-yourself.... The press has been brutal from the day it was invented.

My Training Log My Race Log

Elite

6387

Subject: RE: CPAC 2014

Originally posted by tuwood

No question I'd be voting Libertarian if those were the choices.

I'll be voting libertarian regardless. I'm done with both of them and Washington.

My Race Log

Pro

9391

Omaha, NE

Subject: RE: CPAC 2014

Originally posted by ejshowers Palin did not need any help destroying her image with the general public or solidifying her image as a policy lightweight. I believe this is an accurate statement about that now famous quote/SNL skit: "The basis for this line comes from a September 2008 interview with ABC News's Charles Gibson, who asked Palin what insights she had from her state being so close to Russia. She responded: "They're our next-door neighbors, and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska." Yes, very insightful pointing out that you can see Russia from an unpopulated island - wow. If she had at least known the name of the island, I would have given her a little credit. Remember the question about what magazines or newspapers she read: COURIC: And when it comes to establishing your world view, I was curious, what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this — to stay informed and to understand the world? PALIN: I’ve read most of them again with a great appreciation for the press, for the media, coming f— COURIC: But like which ones specifically? I’m curious that you— PALIN: Um, all of 'em, any of 'em that, um, have, have been in front of me over all these years. Um, I have a va— COURIC: Can you name a few? PALIN: I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news too. Alaska isn't a foreign country, where, it's kind of suggested and it seems like, 'Wow, how could you keep in touch with what the rest of Washington, D.C. may be thinking and doing when you live up there in Alaska?' Believe me, Alaska is like a microcosm of America. And then the whole "quitter" thing, baling out on Alaska before her term was up. That went over real well. No, she did not need any help form the media, nor did she get any...this is America, remember? Bootstraps, tough, make-it-yourself.... The press has been brutal from the day it was invented.

I completely agree that she was ill prepared for the White House and she didn't shine in the interview with Couric either. However, you're justifying the complete destruction of this woman because of how she reacted in an interview? yikes.

Even the Russia comment, was there anything factually inaccurate about what she said? No. Was there anything shallow about what she said? no. Perhaps the elites would have accepted it if she gave the exact latitude and longitude of the island? yeah right.

I think you're missing my point. Even if she came to the interview and drooled all over herself it doesn't justify the personal destruction. Bully's have been brutal throughout history as well, but I don't try and justify the behavior. "Well, he stuttered so of course my son was going to beat him up."

Oh, and you need to change your bootstrap line as well. We do not "make-it-ourselves", the government provided us the roads and facilities in order for us to succeed. Remember, we didn't build that the government did. ;-)

For the record, I'm not a big Palin fan for any political office. She kind of annoys me when she speaks at events but I completely respect her and her family for what she's gone through. I try to stick up for her or anyone else when I see hate speech. Can't we all just get along? ;-)

My Race Log

Regular

5477

LHOTP

Subject: RE: CPAC 2014

Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by ejshowers Palin did not need any help destroying her image with the general public or solidifying her image as a policy lightweight. I believe this is an accurate statement about that now famous quote/SNL skit: "The basis for this line comes from a September 2008 interview with ABC News's Charles Gibson, who asked Palin what insights she had from her state being so close to Russia. She responded: "They're our next-door neighbors, and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska." Yes, very insightful pointing out that you can see Russia from an unpopulated island - wow. If she had at least known the name of the island, I would have given her a little credit. Remember the question about what magazines or newspapers she read: COURIC: And when it comes to establishing your world view, I was curious, what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this — to stay informed and to understand the world? PALIN: I’ve read most of them again with a great appreciation for the press, for the media, coming f— COURIC: But like which ones specifically? I’m curious that you— PALIN: Um, all of 'em, any of 'em that, um, have, have been in front of me over all these years. Um, I have a va— COURIC: Can you name a few? PALIN: I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news too. Alaska isn't a foreign country, where, it's kind of suggested and it seems like, 'Wow, how could you keep in touch with what the rest of Washington, D.C. may be thinking and doing when you live up there in Alaska?' Believe me, Alaska is like a microcosm of America. And then the whole "quitter" thing, baling out on Alaska before her term was up. That went over real well. No, she did not need any help form the media, nor did she get any...this is America, remember? Bootstraps, tough, make-it-yourself.... The press has been brutal from the day it was invented.

I completely agree that she was ill prepared for the White House and she didn't shine in the interview with Couric either. However, you're justifying the complete destruction of this woman because of how she reacted in an interview? yikes.

Even the Russia comment, was there anything factually inaccurate about what she said? No. Was there anything shallow about what she said? no. Perhaps the elites would have accepted it if she gave the exact latitude and longitude of the island? yeah right.

I think you're missing my point. Even if she came to the interview and drooled all over herself it doesn't justify the personal destruction. Bully's have been brutal throughout history as well, but I don't try and justify the behavior. "Well, he stuttered so of course my son was going to beat him up."

Oh, and you need to change your bootstrap line as well. We do not "make-it-ourselves", the government provided us the roads and facilities in order for us to succeed. Remember, we didn't build that the government did. ;-)

For the record, I'm not a big Palin fan for any political office. She kind of annoys me when she speaks at events but I completely respect her and her family for what she's gone through. I try to stick up for her or anyone else when I see hate speech. Can't we all just get along? ;-)

Damn you and your compassion Tony!

;)

I think the reason Palin draws so much disdain is because she continues to put herself in a position where she is talking--often very inarticulately--about things she doesn't seem to know much about. We can all do that here (wink wink), but we're not purporting to be professional politicians with educated opinions on all matters of State. It's easy to pick apart her rhetoric because it is so riddled with mistakes, generalities, and colloquialisms. Should she be vilified for that? No. Should she have enough common sense to redirect herself to a more appropriate stage? I think so.

My Race Log

Elite

6387

Subject: RE: CPAC 2014

Originally posted by switch

Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by ejshowers Palin did not need any help destroying her image with the general public or solidifying her image as a policy lightweight. I believe this is an accurate statement about that now famous quote/SNL skit: "The basis for this line comes from a September 2008 interview with ABC News's Charles Gibson, who asked Palin what insights she had from her state being so close to Russia. She responded: "They're our next-door neighbors, and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska." Yes, very insightful pointing out that you can see Russia from an unpopulated island - wow. If she had at least known the name of the island, I would have given her a little credit. Remember the question about what magazines or newspapers she read: COURIC: And when it comes to establishing your world view, I was curious, what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this — to stay informed and to understand the world? PALIN: I’ve read most of them again with a great appreciation for the press, for the media, coming f— COURIC: But like which ones specifically? I’m curious that you— PALIN: Um, all of 'em, any of 'em that, um, have, have been in front of me over all these years. Um, I have a va— COURIC: Can you name a few? PALIN: I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news too. Alaska isn't a foreign country, where, it's kind of suggested and it seems like, 'Wow, how could you keep in touch with what the rest of Washington, D.C. may be thinking and doing when you live up there in Alaska?' Believe me, Alaska is like a microcosm of America. And then the whole "quitter" thing, baling out on Alaska before her term was up. That went over real well. No, she did not need any help form the media, nor did she get any...this is America, remember? Bootstraps, tough, make-it-yourself.... The press has been brutal from the day it was invented.

I completely agree that she was ill prepared for the White House and she didn't shine in the interview with Couric either. However, you're justifying the complete destruction of this woman because of how she reacted in an interview? yikes.

Even the Russia comment, was there anything factually inaccurate about what she said? No. Was there anything shallow about what she said? no. Perhaps the elites would have accepted it if she gave the exact latitude and longitude of the island? yeah right.

I think you're missing my point. Even if she came to the interview and drooled all over herself it doesn't justify the personal destruction. Bully's have been brutal throughout history as well, but I don't try and justify the behavior. "Well, he stuttered so of course my son was going to beat him up."

Oh, and you need to change your bootstrap line as well. We do not "make-it-ourselves", the government provided us the roads and facilities in order for us to succeed. Remember, we didn't build that the government did. ;-)

For the record, I'm not a big Palin fan for any political office. She kind of annoys me when she speaks at events but I completely respect her and her family for what she's gone through. I try to stick up for her or anyone else when I see hate speech. Can't we all just get along? ;-)

Damn you and your compassion Tony!

I think the reason Palin draws so much disdain is because she continues to put herself in a position where she is talking--often very inarticulately--about things she doesn't seem to know much about. We can all do that here (wink wink), but we're not purporting to be professional politicians with educated opinions on all matters of State. It's easy to pick apart her rhetoric because it is so riddled with mistakes, generalities, and colloquialisms. Should she be vilified for that? No. Should she have enough common sense to redirect herself to a more appropriate stage? I think so.

So what stage do you think that is? I mean right now she is not running for office, and is more or less a cheerleader.

Anyone that wants to put themselves in the spotlight has certain qualities. She is not stupid and lazy. I'm sure she wants to understand what she is talking about. She was picked for a reason, and she filled that reason. The media wanted Obama to win, and they went out of their way, and continue to do so, to shred her. She is like normal people, and normal people respond to her. But for the leaders of our country... I do not want normal people....

Having said all that... I am not a fan by any means. She irritates me to no end... but so what? She does what she does. Is she any worse than any other talking head/celebrity/public figure/politician. Not really. They are all intelligent driven people... that can all be made to look like morons... some with less help than others.

What bothers me the most is the level of discussion of the national popularity contest that happens every 4 years in November. Where is the critical thinking, where is the qualified candidate? All we get is polls and how likable they are or how electable they are. Obama was a complete joke of a candidate. Don't lump me in with the extreme right.... they are jokes for different reasons. I know Obama is an intelligent caring person, but he was a joke as a candidate with not a single success to point to in his unremarkable career. We got exactly what we voted for... a well spoken puppet. He was delivered by a media that wanted to make a story. Congrats.

Now here we are 8 years later talking about another round of idiots and partisan hacks that will do nothing to actually solve problems. Served up by ratings driven media that is propping up what is best for them, instead of being the watch dog they were meant to be. It is a sorry state of affairs. Nothing but a dog and pony show driven by selfish interests of the candidate/party/talking heads. I have taken interest and got involved for the last 10 years only to figure out it is all a joke. Probably always was... but it did not seem as ridiculous as it is now.

My Race Log

Regular

5477

LHOTP

Subject: RE: CPAC 2014

Originally posted by powerman

Originally posted by switch

Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by ejshowers Palin did not need any help destroying her image with the general public or solidifying her image as a policy lightweight. I believe this is an accurate statement about that now famous quote/SNL skit: "The basis for this line comes from a September 2008 interview with ABC News's Charles Gibson, who asked Palin what insights she had from her state being so close to Russia. She responded: "They're our next-door neighbors, and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska." Yes, very insightful pointing out that you can see Russia from an unpopulated island - wow. If she had at least known the name of the island, I would have given her a little credit. Remember the question about what magazines or newspapers she read: COURIC: And when it comes to establishing your world view, I was curious, what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this — to stay informed and to understand the world? PALIN: I’ve read most of them again with a great appreciation for the press, for the media, coming f— COURIC: But like which ones specifically? I’m curious that you— PALIN: Um, all of 'em, any of 'em that, um, have, have been in front of me over all these years. Um, I have a va— COURIC: Can you name a few? PALIN: I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news too. Alaska isn't a foreign country, where, it's kind of suggested and it seems like, 'Wow, how could you keep in touch with what the rest of Washington, D.C. may be thinking and doing when you live up there in Alaska?' Believe me, Alaska is like a microcosm of America. And then the whole "quitter" thing, baling out on Alaska before her term was up. That went over real well. No, she did not need any help form the media, nor did she get any...this is America, remember? Bootstraps, tough, make-it-yourself.... The press has been brutal from the day it was invented.

I completely agree that she was ill prepared for the White House and she didn't shine in the interview with Couric either. However, you're justifying the complete destruction of this woman because of how she reacted in an interview? yikes.

Even the Russia comment, was there anything factually inaccurate about what she said? No. Was there anything shallow about what she said? no. Perhaps the elites would have accepted it if she gave the exact latitude and longitude of the island? yeah right.

I think you're missing my point. Even if she came to the interview and drooled all over herself it doesn't justify the personal destruction. Bully's have been brutal throughout history as well, but I don't try and justify the behavior. "Well, he stuttered so of course my son was going to beat him up."

Oh, and you need to change your bootstrap line as well. We do not "make-it-ourselves", the government provided us the roads and facilities in order for us to succeed. Remember, we didn't build that the government did. ;-)

For the record, I'm not a big Palin fan for any political office. She kind of annoys me when she speaks at events but I completely respect her and her family for what she's gone through. I try to stick up for her or anyone else when I see hate speech. Can't we all just get along? ;-)

Damn you and your compassion Tony!

;)

I think the reason Palin draws so much disdain is because she continues to put herself in a position where she is talking--often very inarticulately--about things she doesn't seem to know much about. We can all do that here (wink wink), but we're not purporting to be professional politicians with educated opinions on all matters of State. It's easy to pick apart her rhetoric because it is so riddled with mistakes, generalities, and colloquialisms. Should she be vilified for that? No. Should she have enough common sense to redirect herself to a more appropriate stage? I think so.

So what stage do you think that is? I mean right now she is not running for office, and is more or less a cheerleader.

Anyone that wants to put themselves in the spotlight has certain qualities. She is not stupid and lazy. I'm sure she wants to understand what she is talking about. She was picked for a reason, and she filled that reason. The media wanted Obama to win, and they went out of their way, and continue to do so, to shred her. She is like normal people, and normal people respond to her. But for the leaders of our country... I do not want normal people....

Having said all that... I am not a fan by any means. She irritates me to no end... but so what? She does what she does. Is she any worse than any other talking head/celebrity/public figure/politician. Not really. They are all intelligent driven people... that can all be made to look like morons... some with less help than others.

What bothers me the most is the level of discussion of the national popularity contest that happens every 4 years in November. Where is the critical thinking, where is the qualified candidate? All we get is polls and how likable they are or how electable they are. Obama was a complete joke of a candidate. Don't lump me in with the extreme right.... they are jokes for different reasons. I know Obama is an intelligent caring person, but he was a joke as a candidate with not a single success to point to in his unremarkable career. We got exactly what we voted for... a well spoken puppet. He was delivered by a media that wanted to make a story. Congrats.

Now here we are 8 years later talking about another round of idiots and partisan hacks that will do nothing to actually solve problems. Served up by ratings driven media that is propping up what is best for them, instead of being the watch dog they were meant to be. It is a sorry state of affairs. Nothing but a dog and pony show driven by selfish interests of the candidate/party/talking heads. I have taken interest and got involved for the last 10 years only to figure out it is all a joke. Probably always was... but it did not seem as ridiculous as it is now.

I suppose she could be a fine cheerleader except that her own party sees her as a liability.

While I agree with most of what you wrote, I do think we have to think about how "electable" a candidate is. That seems to be a legitimate issue, no?

My Race Log

Elite

6387

Subject: RE: CPAC 2014

Originally posted by switch

I suppose she could be a fine cheerleader except that her own party sees her as a liability.

While I agree with most of what you wrote, I do think we have to think about how "electable" a candidate is. That seems to be a legitimate issue, no?

No, that is for the candidate and their election teams to figure out. I'm not a Democrat... but I had no problem with Clinton. In that he was a popular President that people identified with and liked. I might not agree with all he did, but a lot of America did and that is what living in a Democratic society is about. So I am good with that.

But Clinton was very "likable". We did not need to analyze that, or be told that. You either have it or you don't, and people get it without being told. I knew when I heard Obama give his first big victory speech over beating Hilary in some state he was going to be our next President. You want to like him... or at least his message.

The problem is we focus on the fluff and not the substance. The fluff works itself out... the substance... or lack there of... is what is running this country into the ground. Right now, America is at a cross roads... we are in a decline as a World power, our economy is in decline as a result of global competition. We continue to try to spend our way into prosperity through military and social programs that are actually making things worse. We have some tough decisions on where we go from here, and some tough decisions on what path to take. And all we get are partisan politics and ratings driven 24/7 newsertainment propaganda. I do not think the sky is falling, but I absolutely think we are headed towards collapse, and all we keep doing is racking up more debt, artificially propping up markets, and watching TV.

We can change our course.. or, we can just let nature decide for us. Both will be painful. It's a matter of degree and who's in control.

Edited by powerman 2014-03-11 2:39 PM

My Race Log

Champion

6993

Chicago, Illinois

Subject: RE: CPAC 2014

Sarah Palin is not that innocent. You can not put yourself out there on a national stage like she is doing and not expect get criticism. Even after she left the job being governor she did not go away but tried to trust herself more into the political spotlight. Sadly she might have more political power now than she had as governor.

Sad thing about politics it is more about trashing your opponent rather than trying to show why you are better. That is one reason it becomes lesser of two evils rather than which of the two people are better.

Sarah Palin never said she could see Russia from her house. Al Gore never said he invented the internet.

My Race Log

Pro

9391

Omaha, NE

Subject: RE: CPAC 2014

Originally posted by chirunner134 Sarah Palin is not that innocent. You can not put yourself out there on a national stage like she is doing and not expect get criticism. Even after she left the job being governor she did not go away but tried to trust herself more into the political spotlight. Sadly she might have more political power now than she had as governor. Sad thing about politics it is more about trashing your opponent rather than trying to show why you are better. That is one reason it becomes lesser of two evils rather than which of the two people are better. Sarah Palin never said she could see Russia from her house. Al Gore never said he invented the internet.

There's no question she chooses to be out there, but if the opposition merely has to attack you so you curl back up in a ball at home, then that proves it the ideal political tactic. It works unfortunately because nobody decent wants to run for office (on either side) because they know they'll get torn to shreds in the public eye. Who in their right mind would ever put their family through that. Take away the politics and look at what Sarah's kids have had to endure, it's just sickening.

What's even worse is that we the people eat it up. It's all about personal destruction and seeing what kind of dirt can be dug up on the other guy. If you notice this thread even quickly shifted into personal attacks on politicians with nary a mention of policy.

My Race Log

Expert

3126

Boise, ID

Subject: RE: CPAC 2014

Originally posted by powerman

Originally posted by switch

Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by ejshowers Palin did not need any help destroying her image with the general public or solidifying her image as a policy lightweight. I believe this is an accurate statement about that now famous quote/SNL skit: "The basis for this line comes from a September 2008 interview with ABC News's Charles Gibson, who asked Palin what insights she had from her state being so close to Russia. She responded: "They're our next-door neighbors, and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska." Yes, very insightful pointing out that you can see Russia from an unpopulated island - wow. If she had at least known the name of the island, I would have given her a little credit. Remember the question about what magazines or newspapers she read: COURIC: And when it comes to establishing your world view, I was curious, what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this — to stay informed and to understand the world? PALIN: I’ve read most of them again with a great appreciation for the press, for the media, coming f— COURIC: But like which ones specifically? I’m curious that you— PALIN: Um, all of 'em, any of 'em that, um, have, have been in front of me over all these years. Um, I have a va— COURIC: Can you name a few? PALIN: I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news too. Alaska isn't a foreign country, where, it's kind of suggested and it seems like, 'Wow, how could you keep in touch with what the rest of Washington, D.C. may be thinking and doing when you live up there in Alaska?' Believe me, Alaska is like a microcosm of America. And then the whole "quitter" thing, baling out on Alaska before her term was up. That went over real well. No, she did not need any help form the media, nor did she get any...this is America, remember? Bootstraps, tough, make-it-yourself.... The press has been brutal from the day it was invented.

I completely agree that she was ill prepared for the White House and she didn't shine in the interview with Couric either. However, you're justifying the complete destruction of this woman because of how she reacted in an interview? yikes.

Even the Russia comment, was there anything factually inaccurate about what she said? No. Was there anything shallow about what she said? no. Perhaps the elites would have accepted it if she gave the exact latitude and longitude of the island? yeah right.

I think you're missing my point. Even if she came to the interview and drooled all over herself it doesn't justify the personal destruction. Bully's have been brutal throughout history as well, but I don't try and justify the behavior. "Well, he stuttered so of course my son was going to beat him up."

Oh, and you need to change your bootstrap line as well. We do not "make-it-ourselves", the government provided us the roads and facilities in order for us to succeed. Remember, we didn't build that the government did. ;-)

For the record, I'm not a big Palin fan for any political office. She kind of annoys me when she speaks at events but I completely respect her and her family for what she's gone through. I try to stick up for her or anyone else when I see hate speech. Can't we all just get along? ;-)

Damn you and your compassion Tony!

I think the reason Palin draws so much disdain is because she continues to put herself in a position where she is talking--often very inarticulately--about things she doesn't seem to know much about. We can all do that here (wink wink), but we're not purporting to be professional politicians with educated opinions on all matters of State. It's easy to pick apart her rhetoric because it is so riddled with mistakes, generalities, and colloquialisms. Should she be vilified for that? No. Should she have enough common sense to redirect herself to a more appropriate stage? I think so.

So what stage do you think that is? I mean right now she is not running for office, and is more or less a cheerleader.

Anyone that wants to put themselves in the spotlight has certain qualities. She is not stupid and lazy. I'm sure she wants to understand what she is talking about. She was picked for a reason, and she filled that reason. The media wanted Obama to win, and they went out of their way, and continue to do so, to shred her. She is like normal people, and normal people respond to her. But for the leaders of our country... I do not want normal people....

Having said all that... I am not a fan by any means. She irritates me to no end... but so what? She does what she does. Is she any worse than any other talking head/celebrity/public figure/politician. Not really. They are all intelligent driven people... that can all be made to look like morons... some with less help than others.

What bothers me the most is the level of discussion of the national popularity contest that happens every 4 years in November. Where is the critical thinking, where is the qualified candidate? All we get is polls and how likable they are or how electable they are. Obama was a complete joke of a candidate. Don't lump me in with the extreme right.... they are jokes for different reasons. I know Obama is an intelligent caring person, but he was a joke as a candidate with not a single success to point to in his unremarkable career. We got exactly what we voted for... a well spoken puppet. He was delivered by a media that wanted to make a story. Congrats.

Now here we are 8 years later talking about another round of idiots and partisan hacks that will do nothing to actually solve problems. Served up by ratings driven media that is propping up what is best for them, instead of being the watch dog they were meant to be. It is a sorry state of affairs. Nothing but a dog and pony show driven by selfish interests of the candidate/party/talking heads. I have taken interest and got involved for the last 10 years only to figure out it is all a joke. Probably always was... but it did not seem as ridiculous as it is now.

Post of the year right here.

My Race Log

Elite

4564

Boise

Subject: RE: CPAC 2014

Originally posted by powerman

Originally posted by switch

Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by ejshowers Palin did not need any help destroying her image with the general public or solidifying her image as a policy lightweight. I believe this is an accurate statement about that now famous quote/SNL skit: "The basis for this line comes from a September 2008 interview with ABC News's Charles Gibson, who asked Palin what insights she had from her state being so close to Russia. She responded: "They're our next-door neighbors, and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska." Yes, very insightful pointing out that you can see Russia from an unpopulated island - wow. If she had at least known the name of the island, I would have given her a little credit. Remember the question about what magazines or newspapers she read: COURIC: And when it comes to establishing your world view, I was curious, what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this — to stay informed and to understand the world? PALIN: I’ve read most of them again with a great appreciation for the press, for the media, coming f— COURIC: But like which ones specifically? I’m curious that you— PALIN: Um, all of 'em, any of 'em that, um, have, have been in front of me over all these years. Um, I have a va— COURIC: Can you name a few? PALIN: I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news too. Alaska isn't a foreign country, where, it's kind of suggested and it seems like, 'Wow, how could you keep in touch with what the rest of Washington, D.C. may be thinking and doing when you live up there in Alaska?' Believe me, Alaska is like a microcosm of America. And then the whole "quitter" thing, baling out on Alaska before her term was up. That went over real well. No, she did not need any help form the media, nor did she get any...this is America, remember? Bootstraps, tough, make-it-yourself.... The press has been brutal from the day it was invented.

I completely agree that she was ill prepared for the White House and she didn't shine in the interview with Couric either. However, you're justifying the complete destruction of this woman because of how she reacted in an interview? yikes.

Even the Russia comment, was there anything factually inaccurate about what she said? No. Was there anything shallow about what she said? no. Perhaps the elites would have accepted it if she gave the exact latitude and longitude of the island? yeah right.

I think you're missing my point. Even if she came to the interview and drooled all over herself it doesn't justify the personal destruction. Bully's have been brutal throughout history as well, but I don't try and justify the behavior. "Well, he stuttered so of course my son was going to beat him up."

Oh, and you need to change your bootstrap line as well. We do not "make-it-ourselves", the government provided us the roads and facilities in order for us to succeed. Remember, we didn't build that the government did. ;-)

For the record, I'm not a big Palin fan for any political office. She kind of annoys me when she speaks at events but I completely respect her and her family for what she's gone through. I try to stick up for her or anyone else when I see hate speech. Can't we all just get along? ;-)

Damn you and your compassion Tony!

I think the reason Palin draws so much disdain is because she continues to put herself in a position where she is talking--often very inarticulately--about things she doesn't seem to know much about. We can all do that here (wink wink), but we're not purporting to be professional politicians with educated opinions on all matters of State. It's easy to pick apart her rhetoric because it is so riddled with mistakes, generalities, and colloquialisms. Should she be vilified for that? No. Should she have enough common sense to redirect herself to a more appropriate stage? I think so.

So what stage do you think that is? I mean right now she is not running for office, and is more or less a cheerleader.

Anyone that wants to put themselves in the spotlight has certain qualities. She is not stupid and lazy. I'm sure she wants to understand what she is talking about. She was picked for a reason, and she filled that reason. The media wanted Obama to win, and they went out of their way, and continue to do so, to shred her. She is like normal people, and normal people respond to her. But for the leaders of our country... I do not want normal people....

Having said all that... I am not a fan by any means. She irritates me to no end... but so what? She does what she does. Is she any worse than any other talking head/celebrity/public figure/politician. Not really. They are all intelligent driven people... that can all be made to look like morons... some with less help than others.

What bothers me the most is the level of discussion of the national popularity contest that happens every 4 years in November. Where is the critical thinking, where is the qualified candidate? All we get is polls and how likable they are or how electable they are. Obama was a complete joke of a candidate. Don't lump me in with the extreme right.... they are jokes for different reasons. I know Obama is an intelligent caring person, but he was a joke as a candidate with not a single success to point to in his unremarkable career. We got exactly what we voted for... a well spoken puppet. He was delivered by a media that wanted to make a story. Congrats.

Now here we are 8 years later talking about another round of idiots and partisan hacks that will do nothing to actually solve problems. Served up by ratings driven media that is propping up what is best for them, instead of being the watch dog they were meant to be. It is a sorry state of affairs. Nothing but a dog and pony show driven by selfish interests of the candidate/party/talking heads. I have taken interest and got involved for the last 10 years only to figure out it is all a joke. Probably always was... but it did not seem as ridiculous as it is now.

The real problem to me is the "eithor or" situation everyone seems to think we are in. Now, polls show that Obama has a negative effect on voters preferences. So what will they do? Go vote for the side who had the last guy with a negative effect on their preferences. Everyone who is voting for R or D deserves the government they are getting.

My Race Log

Regular

5477

LHOTP

Subject: RE: CPAC 2014

Originally posted by JoshR

Originally posted by powerman

Originally posted by switch

Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by ejshowers Palin did not need any help destroying her image with the general public or solidifying her image as a policy lightweight. I believe this is an accurate statement about that now famous quote/SNL skit: "The basis for this line comes from a September 2008 interview with ABC News's Charles Gibson, who asked Palin what insights she had from her state being so close to Russia. She responded: "They're our next-door neighbors, and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska." Yes, very insightful pointing out that you can see Russia from an unpopulated island - wow. If she had at least known the name of the island, I would have given her a little credit. Remember the question about what magazines or newspapers she read: COURIC: And when it comes to establishing your world view, I was curious, what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this — to stay informed and to understand the world? PALIN: I’ve read most of them again with a great appreciation for the press, for the media, coming f— COURIC: But like which ones specifically? I’m curious that you— PALIN: Um, all of 'em, any of 'em that, um, have, have been in front of me over all these years. Um, I have a va— COURIC: Can you name a few? PALIN: I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news too. Alaska isn't a foreign country, where, it's kind of suggested and it seems like, 'Wow, how could you keep in touch with what the rest of Washington, D.C. may be thinking and doing when you live up there in Alaska?' Believe me, Alaska is like a microcosm of America. And then the whole "quitter" thing, baling out on Alaska before her term was up. That went over real well. No, she did not need any help form the media, nor did she get any...this is America, remember? Bootstraps, tough, make-it-yourself.... The press has been brutal from the day it was invented.

I completely agree that she was ill prepared for the White House and she didn't shine in the interview with Couric either. However, you're justifying the complete destruction of this woman because of how she reacted in an interview? yikes.

Even the Russia comment, was there anything factually inaccurate about what she said? No. Was there anything shallow about what she said? no. Perhaps the elites would have accepted it if she gave the exact latitude and longitude of the island? yeah right.

I think you're missing my point. Even if she came to the interview and drooled all over herself it doesn't justify the personal destruction. Bully's have been brutal throughout history as well, but I don't try and justify the behavior. "Well, he stuttered so of course my son was going to beat him up."

Oh, and you need to change your bootstrap line as well. We do not "make-it-ourselves", the government provided us the roads and facilities in order for us to succeed. Remember, we didn't build that the government did. ;-)

For the record, I'm not a big Palin fan for any political office. She kind of annoys me when she speaks at events but I completely respect her and her family for what she's gone through. I try to stick up for her or anyone else when I see hate speech. Can't we all just get along? ;-)

Damn you and your compassion Tony!

;)

I think the reason Palin draws so much disdain is because she continues to put herself in a position where she is talking--often very inarticulately--about things she doesn't seem to know much about. We can all do that here (wink wink), but we're not purporting to be professional politicians with educated opinions on all matters of State. It's easy to pick apart her rhetoric because it is so riddled with mistakes, generalities, and colloquialisms. Should she be vilified for that? No. Should she have enough common sense to redirect herself to a more appropriate stage? I think so.

So what stage do you think that is? I mean right now she is not running for office, and is more or less a cheerleader.

Anyone that wants to put themselves in the spotlight has certain qualities. She is not stupid and lazy. I'm sure she wants to understand what she is talking about. She was picked for a reason, and she filled that reason. The media wanted Obama to win, and they went out of their way, and continue to do so, to shred her. She is like normal people, and normal people respond to her. But for the leaders of our country... I do not want normal people....

Having said all that... I am not a fan by any means. She irritates me to no end... but so what? She does what she does. Is she any worse than any other talking head/celebrity/public figure/politician. Not really. They are all intelligent driven people... that can all be made to look like morons... some with less help than others.

What bothers me the most is the level of discussion of the national popularity contest that happens every 4 years in November. Where is the critical thinking, where is the qualified candidate? All we get is polls and how likable they are or how electable they are. Obama was a complete joke of a candidate. Don't lump me in with the extreme right.... they are jokes for different reasons. I know Obama is an intelligent caring person, but he was a joke as a candidate with not a single success to point to in his unremarkable career. We got exactly what we voted for... a well spoken puppet. He was delivered by a media that wanted to make a story. Congrats.

Now here we are 8 years later talking about another round of idiots and partisan hacks that will do nothing to actually solve problems. Served up by ratings driven media that is propping up what is best for them, instead of being the watch dog they were meant to be. It is a sorry state of affairs. Nothing but a dog and pony show driven by selfish interests of the candidate/party/talking heads. I have taken interest and got involved for the last 10 years only to figure out it is all a joke. Probably always was... but it did not seem as ridiculous as it is now.

The real problem to me is the "eithor or" situation everyone seems to think we are in. Now, polls show that Obama has a negative effect on voters preferences. So what will they do? Go vote for the side who had the last guy with a negative effect on their preferences. Everyone who is voting for R or D deserves the government they are getting.

So you will be voting for a three-party system regardless of the candidates?

My Race Log