Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Sarah Palin’s foolishness ruined U.S. politics

At some point while watching HBO’s absolutely smashing (and terrifying) movie “Game Change,” it occurred to me that Sarah Palin has ruined America. The movie has been scalloped out of the book by the same name and focuses on Palin, rather than on the entire 2008 presidential campaign. The decision to do so was absolutely correct. With her selection as John McCain’s running mate, American politics lost its way — and maybe its mind as well.

The movie portrays Palin as an ignoramus. She did not know that Queen Elizabeth II does not run the British government, and she did not know that North and South Korea are different countries. She seemed not to have heard of the Federal Reserve. She called Joe Biden “O’Biden” and she thought America went to war in Iraq because Saddam Hussein, not al-Qaeda, had attacked on Sept. 11, 2001. Not only did she know little, but she was determinately incurious and supremely smug in her ignorance.

At the same time, she was a liar. In the movie, she was called exactly that by McCain’s campaign chief, Steve Schmidt, who came to realize — a bit late in the game — that one of Palin’s great talents was to deny the truth. When confronted, she simply shuts down — petulant, child-like — and then sulks off.

Palin objects to this characterization — as does McCain — but the movie has been endorsed by too many of Palin’s top campaign aides to put its veracity in doubt. Some of them had come to revile the Alaska governor — enough to leak some awful facts but not quite enough to go public. Had the election been really close, I wonder if they would have run out into the street yelling that Palin — a heartbeat away from the possible presidency — was a monster. Everybody loves their country. Some people love their careers even more.

All this is now history, I want to say. But then I must instantly correct myself. Apres Palin has come a deluge of dysfunctional presidential candidates. They do not lie with quite the conviction of Palin, but they are sometimes her match in ignorance. As with Palin, it seemed hardly to matter. Herman Cain for a while was a front-runner. He had a nonsensical tax plan, zero knowledge of foreign affairs and had never held elective office. Yet, for a brief but terrifying moment, many Republicans were saying he should be the next president of the United States.

Michele Bachmann told a touching fib about vaccinations and Rick Perry did not know squat about who governs Turkey, a NATO ally and a vitally important Middle East power. He got wrong the number of justices on the Supreme Court — he said eight — and could not remember a Cabinet department he had vowed to eliminate.

Rick Santorum knows his stuff, but his stuff includes a wild denunciation of John F. Kennedy’s famous speech about the proper role of religion in public life and a characterization of President Obama as a snob for extolling the value of college. Newt Gingrich has the wattage to be president, but so does Hannibal Lecter, if you get my drift. As for Ron Paul, he appears to be running for president of some theme park.

I have excluded Mitt Romney from my list of fools and knaves. (He has other problems.) But there once was a time when Romney would not have stood out as the only candidate who knew something about the issues that confront a president. Since Palin, though, ignorance has become more than bliss. It’s now an attribute, an entire platform: Vote for me, I know nothing and hate the same things you do.

Palin is no longer an anomaly. McCain didn’t choose her for her intellectual or experiential qualities, nor because he was geographically or ideologically balancing the ticket. She was an antiabortion woman with a pulse: Enough! She, like the out-of-nowhere Obama, had the stuff of celebrity — the snap, the dazzle, the self-assurance, the sex appeal. She didn’t need to dance with a star. God told her she already was one.

So far, the Palin effect has been limited to the GOP. Surely, though, there lurks in the Democratic Party potential candidates who have seen Palin and taken note.

by Anonymousreply 13503/22/2013

The Democrats don't need these kinds of candidates, so there will probably never be one.

The Republicans have scores precisely because their whole platform ultimately boils down to the very prescient comment in the article:

"I know nothing and hate the same things you do."

by Anonymousreply 103/13/2012

Sarah Palin is not a real American.

by Anonymousreply 203/13/2012

I think it could be argued that the standards were lowered before Palin even arrived on the scene.

Once it became possible in 2000 to install the unqualified, ignorant George W. Bush as President just because he had his Daddy's name, it set the stage for what was to follow.

by Anonymousreply 303/13/2012

No, we can keep going back further...Dan Quayle. In my lifetime, Republicans have always had a soft spot for the uninformed but photogenic.

by Anonymousreply 403/13/2012

r3 has it right. "OB/GYN's can't practice their love for women all across this country".

by Anonymousreply 503/13/2012

Reagan

by Anonymousreply 603/13/2012

Reagan actually had many years of political experience as Governor, R6

by Anonymousreply 703/13/2012

R1 is correct that Democrats don't need these kinds of candidates, at least not at the national level. The Republican appeal to middle-class and poor voters involves a lot of smoke and mirrors by default. They're operating a bait-and-switch scheme, so swindlers like Palin, Bachmann, Santorum, etc are essential. They need experienced liars and con men more than experienced policy wonks or statesmen. How else could they dupe so many into supporting a party that only serves the extremely wealthy and their corporate overlords?

Democrats at least run on a platform of actually helping poor and middle-class people by supporting lower taxes for the middle class, decent wages for working people, and broader access to healthcare, education and basic civil rights for all, so they don't need a dog and pony show to divert from their real agenda.

You might see Palinesque politicians at the local level with a D next to their names, but they're always from some deeply red backwater county where gun racks outnumber library cards.

by Anonymousreply 803/13/2012

R8 makes some very good points.

by Anonymousreply 903/13/2012

I'm sorry, but the writer's anger is completely misdirected.

John McCain's foolishness ruined US politics. He plucked the apple from the tree.

by Anonymousreply 1103/13/2012

R11, what's also amazing is that McCain, even this week, refuses to acknowledge that choosing Palin was a mistake. I can understand him not admitting that during a campaign, but years later when it's over is when politicians are supposed to reflect upon the mistakes they have made.

Steve Schmidt has admitted it, so why can't McCain? Doesn't he realize that now is the time for him to be honest if he wants historians to look back at him with any respect at all?

by Anonymousreply 1203/13/2012

Also, can someone PLEASE feed me a pile of my grandmother's shit, I'M HUNGRYYYY!!

by Anonymousreply 1403/13/2012

The profound stupidy of Sarah Palin is alive and well and living in r13.

by Anonymousreply 1503/13/2012

"Palin raised five children, stayed married to her husband for two decades, and was a governor long before McCain's "game changing." She is not a policy wonk, nor did she ever attempt to pretend to be one. She has become much more educated on the issues, and is still a force."

1. Who cares how many children she has or how long she's been married? Everyone who runs for President or Vice-President is married and has had kids. And incidentally, according to Levi Johnston, Palin and her husband barely spend any time together and sleep in separate rooms. They don't have much of a marriage.

2. She was Governor for less than 2 years when McCain chose her, so no, she hadn't been Governor 'long before' the 2008 election.

3. She has become an even bigger spectacle since 2008. She quit half-way through her term, and permanently killed any chance of an elected political career. She has done nothing to prepare to be more qualified. All she does is write books, go on FOX News and address Tea Party groups.

by Anonymousreply 1603/13/2012

OMG, R13 - where to start... Are you honestly going to sit there and say Dems have been more destructive to the country than Republicans?

by Anonymousreply 1703/13/2012

I can never tell if posters like R13 are

1. parodists

2. idiots

3. trolls

4. republicans

by Anonymousreply 1803/13/2012

Over the last four decades, the Republican Party has transformed from a loyal opposition into an insurrectionary party that flouts the law when it is in the majority and threatens disorder when it is the minority. It is the party of Watergate and Iran-Contra, but also of the government shutdown in 1995 and the impeachment trial of 1999. If there is an earlier American precedent for today's Republican Party, it is the antebellum Southern Democrats of John Calhoun who threatened to nullify, or disregard, federal legislation they objected to and who later led the fight to secede from the union over slavery.

by Anonymousreply 1903/13/2012

Good link, R19

by Anonymousreply 2003/13/2012

"Dems believe in government by emotion. If it *feels* good, *seems* right, or appeals to some nonexistent universal consciousness where everyone does the right thing, then anyone who is against it *must* be stupid, wrong, or out to destory the country."

Rightists like r13 keep parroting this idea, but it describes the right much better than the left. Classic case of projection, classic straw man argument that lets them evade the left's arguments, which they can't answer.

by Anonymousreply 2103/13/2012

"As for how the Dems plan to pay off $15 trillion in debt, I'll leave for another post. "

Please do - and at the same time, please don't conveniently forget to mention how the Republican Party managed to RUN UP a debt of $15 trillion with nothing to show for it...

Sheesh.

by Anonymousreply 2203/13/2012

R13 is most probably a paid "social media" manager or specialist for a GOP connected employer.....and thus most probably under the age of 30.

If it's simply a matter of time...don't worry R13, you'll soon grow up.

However, if you were home-schooled or went to Christian schools, including college,....well, you have my condolences.

by Anonymousreply 2303/13/2012

What I don't understand is why Sarah Palin was elected Governor in the first place. Are the people of Alaska so utterly blind that they disregard the intellectual, social and spiritual flaws of this ignoramous and vote her into office which is patently above her abilities. Why were her reasons (real reasons) for leaving office never explored. We know what she said but was it because she was so incompetent that it was in the best interests of the people of Alaska that they never know?

On a side note, I am curious, after all the brohaha of the primary does ANYONE know what the candidates stand for or what solutions they propose. I see a lot of backbiting among them and bashing the Obama Administration but I have yet to see a candidate really offer constructive plans or convictions, except for the nut case Santorum and his religious zealotry.

by Anonymousreply 2403/13/2012

[quote]As for how the Dems plan to pay off $15 trillion in debt, I'll leave for another post.

Typical conservative statement. He tosses that out implying he has plenty more to talk about yet doesn't follow up and never will.

Are you Breitbart, raised from the dead?

by Anonymousreply 2503/13/2012

*crickets*

by Anonymousreply 2603/13/2012

[quote]Doesn't he realize that now is the time for him to be honest if he wants historians to look back at him with any respect at all?

It doesn't make sense for him to do an overnight change and suddenly be honest for the sake of what historians would write. He's been a liar and cheat for many decades. That's how he will be remembered by historians.

by Anonymousreply 2703/13/2012

29% of Repugs in Mississippi think interracial marriage should be banned. I'll bet the real number is close to 50%. Shocking.

by Anonymousreply 2803/13/2012

[quote]This elitist spew is typical of why Republicans win elections: Democrats are arrogant to the point of believing that their supposed intelligence and educational credentials qualify them, AND ONLY THEM, to lead.

are you claiming that Sarah Palin is Intelligent? honestly?

by Anonymousreply 2903/13/2012

[quote]"Dems believe in government by emotion. If it *feels* good, *seems* right, or appeals to some nonexistent universal consciousness

I would say precisely the same thing about right-wingers

by Anonymousreply 3003/13/2012

Completely agree with R19.

Sarah Palin did not ruin American politics- that's hyperbole. She is merely one of the most prominent examples of the breathtakingly mediocre quality of Republican politicians. Yes Quale was one of the first and George W is at the top of the heap as well. He was spectacularly underqualified. McCain was and is pretty awful as well. Protected like W as a young man by a powerful father (McCain prior to being shot down over Vietnam and becoming a legitimate hero for surviving the ordeal) was a total screw up pilot, wrecking 3 or 4 planes (how many millions each?).

I missed the HBO film. I will try to see it however. I have tuned out all the Repub debates and most news of their primary battles because it fills the news anyway. Like R19, the current direction of their party resembles only the Southern Democratic Party prior to the Civil War- so wrong that they can only obstruct, and their policies brutally regressive- whether trying to justify slavery (Southern Dems in the 1850s) or deny global warming, declaring education as elitist, and on and on. Should not be surprising because after the 1964 Civil Rights Act that same political base moved into the Republican party- became Richard Nixon's stealth weapon and bloomed into mainstream Republican politics under Bush, greatly assisted by Ronald Reagan.

by Anonymousreply 3103/13/2012

[quote]I would say precisely the same thing about right-wingers

It's true of both parties. They both engage in emotional grandstanding and feel-good policy-making that has no basis in reality.

by Anonymousreply 3203/13/2012

As for how the Dems plan to pay off $15 trillion in debt, I'll leave for another post.

Let's go for it now- The Democrat's plan is stimulus, spending cuts and taxing the rich at the same rate the rest of us pay. It is a sound plan that has been hailed by most economists in this country. In turn the reason they support it is through historical fact and emperical fact.

It is not endorsed by the Koch Brothers, oils companies and insurance companies who support the Republicans who would rather not use education and facts but rather take advantage of your lack of educating yourself to get what they want.

by Anonymousreply 3303/13/2012

Reagan embraced the us/them divide and rode it to power. He introduced the divisiveness.

by Anonymousreply 3403/13/2012

The fact that we currently have a major Republican candidate for president who thinks higher education is for "snobs," solely to score cheap political points over Obama, is all you need to know about the GOP.

If there are any sane Republicans left, you would be wise to either sit it out or vote for Obama, then spend the next four years cleaning house of the visceral rhetoric and buffoonery which has overtaken the party. This is no longer about "R" v "D." There are some things that should not be up for debate, if you expect this country to survive. How in the hell does any Republican think this country will survive with idiots like Santorum at the helm?

At some point, be a little introspective. If your instincts after reading the above is to attack Obama, then you are part of the problem. This is no longer about Obama. This is about a political party that is broken at its very core. The Dems are no where near perfect (and I'm not a registered Dem), but at least I know it's a party that believes in things like science and education and civil rights for all - things that should be considered non-negotiable.

by Anonymousreply 3503/13/2012

[quote] it occurred to me that Sarah Palin has ruined America.

Nope. Dick Cheney started the ruination of America. Palin was just a side effect.

by Anonymousreply 3603/13/2012

The kind of emotionalism that R13 exhibits is the kind that gets Palin elected. We are supposed to "feel good" that she is a mother who raised 5 kids and is a "normal" person.

We are asked to ignore her lack of experience in governance and ignorance of public policy and international affairs for sentimental reasons.

Qualifications? Intelligence? Ethics? All of that goes out the window for candidates that are supposed to make us feel warm.

by Anonymousreply 3703/13/2012

My opinion is Ronald Reagan was the start of the dumbing down of republican candidates. I said this all the way back when he was governor - I thought he had "brain" problems and there were really other peopole running the state of California and then the White House. He was an actor, literally, in both roles. It only became obvious that his brain was going when he couldn't remember his lines any more.

by Anonymousreply 3803/13/2012

Everybody who lives in a town with fewer than 8,000 people -- look at your mayor.

Would you want that to be president?

by Anonymousreply 3903/13/2012

I agree with R36. Palin was both ignorant and arrogant, but she was a symptom rather than the problem.

by Anonymousreply 4003/13/2012

She didn't exactly ruin them, OP, she just represented how low it could sink. (Similarly low points in the past, too, to be sure.) I was willing to give her a chance, until that horrifying speech at the convention. Then, of course, she imploded.

The caliber of people running for office is pretty appalling. Like someone upthread wondered, why did Alaska vote her governor? Why do people like Bachmann, Gomert, Fox, Boehner get elected to Congress? How can their constituents believe these people can represent them well?

There's the quality of candidates or lack of, and then there's the intellect of the electorate, which evidently can't be underestimated.

by Anonymousreply 4203/13/2012

I don't like to be placed in a position of looking like I'm defending Palin but she isn't worse than Ronald Reagan or George W.

But she is a woman so it's easier to paint her as dumber or more dangerous than the men have been.

No one has ruined US politics more than Ronald Reagan. And spare me the notion that he had this VAST experience as governor. If you believe he was manipulated as President than he was also manipulated as governor. He was surrounded and backed by the same people throughout his career.

It was Reagan who allowed the crazy lunatic fringe of the right wing into mainstream politics. He welcomed them into his administration in positions high and low. I saw it first hand and I saw the effects of their brand of crazy and selfishness and lack of care for the citizens they were there to help.

Their animosity toward the government has turned them into viruses whose seeming intent is to invade the government at all levels to thwart the purpose of our government which is to serve the common good. They are unAmerican and seem to hate the progress we have made in this country. That's why it's so easy for them to imagine and believe that lunatic conspiracies riddle our government and anything they disagree with. Forgetting all along that for the most part the "government" is ordinary people just doing their jobs. Ordinary people who are not normally very good at keeping secrets in peacetime.

These are people so unworthy of official positions that no respectable republican even gave them the time of day before Reagan. Though I realize the internet has facilitated it, I still blame Reagan for making it acceptable to be foaming at the mouth wingnuts.

Palin is and always has been harmless. The fact that she is a woman made her a bigger and easier target to sexists - even to those sexists who claim to be feminists.

by Anonymousreply 4303/13/2012

"We are supposed to "feel good" that she is a mother who raised 5 kids"

Are we supposed to "feel good" about what a lousy job she has done as a mother?

by Anonymousreply 4403/13/2012

R41, if the choice is an Internet that is free from censorship, I'll gladly forgo suing anyone for defamation of my character.

by Anonymousreply 4503/13/2012

R43 is correct. Reagan had very little knowledge about anything. He repeatedly and proudly would proclaim is that his talent was that he knew how to delegate responsibility. And not for nothing but "trickle down economics" was the beginning of America being greedy and dumb enough not to realize that eventually it would have to be paid for.

George HW was left such a mess by Reagan yet Republicans still laud him as the great president he was not.

by Anonymousreply 4603/13/2012

R43- how old are you? Reagan was detached but hardl a fool. His policies (and I disagreed across the board) were carried out competently and his speeches were pretty much written by him. He was not stupid- if perhaps affected by AD during his second term. W and Palin were and are spectacularly unqualified.

Quale, now you are talking. He is what turned me 100% against George HW Bush- how could he?

Reagan ushered in the era of deregulation and the beginning of the far right in the Repub party. However he did respond to data- he DID increase taxes when the deficit bloomed. He did negotiate, and quite capably.

His Presidency started the ball rolling toward American pre-emptive war- he nominated troglodytes to the Supreme Court, he ignored HIV, he stripped the SEC of power and started the whole gstalt of gov't being the problem (rather than bad gov't being the problem.)

But he was hardly a fool, or stupid. He acted like it at times- but he was not.

by Anonymousreply 4703/13/2012

[quote]His Presidency started the ball rolling toward American pre-emptive war-

Actually (and sadly) that was Truman -- this is what spurred Eisenhower's warning about the military-industrial complex back in 1960.

by Anonymousreply 4803/13/2012

I've told the story before that Howard Baker's response to the question of how realistic The West Wing was was to say that you would NEVER have the President involved in all the decision making and policy discussion that Bartlett seemed to participate in.

I wanted to ask if it was because it was clear to him that Alzheimer's dementia had set in.

by Anonymousreply 4903/13/2012

Bullshit, neither Bush nor Romney was presidential material and they were both in it long before Palin.

by Anonymousreply 5003/13/2012

R43, then perhaps you should take it up with the right - who worship Reagan. I sure as hell don't, and a lot of people have always attacked him and the revisionist history.

I'm tired of people thinking the attacks on Palin are because she is a woman. What an absolute cop out. She is Dan Quayle 2.0. Quayle was endlessly mocked for his stupidity. Had there been an internet back then, he would've gotten it even worse. Lots of "EPIC FAIL" pics.

This woman is mocked because she is proud of her ignorance. The fact that a question like "What newspaper do you read?" is considered a "gotcha" question by her idiot minion is why she deserves ridicule. She is an absolute embarrassment to the country.

I dislike and disagree with people like Kay Bailey Hutchison or Elizabeth Dole, but I have no doubt that they are both intelligent women.

I'm a woman and I'm sick and tired of people attempting to coddle Palin or excuse her idiocy. She's a dingbat and she's not even a good mother to boot, so let's not attempt to rewrite who she is. She also engaged in some vicious attacks on Obama that Obama never would've gotten away with had he done it to her.

Like Dubya, she was allowed to fail upward, and has become very wealthy in the process.

by Anonymousreply 5103/13/2012

Janet Flanner on Hitler, 1936:

"Being self-taught, his mental processes are mysterious; he is missionary-minded; his thinking is emotional, his conclusions material. He has been studious with strange results: he says he regards liberalism as a form of tyranny, hatred and attack as part of man's civic virtues, and equality of men as immoral and against nature. Since he is a concentrated, introspective dogmatist, he is uninformed by exterior criticism. On the other hand, he is a natural and masterly advertiser, a phenomenal propagandist within his limits, the greatest mob orator in German annals, and one of the most inventive organizers in European history. He believes in intolerance as a pragmatic principle. He accepts violence as a detail of state, he says mercy is not his affair with men, yet he is kind to dumb animals. ... His moods change often, his opinions never. Since the age of twenty, they have been mainly anti-Semitic, anti-Communist, anti-suffrage, and Pan-German. He has a fine library of six thousand volumes, yet he never reads; books would do him no good — his mind is made up."

by Anonymousreply 5203/13/2012

Stupidity is bi-partisan. There are dozens of Democratic politicians every bit the intellectual equal of Palin (see Maxine Waters, for example). Fortunately, fewer have had the ego to run for the executive.

by Anonymousreply 5303/13/2012

I thought this was an interesting framework for understanding why Republican presidential candidates pick seemingly under-qualified VPs.

My favorite Internet counter-theory is "inoculation against impeachment": the candidate has a few skeletons in his closet (Iran-Contra, etc) and bets that a Nancy Pelosi type would take impeachment off the table after getting a good look at the President's designated successor.

by Anonymousreply 5403/13/2012

[quote]There are dozens of Democratic politicians every bit the intellectual equal of Palin (see Maxine Waters, for example). Fortunately, fewer have had the ego to run for the executive.

Democratic candidates don't seem to have a need to choose idiots to run on their tickets with them.

by Anonymousreply 5503/13/2012

[quote]There are dozens of Democratic politicians every bit the intellectual equal of Palin (see Maxine Waters, for example). Fortunately, fewer have had the ego to run for the executive.

Hence, the glaring differences between the two parties. They ALL have egos, but Dems would never allow someone like Palin to get that far.

by Anonymousreply 5603/13/2012

How old am I, Charlie? Maybe older than you are. I was a lobbyist when Reagan was elected so I was of drinking age. That's all I'll admit to.

Just a note about Reagan's mental health. His Alzheimer's was a progressive illenss that started waaaay before the public has been led to believe it did. I was close friends with a woman whose brother ran for congress during that time and Reagan came to his district to campaign for him in 1978. This guy was very conservative and a huge fan of Reagan's and yet he recognized Reagan's diminshed mental capacity BEFORE his first term. He was rather shocked by it but in the end didn't care because of what Reagan represented to conservatives.

You are pretty naive if you think Reagan wrote his own speeches. He may have told them what topic he wanted and ordered revisions but Reagan was never that involved in such things.

I agree that Reagan loved to put on the pretense of some gosh golly fool but his main failing was that he wasn't particularly interested in governance or details. That doesn't make him stupid, just intellectually lazy. You give him way too much credit for steering the course of his administration. He perfected a very laissez faire attitude toward his presidency.

by Anonymousreply 5803/13/2012

People have such an odd nostalgia when it comes to Reagan and the 80s. Was it Dynasty? What am I missing?

by Anonymousreply 5903/13/2012

[quote]Steve Schmidt has admitted it, so why can't McCain?

He hasn't retired. I don't think he'll risk alienating voters or other politicians until he's out of the game.

by Anonymousreply 6003/13/2012

[quote]Ask yourself this: would anyone be bullied online if you could sue ISPs or social-networks for negligence, like you could if someone allowed you to be harmed on their property?

Suing the ISP makes as much sense as would suing the US Postal Service if I received hate mail.

by Anonymousreply 6103/13/2012

Maxine Waters is as big an "idiot" as Sarah Palin? Please, just stop.

by Anonymousreply 6203/13/2012

I met Reagan once in the mid 70s in San Francisco. He was - honestly - standing in front of the place where I worked waiting for his limo. He was wearing heavy make-up and obviously colored his hair. I think those were the days of his radio show.

by Anonymousreply 6303/13/2012

[quote]2. She was Governor for less than 2 years when McCain chose her, so no, she hadn't been Governor 'long before' the 2008 election.

Not to mention that most of her major decisions were either run through and/or had input from her husband first. So much for being a self-assertive powerful woman.

by Anonymousreply 6403/13/2012

>>> she thought America went to war in Iraq because Saddam Hussein, not al-Qaeda, had attacked on Sept. 11, 2001.

She thought that (and probably still does) because faux news CONTINUES to say Saddam was partly responsible for 9/11 at least 10 times a day. This is despite the fact that it wasn't true, it was proven untrue many, many years ago.

The republican motto is ,"Why let facts get in the way'

by Anonymousreply 6603/13/2012

There's a difference between a vagina and a cunt, R65.

OP, you are reversing cause and effect. Palin is a product of our nation's idiocracy, not the other way around.

by Anonymousreply 6703/13/2012

What R18 said.

by Anonymousreply 6803/13/2012

A country has a decaying education system.

A country has one party pandering to the very people it strives to keep poorly educated. Searching for the kind of candidate who might appeal to the people it insists on keeping poorly informed so that they will vote against their own interests.

You do the math.

I did.

Sarah Palin didn't ruin America.

The country's not giving a shit about education has ruined America.

by Anonymousreply 6903/13/2012

[quote] I'm surprised gays don't realize the primary cause of CYBERBULLYING.

The primary cause of cyberbullying is the internet. Let's close it down!

by Anonymousreply 7003/13/2012

I've been thinking the same thing that the article asserts about Palin and politics for a long time. And W also has a huge role in dumbing down the political discourse and this is where we've ended up - seeking out higher education is something to be sneered at, unbelievable. John McCain is still praising Palin publicly, he should be forced to resign.

by Anonymousreply 7103/13/2012

So you can't attack a woman who's an idiot because she's a woman? It doesn't work that way, R65. Palin put herself out there as a public figure, so she's fair game. And to prove the point about idiocy - just check any thread on here about Newtie or Frothy.

by Anonymousreply 7303/13/2012

George W Bush and Dick Cheney were the most destructive politicians America has yet seen. Sarah Palin PALES in comparison with them.

Yet the mainstream media is all over Palin and gives a free pass to Bush and Cheney.

Sorry, but that is total bullshit. Palin never got close to making federal legislation, gutting federal regulations, stripping civil rights, legalizing torture, overturning the constitution. That was the big boys and all this sniping about Palin is a feint. She is nothing but a straw woman.

by Anonymousreply 7403/13/2012

I'm not sure McCain's selection of Palin was a mistake. I think he did it intentionally to fuck the GOP for refusing to let him have Deputy Dawg Lieberman as his running mate.

by Anonymousreply 7503/13/2012

"Yet the mainstream media is all over Palin and gives a free pass to Bush and Cheney."

The mainstream media were all over Palin with loving drool dripping from their lips as they kissed her ignorant ass and insisted that we all take her seriously. They ignored the seriousness of her destructive impact to the same extent as they do every other Republican, including Bush and Cheney. The fact that Bush and Cheney were worse than her doesn't mean that she wasn't (and isn't) bad, or that she took any hits that she didn't completely deserve. The problem isn't Sarah Palin being "bullied"; the problem is Republicans not being held accountable for their destructive actions, ever, period. Go whine to your mainstream media about that.

by Anonymousreply 7603/13/2012

R74 is right, but still hate what Palin's image has done to politics. She's still out there with her ridiculous ego trying to attack President Obama as if she's on the same level as him.

by Anonymousreply 7703/13/2012

[quote]"Yet the mainstream media is all over Palin and gives a free pass to Bush and Cheney."

Bush and Cheney made shit tons of money for the media owners' stock portfolios and went to war for Israel's benefit.

by Anonymousreply 7803/13/2012

She didn't "ruin" American politics, R76. It was ruined before she came along, by assholes like Reagan, the Bushes and Cheney. Palin only managed to be a governor of a red state for half a term, she never had the power the others had. Why are they taken as serious politicians who didn't ruin anything?

The damamge she caused America was minimal. She is nowhere near as destructive as Newt Gingrich was and still is.

by Anonymousreply 7903/13/2012

Talk to Gabby Giffords about how much damage Palin has done.

by Anonymousreply 8003/13/2012

Fuck off, R81.

by Anonymousreply 8203/13/2012

"Palin only managed to be a governor of a red state for half a term, she never had the power the others had. Why are they taken as serious politicians who didn't ruin anything?"

Who said they aren't taken seriously as politicians who ruined anything? You're making the same strawman argument over and over again: Bush, Cheney, et al. were more substantively powerful and destructive, thus citing the rise of Palin as singularly destructive of the tenor of political discourse is unfair. The reality is that both are true: Palin never had the same substantive power as other Republicans, but her rise still had a tremendously destructive impact on political discourse in this country and the way that political campaigns are conducted. People like Cheney and Gingrich could never have gotten to the positions they ultimately held and did the substantive damage they ultimately did if it had not been for the steady deterioration in political discourse that began with Reagan and reached its nadir with Palin and the Tea Party. And now we have Mitt Romney insisting that he is even more extreme and batshit than Rick Santorum in order to appeal to his "base." It is the creation and nurturance of said "base" that empowered Bush and Cheney, and empowers Santorum and every other Republican "I'm a bigger fascist than that other guy" flavor of the month.

by Anonymousreply 8503/13/2012

Why are mean spirited people like r81 allowed admission here? Oh, never mind.

by Anonymousreply 8703/13/2012

R13/r41 is a particularly addled person.

by Anonymousreply 8903/13/2012

Well r88 the only one telling anyone to "fuck off" was you. Sounds pretty angry; however, at least you admit to your idiot issues.

by Anonymousreply 9003/13/2012

So There!

by Anonymousreply 9103/13/2012

[quote]Not only did she know little, but she was determinately incurious and supremely smug in her ignorance.

Sounds like 99% of the freeper base.

by Anonymousreply 9203/13/2012

Honey child, there has not been serious political discourse in the US since the 1970s and already we had George Murphy, Ronald Reagan, Phyllis George, etc.

by Anonymousreply 9303/13/2012

Phyllis George?

by Anonymousreply 9403/13/2012

Sarah Palin is a textbook example of narcissistic personality disorder. A self-absorbed attention whore whose superficial charm wins her all sorts of undeserved opportunities, which she then fucks up by her complete lack of substance, ridiculously short attention span and unfortunate tendency to thoughtlessly trample all over people, turning would-be allies into enemies.

Ever since Reagan, Republican puppet masters have been on the lookout for another perfect Chance the Gardener who can charm the crowds but is too out of it to do anything except what he's told. George W. Bush was a dream come true, and I guess they wanted another one so badly that they talked themselves into thinking Sarah Palin would fit the bill. Mitt Romney is much better in terms of sock puppetry, but the crowds don't like him so much.

by Anonymousreply 9503/13/2012

"What I don't understand is why Sarah Palin was elected Governor in the first place."

Wasn't there a backlash against Governor Murkowski for appointing his own daughter Lisa Murkowski to the U.S. Senate seat for Alaska?

by Anonymousreply 9603/13/2012

Palin is a quitter. A whiner. Like Bush, completely uncurious about anything, except her own little world. In this ever increasing global economy, where everything is affected, and where what happens outside the U.S. can affect us more than what happens in the U.S., the days of the 'U.S. rules the world' mentality are over. A President needs to be someone who grasps the whole picture, different cultural thinking, and weigh it all, without overacting, or undereacting. As someone else here said, I don't want a President I can relate to, like a neighbor. I want A Prez who's smarter than me, more educated, who understands complex scenarios, and who cares. I believe that's who we have in the White House now. The idea of Romney, Gingrich, Santorium, or God forbid Palin, absolutely terrifies me. They are buffoons.

by Anonymousreply 9703/13/2012

R97 you're FIRED!!

by Anonymousreply 9803/13/2012

How is Gingrich still a topic of conversation? Let alone a viable Presidential candidate?

by Anonymousreply 9903/13/2012

[quote]Palin raised five children,

And did a piss poor job of it. Her son was arrested for vandalizing a bunch of school buses and her daughter is a high school drop-out.

by Anonymousreply 10003/13/2012

It happened long before Palin. Politics just gets worse as the disgusting right wingers get stronger.

by Anonymousreply 10103/13/2012

[quote] Reagan was detached but hardly a fool. His policies (and I disagreed across the board) were carried out competently and his speeches were pretty much written by him.

I'd be liable to disagree with you as to who wrote Reagan's speeches.

by Anonymousreply 10203/13/2012

I've posted this on DL before. In 1980 my grandfather (I knew he was wise but never realized how prophetic he was) said if Reagan gets elected and evil will be unleashed on this country that will never be able to be stopped.

Everything that is happening today and everything that has happened since 1981 (actually before that since Reagan and his people are the ones who made the hostage situation that brought Carter down happen) is traced back to Reagan, especially allowing the religious right to run this country and to make greed and blaming and hating the poor good qualities to so many Americans. Reagan also made being a racist and being anti gay alive again.

Don't forget that Reagan has the death of millions upon million on his evil head. AIDS would never have killed all those who have died world wide if not for Reagan.

If people would fight back perhaps the evil could be stopped but for the most part they are not, at least not in American. Occupy tried and evil, like Bloomberg and those like him, were able to beat them down.

by Anonymousreply 10303/13/2012

r19's link is the best article ever posted on this site - and that's not hyperbole. If you skipped it, please go back and read. It's long but worth your while.

Everyone should understand the big picture, not just the day-to-day details that piss you off. You need to know what's been happening to America and why. It's time the motive, purpose and method of today's Republican party gets fully exposed.

by Anonymousreply 10403/13/2012

[quote]In 1980 my grandfather (I knew he was wise but never realized how prophetic he was) said if Reagan gets elected an evil will be unleashed on this country that will never be able to be stopped.

Your grandfather and my dad would have gotten along very well. I used to tell my friends, "Don't mention Reagan's name in front of my father."

by Anonymousreply 10503/13/2012

R105, everyone in my family hated Reagan. I'm the last one left and I do feel my blood pressure rise at the thought of him. As I typed I could feel all the anger and hatred I felt back then fresh again.

This man destroyed whatever good was in this country. Just when the 60s started to help erase so much of what was really horrible in this country, Reagan did away with.

I think your dad would have gotten along great with my grandpa and with me, lol!

My Reagan hate is like eating potato chips. Once I get started I can't stop.

by Anonymousreply 10603/13/2012

Say what you want, but her appeal changed the power structure in American politics. What she did with the Tea Party, the Occupy could not duplicate.

by Anonymousreply 10703/13/2012

I wish the clip was on YouTube, but I clearly remember seeing on the news Nancy and Ron on the White House lawn, taking questions from reporters. One of them asked what was being done about the hostages (the hostages that Reagan later got freed by selling the terrorist weapons) He stood there with this dumb look on his face, and Nancy leans over and whispers into his ear, but not soft enough for the mics to not pick up, "We're doing the best we can" Reagan then parrots back exactly what she said.

Fast forward many years. I had a friend that worked as a flight attendant on Malcolm Forbes private jet. Forbes lent the Reagans the use of the jet shortly after they left with WH so they could go on a round the world trip. My friend told me that when he was "with it" Reagan was charming and friendly and had a great sense of humor. But those occasions were few and far between. Most of the time he didn't know where he was, and Nancy actually had to cut his food up for him. Here was the man that a few months earlier had at his disposal enough nukes to destroy the world several times over, and he couldn't even feed himself.

by Anonymousreply 10803/13/2012

They glory in their stupidity. I've actually seen well educated people turn their backs on their education, just so they can be accepted by the conservative idiots.

by Anonymousreply 10903/14/2012

this is what i think of regan and bush sr.

by Anonymousreply 11003/14/2012

And we hope it is never duplicated again. Blatant vacuousness is dangerous in leadership.

by Anonymousreply 11103/14/2012

This is a ridiculous thread. OP is an idiot. American Politics has been much less elegant and more ridiculous, starting with our earliest presidential campaigns. Do some homework, OP - everything didn't start with Palin. There have been a whole boatload of ridiculous VP and VP candidates.

Whether you like one or another depends on your orientation, but I don't think Palin any more ridiculous than Geraldine Ferraro or Spiro Agnew or Jim Nance Garner.

by Anonymousreply 11203/14/2012

Moah Palin hate pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeze

by Anonymousreply 11303/14/2012

[quote]If there is an earlier American precedent for today's Republican Party, it is the antebellum Southern Democrats of John Calhoun who threatened to nullify, or disregard, federal legislation they objected to and who later led the fight to secede from the union over slavery.

Today's Republican Party represents the legacy of the South.

by Anonymousreply 11403/14/2012

r24: [quote]What I don't understand is why Sarah Palin was elected Governor in the first place. Are the people of Alaska so utterly blind that they disregard the intellectual, social and spiritual flaws of this ignoramous and vote her into office which is patently above her abilities. Why were her reasons (real reasons) for leaving office never explored. We know what she said but was it because she was so incompetent that it was in the best interests of the people of Alaska that they never know?

As an Alaskan who was here (but didn't vote for her) maybe I can provide some context.

Alaska politics is very personal. The state voted in former senator Frank Murkowski to replace a popular two term Democratic governor in 2002. Senator Murkowski wasn't all that popular then, but neither was anyone he ran against, so he won. Our Democratic party apparatus is not very well organized, tends to run Mondale or Dukakis-like candidates, and has an uphill battle anyway because there are so many transplants from Texas, the intermountain west, and Oklahoma, and military retirees.

I have said this many times here before but when Sarah P. was initially running for office she did not come off as the buffoon you've seen since 2008. She ran for Lt. Governor in 2002 and was defeated, but Frank Murkowski gave her a very powerful consolation prize, which was the chairmanship of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission. This agency controls who drills for oil and gas in Alaska and how they do it. It was a technical job that was way over her head (it should be filled by a petroleum engineer, or at least someone with experience in the industry), and it also required her to commute from Wasilla to sit in an office in downtown Anchorage on a daily basis, which she hated doing.

So, bored off her ass in this bureaucratic position, she started digging into some of the corrupt behavior that was occurring in the Republican party. Her outing of some of the shitty corrupt stuff the party was doing coincided with some of the big stings and arrests of public officials (including Sen. Ted Stevens) being made by the FBI. She got some undeserved credit for being a corruption buster. She didn't do it. She found emails that indicated that the party was fundraising on state computers, but it isn't like she took down Stevens and half the legislature. That was the FBI.

Shortly into Gov. Murkowski's administration he bought a jet. This was a gravely unpopular act. The second gravely unpopular act was shopping his vacant Senate seat around to all these people, Sarah being one of them, and then appointing his daughter Lisa.

Funny thing about Lisa: she was a very popular and well-liked state senator at the time and was probably the best candidate among those he was considering. But nobody liked the nepotism and Murkowski pissed off a lot of people in his own party. It has tainted Lisa's tenure in the Senate since.

About this time, people started printing up these little flags on toothpicks with the governor's image on them and sticking them in piles of dog shit around Juneau. Juneau is notorious for nobody cleaning up their dog's shit so there were a lot of these. I once went hiking and found a pile of bear scat with about 15 Murkowski flags in it.

Sarah sounded articulate and reasonable up until she won the Republican primary against Murkowski. That's when she started going off the rails, talking about shit like intelligent design.

She did a couple of good things as governor. Her ACES oil tax infuriated the oil companies. Some tinhats think that the VP nomination was designed to exploit her inner crazy and vanity and get her out of the governor's office because of this tax, among other things.

Her sole appointee to the Alaska Supreme Court is a former Planned Parenthood lawyer who has already been sent up to the Ninth Circuit by Obama. That's about all the good she did. Alaskans were already souring on her when she was picked by McCain.

She's an actress. Her replacement is a right wing asshole.

by Anonymousreply 11503/14/2012

Sarah Palin is a symptom not a cause.

by Anonymousreply 11603/14/2012

"It has tainted Lisa's tenure in the Senate since."

And yet, Alaskans chose to re-elect Lisa Murkowski in 2010 as an Independent over Palin's hand-picked Tea Party candidate, Joe Miller.

by Anonymousreply 11703/14/2012

Yes they did. The reason was that 1) Lisa is personally popular with voters but not necessarily with those who control the AK Rep party because of the aforementioned sour grapes, 2) said Republicans engineered the primary to occur at the same as a ballot measure on parental notification that got all the crazy fundies out to vote and 3) the Democrats once again ran a guy who everyone liked but few people voted for.

Plus joe miller was a carpetbagger and as such was not well liked here. As red as this state appears to be, it's not as simple as, say, Idaho or Oklahoma.

by Anonymousreply 11803/14/2012

The fact that Alaskans chose Murkowski over Palin's Tea Party guy means that Palin appears to have very little influence even in her own state.

by Anonymousreply 11903/14/2012

She is hated and mocked here. She knows it; it's one reason she spends little time here.

by Anonymousreply 12003/14/2012

[quote]Whether you like one or another depends on your orientation, but I don't think Palin any more ridiculous than Geraldine Ferraro or Spiro Agnew or Jim Nance Garner.

Please enlighten us with concrete examples by which Geraldine Ferraro says/does anything as batshit crazy as Palin. (And yes I'm aware of Ferraro's history of gaffes.)

Please. We're all ears.

by Anonymousreply 12103/14/2012

R83, I'm "the woman" and I stand by what I said about her. I stand by it for the same reason I criticized Newt Gingrich and Limbaugh and Reagan (don't think I haven't brought up his two marriages and daughter posing in Playboy).

REPUBLICANS ARE THE ONES WHO GO OFF ABOUT **FAMILY VALUES***

I didn't go after her because she was simply a mother. I went after her because she's one of these morons who endlessly talks about FAMILY VALUES when she exemplifies anything but.

And here we go again with Hillary.

You want to talk sexist? How about looking to emulate a woman who doesn't stay in a marriage where her husband publicly humiliate her because her political ambitions meant more to her than her dignity?

How about having enough confidence in your abilities so that you wouldn't have to depend on your husband's name/accomplishments, and run as a carpetbagger?

Sexist would be those who thought she should be allowed to continuously mock Obama and his message, but he shouldn't have been allowed to respond in kind.

Enough with the attitude of an entitlement.

by Anonymousreply 12203/14/2012

Who really gives a shit. The world will end in December.

by Anonymousreply 12303/14/2012

She didn't care about her last baby...who takes care of him now? Not her.

Nixon started with the dirty tricks 40 years ago. She didn't start or finish anything. She's an ignoarant, stupporn peabrain but she didn't start the problems in politics.

by Anonymousreply 12403/14/2012

Why is she hated and mocked in Alaska now R120? Is it because she quit? Are the people mad because they feel she let them down or because they now realize she is woefully uneducated?

by Anonymousreply 12503/14/2012

The quitting, the ethical violations that came out while she was running with McCain and shortly before, the quitting, the ludicrous behavior of her entire extended family (including her sister in law who was burglarizing houses with her kid sitting in the car outside) all the tacky drama, the quitting...

And most of all the fact that her public persona after being picked changed dramatically.

Still even before that she was starting to have problems that would probably have meant she wouldn't have been re-elected.

Alaska is a fairly red state but the Natives moderate that (they are quite independent) but most Alaskans are more Lisa Murkowski type Republicans than the sort Sarah Palin now pretends to be.

They *hate* each other, by the way.

by Anonymousreply 12603/14/2012

[quote]She's an ignoarant, stupporn peabrain

by Anonymousreply 12703/15/2012

From R97's post:

[quote] I don't want a President I can relate to, like a neighbor. I want A Prez who's smarter than me, more educated, who understands complex scenarios, and who cares.

This reminds me of the comments in 2000 that G.W. Bush was someone you would want to have a beer with (vs. Gore). I could never understand why so many pundits kept repeating that, as if it were a good reason to elect a president.

That's not what I would want when selecting a surgeon, for example. I don't think any of the people saying or "feeling" that would either.

by Anonymousreply 12803/15/2012

R128, I don't think they were saying it was a good reason someone should be President - I think they were saying that it is often the candidate who seems more down to earth and authentic that does a better job connecting with voters. Gore seemed more aloof and out of touch than Bush.

This same dynamic is being played out right now in the Republican race. Santorum is beating Romney in many states because Romney comes across as a phony. I agree. I may be a liberal, but I have to acknowledge that in some ways Santorum is more likeable than Romney. Meredith Vieira and her husband Richard Cohen said the same thing on Piers Morgan tonight.

by Anonymousreply 12903/15/2012

R129, you're right, I know.

I just wish someone had said something to the effect of "Fun to drink with? So what. There are good and fun friends I wouldn't trust with my car, let alone a country. Imagine if that where how Fortune 500 CEO's were selected."

It's a huge irony that one of the most important offices in the world is filled often so emotionally.

by Anonymousreply 13003/16/2012

So, in other words, believing a person, regardless of his or her sex, who doesn't know the prime minister of Great Britain is its head of state, who believe Putin flying over Alaska gives the governor of Alaska gravitas on foreign policy, and who believes Iraq attacked the U.S. on 9/11, is a well-informed human being? And the Republican party was acting responsibly in placing that person on a presidential ticket?

Is that what some of you are saying?

It's a very interesting position. Especially since the very people responsible for putting her on that ticket now disagree with you.

by Anonymousreply 13103/19/2012

"What she did with the Tea Party, the Occupy could not duplicate."

I'm sure they have no interest in duplicating SP's Tea Party rabble-rousing.

by Anonymousreply 13203/19/2012

Snarling Sarah Palin: MK (Mind Kontrolled) Ultra Monarch BETA Prog’md Sex Slave/Human Laptop on Auto-Pilot. Palin has been hand picked and groomed by Global Mgt. Team (“GMT”) before she was a child –this NSA-CIA “controlled asset” was hidden far away from the masses, in the tiny town of Wasilla. Palin was being trained (prog’md) by sadistic neurosurgeons, behavioral scientists, psychiatrists and psychologists working w/in Monarch Prog under aegis of NSA-CIA Military-Industrial-Apparatus and no expense was spared — Hollywood acting coaches, voice coaches and stylists were contracted to make the Alaskan MK’d Kitten sparkle! This was after years of “grooming” — first as Mrs. Wasilla, then runner -up in Mrs. Alaska pageant (worldwide pageant system functions as a smorgasbord of MK’s for GMT. Prog’mrs (quite possibly Dr. Ewen Cameron a.k.a. Dr. White) methodically and skillfully layered in her “alters” (mind files) IAW-SOP rape/torture/trauma, for use in Hollywood scripted fantasy narrative of “local hometown girl makes good” (front page copy), launching her meteoric rise in Alaskan political circles — then her grand entrance on natl. stage, to mesmerize electorate, capture hearts/minds of GOP evangelical base, as their first woman VP candidate, and current role as chief antagonist to Obama/ left-wing of phony political paradigm. As planned, she performed this “social alchemy” brilliantly. Palin’s unique blend of folksiness, brashness, quirky combativeness, stinging humor, “look-at-me” mannerisms and overt sexiness, knocked voters out! However, as one begins to pull the threads of her fictitious political resume, it quickly becomes clear, “the character” named Sarah L. Palin was carefully constructed to check off boxes on GOP candidate application – the attraction is pure cult of personality… Much more info on the URL, click thru to see full details. Thank you Sandra Bullock and Jamie Jones

by Anonymousreply 13303/22/2013

Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachman are lesbians, real question is are they traitors to America. [click thru for more details] Snarling Sarah Palin: MK (Mind Kontrolled) Ultra Monarch BETA Prog’md Sex Slave/Human Laptop on Auto-Pilot. Palin has been hand picked and groomed by Global Mgt. Team (“GMT”) before she was a child –this NSA-CIA “controlled asset” was hidden far away from the masses, in the tiny town of Wasilla. Palin was being trained (prog’md) by sadistic neurosurgeons, behavioral scientists, psychiatrists and psychologists working w/in Monarch Prog under aegis of NSA-CIA Military-Industrial-Apparatus and no expense was spared — Hollywood acting coaches, voice coaches and stylists were contracted to make the Alaskan MK’d Kitten sparkle! This was after years of “grooming” — first as Mrs. Wasilla, then runner -up in Mrs. Alaska pageant (worldwide pageant system functions as a smorgasbord of MK’s for GMT. Prog’mrs (quite possibly Dr. Ewen Cameron a.k.a. Dr. White) methodically and skillfully layered in her “alters” (mind files) IAW-SOP rape/torture/trauma, for use in Hollywood scripted fantasy narrative of “local hometown girl makes good” (front page copy), launching her meteoric rise in Alaskan political circles — then her grand entrance on natl. stage, to mesmerize electorate, capture hearts/minds of GOP evangelical base, as their first woman VP candidate, and current role as chief antagonist to Obama/ left-wing of phony political paradigm. As planned, she performed this “social alchemy” brilliantly. Palin’s unique blend of folksiness, brashness, quirky combativeness, stinging humor, “look-at-me” mannerisms and overt sexiness, knocked voters out! However, as one begins to pull the threads of her fictitious political resume, it quickly becomes clear, “the character” named Sarah L. Palin was carefully constructed to check off boxes on GOP candidate application – the attraction is pure cult of personality… Click thru to URL for much more info, thank you Sandra Bullock and Jamie Jones

by Anonymousreply 13403/22/2013

[quote] Surely, though, there lurks in the Democratic Party potential candidates who have seen Palin and taken note.

No. Democrats would have no use for a cretin. We think.

by Anonymousreply 13503/22/2013
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.
×

Follow theDL catch up on what you missed


recent threads by topic delivered to your email

follow popular threads on twitter

follow us on facebook

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!