Very well done!! I love to imagine that's what she looks like under those conservative suits.
Oh, and cpbell0033944: Elaine Lafferty, former editor-in-chief of
Ms. magazine, a Democrat and no fan of Gov. Palin's politics, would
take issue with your characterization of her as "dumb as a bag of hammers":
Read the whole thing.Just because you disagree with a person's politics doesn't make them stupid.
I'm sorry if I caused offence in what I said - we may disagree in matters of politics, but I hope you appreciate that, though I sometimes let my views get the better of me, I'm a huge fan of yours and have no personal beef whatsoever. I know that seems an odd thing to say here, but I wanted to put it on the record.
The article you linked is very interesting. I would genuinely like to believe that Sarah Palin is truly an intellectual colossus, but the writer fails to convince me of this. Why? Well...
...firstly, she admits to having been in the pay of the McCain campaign. Nothing wrong with that, of course, and I'm going to suggest for one second that this fact renders her insight irrelevant, but there has to be some doubt over her neutrality. In addition, she frequently repeats that she is a Democrat and opposes Palin's pro-life stance, when one disclaimer would suffice, as though she is trying to convince us or herself that she is writing purely objectively.
Secondly, she is unable to provide any evidence of Ms Palin's intelligence aside from her ability to memorise speeches and ideas - hardly a revelation given that even an outsider such as myself already knew this before polling day. Indeed, photographic memory in iteself proves little - it is a form of intelligence, but it hardly covers all aspects of intelligence. In effect, the author is saying "She really is intelligent - I saw evidence of it, but I can't/won't give examples." which means that we are relying on one person's (the author's) judgement of intelligence, as well as her word on the matter.
Thirdly, she muddies the issue by railing against the way that her fellow feminists have pilloried Ms Palin. The problem is that, unlike the author, others have to base their opinions on Ms Palin on her public performance, not having had any access to her. Which brings me to...
...the fact that, fourthly (is there such a word?), it might be a little easier to accept the argument she is making had we seen any evidence of this great mind at work, other than her ability to memorise talking points. In this regard she had plenty of opportunities to prove her brainpower, but never managed to do so. She didn't seem to understand the job of VP even though she was the Republican Party's nominee for that position. To many observers, there can only be two plausible explanations; either she is not very intelligent, or she is intellectually lazy, which is probably as much of a problem. I know that if I had been nominated for a position of high office, I would make it my business to know that position inside-out. It may be that a great mind is being masked by a lack of public speaking skills, but, even if this is the case, shouldn't this have been a barrier to her being nominated?
Anyway, I've waffled enough. It is now for the picklocks of biographers to decide how this period of US history will be remembered. Will Sarah Palin make a comeback? Will she lead the Republicans back to power? We shall see.
