There are hookers that stroll down a nearby street who make more than a lot of people too. So your point would be, what?
Just another bit of proof that education in this country has gone to shit in the past few decades. It used to be harder to sell people complete bullshit as though it were bonbons.
She was far from poor. Governor is not minimum wage profession ,you know. her hubby also was making money.
Law suits were a reflection of her governance and inability to follow the rules. she was petty and vindictive and used her power to even scores.
She has not made hundreds of millions.
That is not why people were saying she is dumb. It was her total lack of knowledge. Nobody said she wasn’t greedy. How can you confuse that?
Well your argument is irrefudiable. You know who else has made more money than most people on this board? Paris Hilton. Maybe we should send her to the Oval Office as well.
I will give Palin credit for being smart enough to know that being a Fox News talker is a far more lucrative and far easier profession than being President of the United States.
Except that pkbites isn’t wrong. Your post is a perfect example of how Sarah Palin makes the collective anus of the left run in and out like a big red sock. You people are terrified of her and you express it like a bunch of chimpanzees, with grunts and hollers and much shit-slinging.
Ronald Reagan was NOT dumb. This stupid ‘Reagan is dumb’ meme was never anything more than liberal conceit and the tendency to believe that anyone who is a conservative and who speaks in plain language must be an idiot.
Reagan had a degree in economics. He was president of the Screen Actor’s Guild for a long, long time, and did a great job in the role. Then he was a two-term Governor of California during some of its most turbulent years - and was probably the best Governor that state has had in the last 50 years. Then he went on to be a two-term President, and is now widely considered to have been on balance a very good president. He wrapped Gorbachev around his finger in arms negotiations.
Reagan was also funny. He was capable of coming up with quick quips that disarmed his opponents. He was quick on his feet.
But more than that, Reagan was actually a man of ideas. If you asked him to justify his conservatism, he could lecture you on Bastiat, Mill, and Hayek. Hey could explain the difference between Keynes and Friedman. He was extremely well read in political philosophy and economics. He could easily hold his own in the economic debates on the SDMB if he were around today.
Reagan made his big splash in the Republican party when he gave a speech at the 1964 Republican convention (that he wrote) called “A Time for Choosing”. It electrified the party, and is still considered one of the great speeches. You can see it in its entirety here. Watch that, and tell me that this is a stupid person. And don’t forget - this was before teleprompters.
For years, Reagan gave a half-hour speech on radio every week. He wrote every one of them.
The difference between Reagan and Palin is that by the time Reagan ran for President he had already spend several decades promoting his ideas and shaping the Republican party. As spokesman for GE, Reagan traveled the country for years visiting factories and by all accounts he spent that time really learning how business in America operates. By the time Reagan ran for President, he was an accomplished man who had spent a lifetime honing his beliefs.
Reagan was a promoter of ideas, while Palin speaks in platitudes.
I don’t think Palin is stupid. I think she’s uneducated and incurious. Reagan knew what he believed, but he knew why he believed it. Palin just knows what she believes. Palin hides from tough interviews - Reagan sought them out. He loved debate, and the tougher the opponent, the better. He was totally confident of his ability to defend his ideas.
I’m sure she’s smarter than the average bear.
I view her like an nuclear war. It is not likely to happen, but if it did it would be a disaster. I don’t stay up nights worrying about either one.
That summarizes her current status rather nicely doesn’t it?
World issues are complicated. The economy is complicated. Despite Rush Limbaugh and FoxNews trying to convince everyone that these issues are black and white and all it takes is any ol’ moron to run this county as long as they are ultra right-wing, the person assuming the role of commander in chief should have a solid grasp of history, economics, politics, etc. Sarah Palin hasn’t convinced me she has any of this. She is simply just as Vinyl Turnip says, an overpaid cheerleader for the right.
She has no plans of any substance for this country. No solutions to it’s problems. Her entire agenda would be to “reverse everything Obama tried to do”. She’d assume the head position of the “do nothing” party.
If all it took to run this country was to be an armchair critic of the other side and be a rah-rah America cheerleader for your own side then we might as well put Rush Limbaugh, Michael Moore, and Ann Coulter on the ticket.
I’m not really afraid of Palin. I’m more afraid of the people who would vote for her.
I heard Palin has a second book. I did not know she finished coloring the first one.
Sam Stone,
You and I seldom agree on political matters. Leaving aside Reagan-as-President, I have to say that your assessment of Reagan the man is something I can agree with. I may not have liked his policies, and I certainly made senile/cowboy jokes; but I never took him for being stupid.
Yep, I agree with Sam also.
She is not evenly remotely in Reagan’s league as far as ideas go. She doesn’t take questions, doesn’t do debates, even talks herself into corners on O’Reilly’s show… Katie Couric was able to make her look clueless by asking what newspapers she reads. This is all basic stuff.
And as far as political resume, it’s also not comparable. Reagan led SAG and was a two-term governor of a giant state. Palin was a small-town mayor and quit as the governor of the most socialist (and one of the smallest, population-wise) states.
Palin doesn’t scare me, but the 25% that think she should be president do. And the fact that she might win the GOP nomination is current exhibit 1-A why I no longer support that party.
As a side note to the wack a moron main topic, I’d be curious, is intelligence really a trait that our President requires? Looking at history, I’m not so sure IQ is more important than charisma, speaking ability, and selecting good advisers.
That being said, calling Republicans dumb is just something that Democrats do. If they can’t defend their policies, or attack the Republicans policies, they just start tossing out ad hominems. It’s about as mature as ‘well you’re a doodyhead, so there!’ Calling Bush or Reagan stupid is as good a sign to identify a mindless leftwing political hack as the words ‘birth certificate’ is to identify a mindless rightwing political hack.
However, in the case of Palin, the liberals might actually be right for a change. She isn’t stupid, but she isn’t reallly that intelligent either. Worse, in my opinion, is that she doesn’t seem at all interested in using what IQ she has. I can respect someone who does the best to expand their knowledge regardless of their IQ a lot more than I can respect the intellectually lazy.
This. I am having trouble imagining who would be willing to be her VP and cabinet secretaries. I cannot see anyone with a modicum of competence be willing to have her as a boss. Though they may still be in office after a month, while she quits because its too hard.
But in response to the OP, I heard suggestions that Reagan may have been affected by Alzheimer’s earlier than admitted, but I never heard anyone state that he was dumb when he was in possession of his faculties. He was a master politician, yet he should have been impeached for Iran-Contra, but that is a different issue.
I certainly do not fear Palin. I loathe her and her followers for celebrating ignorance and incompetence. I lost all respect for the Republican party when they embraced her, and have no respect for anyone who still a member of that ensemble. I’ve hated the Republicans ever since I learned about the ‘Southern Strategy’, of who Reagan was a key architect, but I could still respect them for having principles - ugly, detestable principles, but principles nonetheless. Any that may have lasted through the Bush administration were completely pissed on when they nominated her to the ticket in 2008.
I’ll also agree with Sam Stone. Reagan had a good grasp of economics, politics, etc. And he even had (gasp!) his own ideas he wanted to implement.
Palin offers absolutley none of this. How the conservative party could go from a Reagan to a Palin shows just how off track they have gone.
Good thing. I need another door stop.
I’ll add to the pile-on of agreeing with Sam. Anyone who thinks all his quips were written by comedy writers should remember the jokes he made after he got shot - something probably not planned for.
Reagan became a candidate the old fashioned way - he worked for it, and he worked for it hard, supporting Goldwater and making many a speech in support of conservatives. Palin, on the other hand, got picked thanks to Bill Kristol and approved after a half hour interview by someone who is looking more and more senile. Both Reagan and Palin were actors in a sense, but Reagan made it to Hollywood and Palin never got beyond weather bimbo status. As for governorships, Reagan was on Broadway and Palin was
But I do understand where the OP is coming from. No matter how dumb she is, she is smarter than her supporters.
Aaaaaand, /thread.
I don’t know how anyone, regardless of political persuasion, could answer the question better than that. Kudos, Sam.
Also, the whole “Palin quit as governor because it was a financial liability” argument just makes no sense. She could have written Going Rogue and stayed in office, and she and her family would be totally fine. Sitting politicians write books all the time.
Even though Reagan was an actor, Palin is the only one of the two who’s a celebrity. I do think she’ll run for president to drum up sales for her new book (where she addresses such statesman-like topics as American Idol and Levi Johnston), but will “decide” to quit at the first bit of bad news, claiming that “the lamestream media” is out to get her family.
He was not dumb but the gradual onset of Alzheimers made him appear that way. He got it early in his career and it was hidden. The rules for presidential conferences were very strict. Reporters had to stay on subject and press conferences had very narrow subject matter. He could remember enough to muddle through but his handlers were terrified that if he went off subject, he could not cover up very well.
To some degree his Presidency running effectively even as he declined with Alzheimer’s was a tribute to Reagan the executive. The most effective executives hire the people who understand the vison and who can implement it with little additional input from the top. Yes he said a few stupid things in service of his views, but he knew how to utilize the minds of Conservative intellectuals. Maybe Reagan was not an intellectual powerhouse himself, but he did not hold intellectualism in contempt. A review of Buckley’s book “The Reagan I Knew” makes some very cogent points:
I was about to chime in, but it appears that Sam and others have done it for me.
Where the idea came from that “Reagan was stupid” is beyond me. It was a tired, shopworn meme from the left that unfortunately gained traction in the mainstream media over time.
I think one of Reagan’s traits that fostered this belief was that he really didn’t care whether people thought he was smart or not. He saw no reason to fight back or discredit these attacks. It didn’t bother him one way or another. It’s useful to compare that leadership style to other, more recent occupants of the White House who are extremely thin-skinned to these sorts of attacks and lash out whenever they feel they have been slighted.
I suggest reading “Reagan: In His Own Hand” as well as some of the works of Margaret Thatcher to get a better idea of how the man thought about things. You might find it enlightening.