I think that’s painting with a rather broad brush. One of the definitions of learning is “change”, and people do sometimes change for the better. It’s reasonable to think that a person who isn’t much at a certain age could possibly improve themselves with time and experience.
But it’s also reasonable to judge that some people are unlikely to do so, and I’d agree that Palin is probably one of those people. Probably, but not necessarily - and therein I disagree with your premise.
I have to admit, I got a kick out of how bothered she was by all foul language used on the campaign trail. That to me spoke volumes about how unprepared she was to enter the arena of national politics. Political operatives have a reputation for being (at least when the cameras are off) among the most foul-mouthed people on Earth.
This one is as substantive as giving Al Gore shit for saying he invented the internet. He really WAS a major ally in Washington for the burgeoning technology. Just like you really CAN see Russia from Alaska. I hate when people choose the worst of all examples to make fun of someone for when there is a wealth of significant things they can use.
LOL, it’s always funny the narcissistic personality disorder accusations. I read a polemic about Obama’s NPD recently too.
The real point of the Palin quip wasn’t that you can’t see Russia from Alaska, it’s that it doesn’t somehow make you someone with foreign policy experience. It’s too bad that it got mocked for the wrong reasons.
Right. That point was even made during the interview:
Her comment in Esquire magazine last March:
Here she’s entirely missing the point: she wasn’t being mocked for saying that you can see Russia from Alaska, but for thinking that that had anything to do with foreign policy experience. My favorite quote on the matter (I forget who said it): “I can look out of my window and see the Moon. Doesn’t make me a f*cking astronaut, now, does it?”
If someone is not particularly bright, and the media points out that she is not particularly bright, how is that being treated “unfairly”?
You’ve got it all wrong. She was picked prematurely. It’s not that Palin will change, but in 2-6 years the level of public discourse will have degenerated so much that she would appear wise and statesmanlike.
The fact that you really can see Russia from Alaska is utterly beside the point. She isn’t ridiculed because anyone thinks the statement isn’t true, but because she tried to cite it as a foreign policy qualification.
Obama doesn’t show the DSM-IV characteristics. Palin shows them in spades.
Perhaps, but it would have at least been honorable to finish out her term instead of taking the money and bolting. She was coming under a lot of criticism for ignoring state issues while on the campaign trail and after her return, but the only reason she resigned was cash in hand.
The NYT has a review of the book today. The reviewer talks about her “annoying habit” of name-dropping philosophers and authors of note, and comparing herself to Reagan (big surprise).
How is it unfair to point out the shortcomings of the person who is second in line to be president of one of the most powerful countries in the world? It’s not the fault of the media that she has a lot of shortcomings. Are they supposed to just ignore that she’s arrogant, narcissistic, and proud of her ignorance?
And it’s also an attack that never actually happened outside of a single blog post on a public forum. The “MSM” certainly never pursued it or endorsed it, and it di nothing but redound to her favor since she milked the victim card for all she was worth.
I wouldn’t be surprised if McCain-Palin had planted that post itself as a way to immunize her against the pregnant daughter revelation.
