Truemors was being goofy.

So here are my comments to 

Palin Calls Bloggers “Kids in Pajamas…in Their Parents’ Home”

Here is the quote from the Fox News site:

–QUOTE–

VAN SUSTEREN: Is there anything else that has been raised or said about you in the media, either during the convention — I mean, during the campaign or since the campaign ended, that you think you need to address that has been, you know, an allegation about you?

 

PALIN: Well, unfortunately, early on, there are a tremendous number of examples that we can give regarding my record and things that could have, should have been so easily corrected if — if the media would have taken one step further and — and investigated a little bit, not just gone on some blogger probably sitting there in their parents’ basement, wearing their pajamas, blogging some kind of gossip or — or a lie regarding, for instance, the — the discussion about who was Trig’s real mom? You know, Was it one of her daughters or was she faking her pregnancy?

–UNQUOTE–

Yes, it is true that she does not say ALL bloggers blog in pajamas in their parents home, but she is stereotyping bloggers much like, oh, I dunno.. like what a GOP group did for Obama on what African-Americans eat, for example… 

http://www.dogwalkblog.com/2008/10/18/the-price-of-stupid-and-ignorance/  even though it may be true of SOME African-Americans… Couple that with the tone in her voice (check out YouTube) and her reference really is unmistakable.

Sarah Palin is just not that bright. My God, the sentence structure and subject-predicate agreement alone is horrifying! Lawyers would be endlessly employed trying to figure out which “is” meant “is” or “was” or what “is” really is. 

She is GREAT for energizing the DNC base to vote against her and non-stop entertainment for humans and canine alike, but presidential? Hmmm… no.

Posted by email from rufus’s posterous

Never confuse ‘clear thought’ with crap

Last Saturday, Mark Lilla, a professor of humanities at Columbia University, wrote an article in the WSJ titled The Perils of ‘Populist Chic’, What the rise of Sarah Palin and populism means for the conservative intellectual tradition. It was well-thought out and objectively argued. In short, it explains why presidential candidates need to go bowling and drinking beer, why smart girls get teased in math class and why nobody like a know-it-all. Kinda.

Anyway, I tell you this so that you are intriqued enough to read the article and draw your own conclusions, but also to introduce Mr. Peter Noel Murray, Ph.D who wrote a letter to the editor, saying, among other things:

Prof. Lilla proves that highly educated minds can be small and prejudiced when he describes Gov. Sarah Palin as “ignorant” and “provincial.” What this Columbia professor really means is that she isn’t Ivy League educated and isn’t from New York City.

Well, I’m just a mutt that grew up in the Frogtown area of St. Paul and graduated with a BA in English from the public university, the University of Minnesota and even I think Sarah Palin is ignorant and provincial. Moreover, I think she is rather stupid in that she does not show a capacity to learn as evidenced by her more recent interviews (still reading the keywords off the notecards!) Furthermore, she exhibits distain for others around her and appears incapable of empathy. 

But mostly, she is stupid. No, really she is.

The president should be really smart, almost geeky smart. The fact that we have a smart president-elect who is also a great orator and empath is a giant plus. Let’s stop “mocking him” through sneers, jokes and sarcastic asides. After all, he did what Sarah Palin and John McCain could not.

Posted by email from rufus’s posterous

Sarah Palin is a Chitty Chitty Bang Bang Wannabee


In the 1968 film adaptation of Ian Fleming’s Chitty Chitty Bang Bang: The Magical Car, there is a scene where the Baron of Vulgaria steals Chitty, kidnaps Grandpa and assembles all the smart guys of the kingdom to make the car fly. It is reasoned that if they just kinda disassemble the car, examine every piece of hardware, then glue a life preserver on another car, put a wing here and there, their car will also float and fly.

And, to sweeten the deal, the Baron will execute anyone who can’t make his car fly by his birthday party, a few days hence.

The truth of why Chitty Chitty Bang Bang can fly is because it is in her soul, it is who she is. It is becasue she has a great spirit of having once been great on the race track and once again, has a “family” (the Potts) who adore and cherish her, enabling her to soar. The “smart guys” fail because they start by asking “what” instead of “why.”

Barack Obama is a Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. He is able to inspire, speak with ease and eloquence, think through complex issues quickly and articulate a plan that is at once detailed, yet understandable. Faced with this “Chitty,” the Republicans immediately race to “disassemble” Obama, identify those things that make him soar and attempt to make a flying car of their own – Sarah Palin.

Palin is young, she is attractive, she is daring, she has executive experience (minimal, but we can spin that.) She is all those things that Barack Obama is; until she starts talking. Then, it becomes painfully clear that she can’t motivate a country to action, that she has not found that “soul” to inspire a nation. That she is divisive and that she just is not very bright. (ahem, sorry, intellectually curious)

But, since the smart guys assembled her and they wish not to be executed, they start yelling at the top of their lungs, “She can fly, she can.. I’ve seen it with my own eyes!” And, the people around them who have clearly seen Palin not fly repeat the chant because they too, do not want to die. They so desperately believe their own dream that they fail to see the facts in front of them.

In the end, the common folk (children) rescues Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, she spreads her wings, repels the baron and his smart guys, Grandpa is rescued and the Baron (and Baroness) are seen for what they really are. But, in an ironic twist, the Baron never understands why his car did not fly. I suspect — if the Baron were a GOP leader — he would still be trying to make a flying car from Chitty parts.

Perhaps if he tried harder. Perhaps if his smart guys were able to analyze the magic coat of paint three more layers deep. Perhaps if he believed more. Perhaps if he put on lipstick one more time and winked one more wink, he too could have a flying car.

Posted by email from rufus’s posterous

Other posts you may enjoy reading:
NY Post
The Real Right
The Examiner
Crook Sandliars.com
Huffington Post

Today, I am a man?

I was reading an interview of Sarah Palin by Kimberley Strassel that appeared in the November 1 WSJ. I got a few paragraphs into the interview and was stopped cold by the following paragraph.

The tasks of “fixing” Washington and “shaping up” the GOP are no small things, whether from inside the West Wing, or depending on Tuesday, from some future role as a party leader. And so, after a firm handshake and an introduction to First Dude Todd, I ask the governor if we could forgo the stump speech and talk about her contribution to this ticket, and the future of the party. Why, exactly, are Republicans as a whole struggling so badly? Are the liberal pundits right that modern conservatism has run its course?

The emphasis is mine. I read and reread it and was struck by how men are really not men anymore. They are “dudes” and “guys” and “buds”, etc. But hardly ever men.

I got to thinking about how I define myself and while I am on the uphill part of 40 and have two fully grown offspring (23 and 17) I find the assertion “I am a man” a bit odd to hear and I don’t know why.

Is it because the past couple generations of women have redefined what a man is? Having children doesn’t make you a man, but being a good father after the children are born does? Providing for your family doesn’t make you a man, but being there for every significant event in your child’s life while also providing for your family does?

Or, is it because this generation of men simply do not want to grow up and old. By calling ourselves “dudes” and “guys,” we avoid old age.

Most women know the point at which they are comfortable calling themselves a woman. But, I wager that the vast majority of men under 60 are uncomfortable with the title. I also wager that the vast majority of women under 60 won’t grant men that title, preferring to call them “my dude” or “my guy.”

At 44, does Todd Palin consider himself a man? Does Sarah?