The title IX comment probably refers to her experience in High School Basketball. Title IX also impacted high school by requiring districts to offer just as many choices for women as for men in the world of sports to receive federal dollars.
September 22, 2008 8:46 am
Ryan Karpeles
Many people believe that Sarah Palin gives women a very good name and has a great deal of wisdom and integrity. She may have a different value system than you, but calling her "ignorant," "not very knowledgeable" and "of inferior intelligence" seems rather shallow.
September 22, 2008 9:53 am
Mike Cecchin
Beth,
calling Palin "ignorant", "not very knowledgeable" and "of inferior intelligence" is right on the money and I'm thinking you held back. And the no-math barbie got a solid laugh from me.
Sarah Palin in no way gives women a good name. Being picked for a position strictly to pander to a specific demographic to garner votes is hardly something to aspire to.
On the other hand, being mayor of the city in Alaska with the highest amount of meth labs, being ignorant to political policies/agendas like the Bush doctrine, and ignoring scientific facts like evolution surely couldn't have been easy. So if anything, she is persistence with her ignorance.
But hey, at least she's got a knack for picking baby names. What a minute...
September 22, 2008 10:30 am
Matt McCoy
Wow - this post is nothing more than a hollow rant. There is absolutely no substance here.
September 22, 2008 10:43 am
Anonymous
"She suggests litigation that Obama has already sponsored and gotten signed into law. "
umm, I think you mean "legislation."
litigation is : a legal proceeding in a court
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
legislation is :a law enacted by a legislative body
/the act of making or enacting laws
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
On a side note, I try not to call people stupid or lacking intelligence, because I know that as soon as I do, someone else will correct my grammar or vocabulary. That's just a personal thing, though.
September 22, 2008 10:47 am
Ryan Karpeles
Dear Mike,
I’m not sure if it’s too late for civility and common sense, but I’ll try.
1. Politics is about pandering. This is nothing new. Obama picked Biden to pander to people who were wary about Barack’s lack of experience. He also picked Biden to pander to the ‘working-class’ voters because many felt as though Obama was out of touch with that crowd. He also picked Biden to pander to the far-left individuals and special interest groups (Biden is the 3rd most liberal-voting Senator). McCain picked Palin to pander to women on the fence, far-right voters, and social conservatives. He also picked her to inject some excitement into the campaign for the Republican base. I don’t see anything wrong with either party’s pandering. Elections are about being elected. Both parties made their choices with this in mind.
2. If we’re judging people by the amount of drugs and/or corruption in their cities, Chicago (i.e. Obama’s city) takes the cake. Glass houses and stones do not mix well.
3. There is no official definition of the Bush Doctrine. Even Wikipedia has about 6 different definitions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_Doctrine). In that interview Charlie Gibson tried to humiliate Sarah Palin and it was rather despicable. Not to mention the fact that his ‘definition’ of the Bush Doctrine was simply common sense: the right to preemptively attack a group that is planning to attack you. This doctrine is as old as history itself.
4. Evolution is littered with gaping hole after gaping hole. Even its most staunchest defenders admit that it is a theory, not a scientific fact set in stone.
Before we call people ignorant, let’s try not to be guilty of the same crime.
I don't think calling her ignorant is out of line at all. Gibson tossed her a soft-ball about the Bush doctrine and she couldn't answer it. Why? Because she's not informed, and she's completely unqualified for the job she's applying for.
Oh goodness, the grammar police have got me. Sorry about that. I definitely do know the difference between litigation and legislation. But, I will admit, this was a bit of a rant. I am embarressed that when I hear people talking about her, the most prized development isn't what comes out of her mouth, but whether there are naked pictures of her.
Political representatives, male or female, are called to a higher standard. It is their job to know what certain things mean. The fact that I obviously know the difference between Title VII and Title IX more than Palin does in fact mean that she is ingorant if ranked as a politician. It doesn't matter that an average American doesn't even know what state touches another, much less where the country of Algeria is located. If she doesn't know what country she has visite, and what state she is in, that is a real problem. If she is proposing legislation, and it comes to light that she doesn't know that there is a website dedicated to making government transparent, that Alaska copied federal legislation in the legislation she signed into law, that right now there is a pending law suit about how much information that legislation entitles voters to when congressional aids do not feel safe having their home address as public knowledge, this makes me wonder just how much they do know up in Alaska. And what rock she crawled from under. Or whether, which is what I suspect, they are taking the Bush act on the road, and think women are too stupid to notice.
FYI, this is totally a rant. I have a few of those. Sometimes ignorance, and I am not sure how much of it is actually genuine, makes you angry.
September 22, 2008 11:54 am
Anonymous
Tim,
You really call that a softball? According to this link there are 4 "Bush Doctrines" that Gibson could have been referring to, and he was not even referring to the most recent (which is the spread of democracy throughout the world).
I don't think ranting has any place in a public professional forum such as this blog. This is what is wrong with citizen journalism-or journalism in general-people write based on their own misinformation, make up facts, or make a big deal of something that is not a big deal.
Your arguments against Palin do not much sense, they lack substance and just aren't factual.
Palin has much more experience than Obama does. She was chosen because she is a strong woman, with high integrity and successfully fights corruption in Alaska.
What the hell has Obama done? He's all talk and no proof. And Biden, he's a nobody too. So where do you get off ranting about Palin when there are obvious shortcomings in your political party? Although there are shortcomings in both political parties...
I suggest the next time you go off on a shallow rant, to first make sure you're not pointing fingers at the same issues others can point issues at you or Obama, or Biden or whoever.
I'm embarrassed by the ignorance that is Beth Harris.
This discussion is not about Biden or Obama. This discussion is about a politican who has made several high profile errors that I feel a politican should not make.
Here is a little ancedote to illustrate why I am angry from a different perspective. President Bush consistently mispronounces the names of foreign dignitaries and countries. President Clinton, during the crisis in the Balkins, made a decision to refer to Kosovo as Kosova. My cousin worked in the Clinton whitehouse. There is an aide for each president whose sole job is to make sure that they say things right. Names and places are spelled phonetically. In capital letters. Or something along those lines, so that they are easy to read and memorize. They practice. Any "mispronunciation" was on purpose. Kosova instead of Kosovo was a signal. So are the many Bush gaffes.
I think that Palin's presentation is a signal. And it is a signal I am angry about. Because not only does she represent the United States, but she represents women. Because unfortunately, while there are more of us, there are fewer of us in positions of leadership.
When I traveled abroad in college/law school, the first thing people wanted to know when the subject of politics came up is how did I feel about Bush. It was a joke. To hear people who have no business being smug about their policies, saying with abandon, well, at least our president/prime minister knows what country he/she is in is not funny. I don't want another eight years of a political joke for a politican. Either she needs a better fact checker, or someone needs to tell Palin that she is not funny and cannot possibly be that dumb.
If you are a Republican, please be big enough to see this as a comment against an image, and not against policies. I haven't said anything about policies. So don't go attack me as some left-wing propagandist. At least not until you know where I stand.
And, as a final note: personal attacks on a blogger who operates in the private sphere are not helpful, because blogging is about the ideas. While you might feel secure saying, behind anonymity, that Beth Harris ignorant, I will have you know that at least I am informed enough to know enough about legislation and litigation to know what it actually means when I reference a law, and I am informed enough to place limits on what I say. If I am wrong about something I have said, show me what I said that was inaccurate. If, rather, I am simply offending your political sensibilities, then say so, and let's keep it moving.
This isn't about other politicians and their experience or lack-thereof. This is about yet another politican who thinks its cute and clever to be ignorant. When it is anything but.
September 22, 2008 3:03 pm
Jeff
When two major worries are how presidents pronounce countries and what foreigners think of Bush, we're in trouble...
Wanting to be liked is a dangerous value. If we are truly committed to doing good, many countries will not like us. Such is life.
Sounding intelligent and wanting to be liked are not the same thing. At all. Intelligence and likeability aren't even related. But beyond that, acting dumb is not a good way to be a good politican. If people think you are stupid, lets see how far you get on an ordinary job, let alone one where you are a REPRESENTATIVE of your electorate. And if you purposefully reinforce this image, what does that mean about you?
September 22, 2008 5:51 pm
Will
I find it amusing, very amusing, that you (Beth) liberals are so outraged by Palin's nomination. If she is so fatally flawed then surely the Republican ticket is doomed and Obama et. al. is cleaning up in the polls. Oh, wait...they're not... and you're panicked. This is what makes you post such silliness.
While I don't agree with her on probably anything, at least Paris has had a sense of humor about thing. So to quote her, I'll "See you at the debate, bitches".
Why must a conversation re: Palin always come back to Biden or Obama when the discussion is not about them?
Now regarding you comment.
1. I wasn't discussing the merits of pandering within the political process, I was discussing pandering and the correlation (or lack of) to Palin's being a quality role model for women and the reasons for which she was selected. I also do not agree with Obama's choice for running mate, which is a completely separate discussion.
2. The meth lab was a joke, though true, people are always so serious on this site. But to address your statement, Obama is a STATE senator, not a city senator. And Chicago is a large metropolis where based on size alone there is bound to be a drug problem to a certain level. Palin was the Mayor of the meth lab capital of Alaska, I find that funny. If I really wanted to attack Palin in a serious fashion there a number of other things to bring up that I am sure you are well aware of and likely ignoring. To each their own.
3. If you think that just because Gibson asked Palin what the Bush doctrine was he was getting the best of her you've been watching too much Fox News. That is a very simple question, nothing surprising and nothing way outside the field of acceptable or even possibly expected questions. If you simply watch any of her interviews, you can tell every other question catches her like a deer in one of her own headlights.
I believe reporters should be asking the exact same questions to Obama and Biden. Conducting interviews like the one she did on FOX news with Hannity is a disrespect and disservice to the public. She may as well have been interviewed by her husband.
4. As for evolution, you tell me, what has more huge gaping holes: evolution or religion?
I stand by Beth's article, Palin is enormously ignorant to most things related to the job she is running for. And its unfortunately people like yourself that are giving her the chance to possibly be President. Next time the republicans should just sponsor a Powerball lottery to select their VP candidate.
15 RESPONSES TO "PALIN'S NOT REALLY THAT DUMB"
The title IX comment probably refers to her experience in High School Basketball. Title IX also impacted high school by requiring districts to offer just as many choices for women as for men in the world of sports to receive federal dollars.
Many people believe that Sarah Palin gives women a very good name and has a great deal of wisdom and integrity. She may have a different value system than you, but calling her "ignorant," "not very knowledgeable" and "of inferior intelligence" seems rather shallow.
Beth,
calling Palin "ignorant", "not very knowledgeable" and "of inferior intelligence" is right on the money and I'm thinking you held back. And the no-math barbie got a solid laugh from me.
Sarah Palin in no way gives women a good name. Being picked for a position strictly to pander to a specific demographic to garner votes is hardly something to aspire to.
On the other hand, being mayor of the city in Alaska with the highest amount of meth labs, being ignorant to political policies/agendas like the Bush doctrine, and ignoring scientific facts like evolution surely couldn't have been easy. So if anything, she is persistence with her ignorance.
But hey, at least she's got a knack for picking baby names. What a minute...
Wow - this post is nothing more than a hollow rant. There is absolutely no substance here.
"She suggests litigation that Obama has already sponsored and gotten signed into law. "
umm, I think you mean "legislation."
litigation is : a legal proceeding in a court
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
legislation is :a law enacted by a legislative body
/the act of making or enacting laws
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
On a side note, I try not to call people stupid or lacking intelligence, because I know that as soon as I do, someone else will correct my grammar or vocabulary. That's just a personal thing, though.
Dear Mike,
I’m not sure if it’s too late for civility and common sense, but I’ll try.
1. Politics is about pandering. This is nothing new. Obama picked Biden to pander to people who were wary about Barack’s lack of experience. He also picked Biden to pander to the ‘working-class’ voters because many felt as though Obama was out of touch with that crowd. He also picked Biden to pander to the far-left individuals and special interest groups (Biden is the 3rd most liberal-voting Senator). McCain picked Palin to pander to women on the fence, far-right voters, and social conservatives. He also picked her to inject some excitement into the campaign for the Republican base. I don’t see anything wrong with either party’s pandering. Elections are about being elected. Both parties made their choices with this in mind.
2. If we’re judging people by the amount of drugs and/or corruption in their cities, Chicago (i.e. Obama’s city) takes the cake. Glass houses and stones do not mix well.
3. There is no official definition of the Bush Doctrine. Even Wikipedia has about 6 different definitions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_Doctrine). In that interview Charlie Gibson tried to humiliate Sarah Palin and it was rather despicable. Not to mention the fact that his ‘definition’ of the Bush Doctrine was simply common sense: the right to preemptively attack a group that is planning to attack you. This doctrine is as old as history itself.
4. Evolution is littered with gaping hole after gaping hole. Even its most staunchest defenders admit that it is a theory, not a scientific fact set in stone.
Before we call people ignorant, let’s try not to be guilty of the same crime.
I don't think calling her ignorant is out of line at all. Gibson tossed her a soft-ball about the Bush doctrine and she couldn't answer it. Why? Because she's not informed, and she's completely unqualified for the job she's applying for.
Oh goodness, the grammar police have got me. Sorry about that. I definitely do know the difference between litigation and legislation. But, I will admit, this was a bit of a rant. I am embarressed that when I hear people talking about her, the most prized development isn't what comes out of her mouth, but whether there are naked pictures of her.
Political representatives, male or female, are called to a higher standard. It is their job to know what certain things mean. The fact that I obviously know the difference between Title VII and Title IX more than Palin does in fact mean that she is ingorant if ranked as a politician. It doesn't matter that an average American doesn't even know what state touches another, much less where the country of Algeria is located. If she doesn't know what country she has visite, and what state she is in, that is a real problem. If she is proposing legislation, and it comes to light that she doesn't know that there is a website dedicated to making government transparent, that Alaska copied federal legislation in the legislation she signed into law, that right now there is a pending law suit about how much information that legislation entitles voters to when congressional aids do not feel safe having their home address as public knowledge, this makes me wonder just how much they do know up in Alaska. And what rock she crawled from under. Or whether, which is what I suspect, they are taking the Bush act on the road, and think women are too stupid to notice.
FYI, this is totally a rant. I have a few of those. Sometimes ignorance, and I am not sure how much of it is actually genuine, makes you angry.
Tim,
You really call that a softball? According to this link there are 4 "Bush Doctrines" that Gibson could have been referring to, and he was not even referring to the most recent (which is the spread of democracy throughout the world).
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR200809...
I don't think ranting has any place in a public professional forum such as this blog. This is what is wrong with citizen journalism-or journalism in general-people write based on their own misinformation, make up facts, or make a big deal of something that is not a big deal.
Your arguments against Palin do not much sense, they lack substance and just aren't factual.
Palin has much more experience than Obama does. She was chosen because she is a strong woman, with high integrity and successfully fights corruption in Alaska.
What the hell has Obama done? He's all talk and no proof. And Biden, he's a nobody too. So where do you get off ranting about Palin when there are obvious shortcomings in your political party? Although there are shortcomings in both political parties...
I suggest the next time you go off on a shallow rant, to first make sure you're not pointing fingers at the same issues others can point issues at you or Obama, or Biden or whoever.
I'm embarrassed by the ignorance that is Beth Harris.
Anonymous,
This discussion is not about Biden or Obama. This discussion is about a politican who has made several high profile errors that I feel a politican should not make.
Here is a little ancedote to illustrate why I am angry from a different perspective. President Bush consistently mispronounces the names of foreign dignitaries and countries. President Clinton, during the crisis in the Balkins, made a decision to refer to Kosovo as Kosova. My cousin worked in the Clinton whitehouse. There is an aide for each president whose sole job is to make sure that they say things right. Names and places are spelled phonetically. In capital letters. Or something along those lines, so that they are easy to read and memorize. They practice. Any "mispronunciation" was on purpose. Kosova instead of Kosovo was a signal. So are the many Bush gaffes.
I think that Palin's presentation is a signal. And it is a signal I am angry about. Because not only does she represent the United States, but she represents women. Because unfortunately, while there are more of us, there are fewer of us in positions of leadership.
When I traveled abroad in college/law school, the first thing people wanted to know when the subject of politics came up is how did I feel about Bush. It was a joke. To hear people who have no business being smug about their policies, saying with abandon, well, at least our president/prime minister knows what country he/she is in is not funny. I don't want another eight years of a political joke for a politican. Either she needs a better fact checker, or someone needs to tell Palin that she is not funny and cannot possibly be that dumb.
If you are a Republican, please be big enough to see this as a comment against an image, and not against policies. I haven't said anything about policies. So don't go attack me as some left-wing propagandist. At least not until you know where I stand.
And, as a final note: personal attacks on a blogger who operates in the private sphere are not helpful, because blogging is about the ideas. While you might feel secure saying, behind anonymity, that Beth Harris ignorant, I will have you know that at least I am informed enough to know enough about legislation and litigation to know what it actually means when I reference a law, and I am informed enough to place limits on what I say. If I am wrong about something I have said, show me what I said that was inaccurate. If, rather, I am simply offending your political sensibilities, then say so, and let's keep it moving.
This isn't about other politicians and their experience or lack-thereof. This is about yet another politican who thinks its cute and clever to be ignorant. When it is anything but.
When two major worries are how presidents pronounce countries and what foreigners think of Bush, we're in trouble...
Wanting to be liked is a dangerous value. If we are truly committed to doing good, many countries will not like us. Such is life.
Jeff,
Sounding intelligent and wanting to be liked are not the same thing. At all. Intelligence and likeability aren't even related. But beyond that, acting dumb is not a good way to be a good politican. If people think you are stupid, lets see how far you get on an ordinary job, let alone one where you are a REPRESENTATIVE of your electorate. And if you purposefully reinforce this image, what does that mean about you?
I find it amusing, very amusing, that you (Beth) liberals are so outraged by Palin's nomination. If she is so fatally flawed then surely the Republican ticket is doomed and Obama et. al. is cleaning up in the polls. Oh, wait...they're not... and you're panicked. This is what makes you post such silliness.
While I don't agree with her on probably anything, at least Paris has had a sense of humor about thing. So to quote her, I'll "See you at the debate, bitches".
Dear Ryan Karpeles,
Why must a conversation re: Palin always come back to Biden or Obama when the discussion is not about them?
Now regarding you comment.
1. I wasn't discussing the merits of pandering within the political process, I was discussing pandering and the correlation (or lack of) to Palin's being a quality role model for women and the reasons for which she was selected. I also do not agree with Obama's choice for running mate, which is a completely separate discussion.
2. The meth lab was a joke, though true, people are always so serious on this site. But to address your statement, Obama is a STATE senator, not a city senator. And Chicago is a large metropolis where based on size alone there is bound to be a drug problem to a certain level. Palin was the Mayor of the meth lab capital of Alaska, I find that funny. If I really wanted to attack Palin in a serious fashion there a number of other things to bring up that I am sure you are well aware of and likely ignoring. To each their own.
3. If you think that just because Gibson asked Palin what the Bush doctrine was he was getting the best of her you've been watching too much Fox News. That is a very simple question, nothing surprising and nothing way outside the field of acceptable or even possibly expected questions. If you simply watch any of her interviews, you can tell every other question catches her like a deer in one of her own headlights.
I believe reporters should be asking the exact same questions to Obama and Biden. Conducting interviews like the one she did on FOX news with Hannity is a disrespect and disservice to the public. She may as well have been interviewed by her husband.
4. As for evolution, you tell me, what has more huge gaping holes: evolution or religion?
I stand by Beth's article, Palin is enormously ignorant to most things related to the job she is running for. And its unfortunately people like yourself that are giving her the chance to possibly be President. Next time the republicans should just sponsor a Powerball lottery to select their VP candidate.
GOT SOMETHING TO SAY?