This blog printed on 100% recycled electrons.
Calling Tina Fey. Here’s Palin defending herself on the contention that she got confused about Africa:
“My concern has been the atrocities there in Darfur and the relevance to me with that issue as we spoke about Africa and some of the countries there that were kind of the people succumbing to the dictators and the corruption of some collapsed governments on the continent, the relevance was Alaska’s investment in Darfur with some of our permanent fund dollars" [Maureen Down, "Boxers, Briefs, or Silks?" New York Times, 2008.11.11].
Chapel and Palin have similar facility with the English language. They are both Main Streeters from the real parts of America. Maybe Palin-Chapel is the ticket to lead the Republican restoration in 2012.
Update 10:23: Or maybe not.
You missed Palin's address to the Republican governors conference this morning. She is actually nothing like the media press she has been given. She is intelligent, conscientious, sensible, fiscally responsible, and speaks well (even if she doesn't put the "g" on the end of all her words). I challenge you to listen to her yourself instead of just repeating the oft touted media soundbites.
ReplyDeleteThe only reason that she is still a focus of media stories is that she is still a force in future politics, and the Dems are scared of her and trying anything to end her rising star.
I know you will never agree with her or appreciate her, but the constant snide jabs are getting old.
Nonnie
It reflects poorly on your intellect, Cory!
ReplyDeleteI like the way you put that Nonnie, but can't agree. Some of us really enjoy those constant snide jabs!
ReplyDeleteBut really, you can't be serious that she speaks well. Oh, I get it now. You are being facetious.
But Nonnie, none of what you say changes the fact that the statement she made above about Darfur is mostly incomprehensible. I'm more than ready to stop wasting pixels on her, but she keeps cranking out the material. Besides, if I quit writing about her, Chuck Ritter won't have anything to comment about. I've got to give the Sam Adams crusaders something to work with. ;-)
ReplyDeleteShe doesn't orate as well as the Messiah, granted, but maybe he doesn't either without the help of the teleprompters. That's how he got in trouble with Joe the plumber if you remember. And he hesitates etc and uses uh, uh, uh, when just talking to the average person and not orating.
ReplyDeleteI don't care if one has the elocution skills of Obama or not. I DO care what the person stands for, the direction the person wants to take the nation, etc. And for that I will take Sarah Palin over Obama anyday, as will many other voters nationwide. And that is why the Dems are scared of her.
Nonnie
I don't ask for golden oratory. I just want a comprehensible paragraph... which the above statement on Darfur is clearly not.
ReplyDeleteScared of Palin? Not me. Nominate Palin in 2012? Go ahead: make my day.
If you missed it, the NY Times reports the whole not knowing Africa was a continent thing was a hoax by some fake blogger that fooled some folks.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/13/arts/television/13hoax.html?_r=2&hp&oref=login&oref=slogin
It doesn't take any substance to attack Palin. She makes her decision, she stands by it and she can talk to anyone without being embarassed. Not to mention actual executive experience.
ReplyDeleteFrom the election of Barack Obama it shows that speaking problems(sans-prompter), being mislead and a candidate looking down at you aren't deal breakers for the Office of the PUSA. It also shows how partisian Activism of the Democrat Party decides their candidates.
But then Cory, I'm sure you're one of those people who make fun of the Native Americans and the Hutterites for their views based on their accents!
Chuck, if you'd like to argue against stupid things I actually say rather than the stupid things you wish I'd say, feel free. The original post says nothing about Palin's accent. Red herring, straw man....
ReplyDeleteSteve: The "Martin Eisenstadt" hoax wasn't the Africa claim itself, but rather the claim by that hoaxster to be the McCain aide who leaked the comment. And notice, I'm not taking a position on the Africa continent-or-country silliness. I'm saying, as is Maureen Dowd, that the above-cited comment is incomprehensible. Or, if one can draw any meaning from it, one finds the rather distasteful suggestion that Palin is worried about Darfur because of investments of state dollars there. Yikes.
I don't know what you meant by attacking Sarah Palin's speech.
ReplyDeleteIf you mean clarity, then re-read some of Obama's and Biden's comments when they are off script. Obama is very adept at skirting an issue and saying nothing but sounding great - that's how he got elected!
Palin has huge popularity ratings, whether or not the press or you want to admit it. And she has a bright political future. I'm just hoping that Obama leaves us a country that will be able to use her executive and political abilities instead of a socialist morass.
But you still treat her like an idiot for it! You can't actually believe anyone thinks this is a policy argument, do you?
ReplyDeleteChuck: you've brought up so many irrelevant issues, I can't properly identify the antecedents of your pronouns. If by "it" and "this" you are referring to the quote straight from Sarah Palin about Darfur that I cited above, well, no one could mistake that specific statement as a policy argument, because it is incomprehensible. And no one here has yet been able to explain or defend that specific statement.
ReplyDeleteAll I can say is that with statesmanship like that, I welcome a Palin-* ticket in 2012. Cakewalk for Obama, field day for bloggers and comedians.
So, what off-topic comments would you like to bring up now?
Since, you I'm sure you'll defend your comments being politically important, what was she commenting on with the African Comments? Do those policies differe from Obama's?
ReplyDeleteYou haven't tried to look for the answer. You just use snippets from MoveOn, Huffington Post and other pundits that push their opinion as news. And you wallow in the mud you sling.
ReplyDeleteYou bore me...
Wow -- again, off point and imagining things. Is that the basic Sam Adams strategy, just keep planting keywords to fool the search engines and the inattentive?
ReplyDeleteI don't think I've ever cited or linked MoveOn.org (I'm open to correction, but I'm sure such references, if any, have been rare). I do link HuffPost, but not in this post, and not as often as other news sources. I can understand why you're bored, Chuck: you don't want to talk about real local issues (I don't think I ever hear from you on any post that talks just about Madison or Lake County), and you don't like arguing against someone who doesn't fit your stereotype of the wimpy liberal you wish all Obama voters were.
On the faint substance of your comment: I think you finally touched on the point. We shouldn't have to go digging for what public figures mean. Their statements should be sufficiently clear to any listener. I can't tell you whether Palin's comments on Darfur represented any substantial policy difference with Obama's because her words don't make clear what her own policy position is.
Again, the point: Palin's above statement is incomprehensible.
Next subject change....
clarification: "I do link HuffPost, but not in this post, and not as often as I link to other news sources."
ReplyDeleteAnd I link to more sources than Chuck ever has.