Sarah Palin - The New Dan Quayle?

[knapplc]

I was an early fan of Palin. Her home spun, blue collar conservatism appealed to me (nice cans didn't hurt either). I intially saw her as very raw politically and in terms of public speaking, I assumed she would mature into the role. As a conservative, I supprt her campaigning for others, but if she has any aspirations for the white house, I'd have to vote elsewhere.

 

I think most peoples' public estimation of other peoples' intelligence tends to be way off base. I would assume most presidents are like most people, that is mostly pretty average. The public perception however is offen swayed mostly by media. How is Quale an idiot for a few gaffs and Biden is just a tad eccentric. Really?

 

I've also heard enough of this well, he went to Harvard or Yale, I have to say, if my dad had the cash, I could of gone there too.

 

Now, we do have opportunities to do something about these parties, I have attended some 911 seminars and certainly read alot about the other various movements cropping up. The press seems content to paint the Tea Party thing as just a right wing freak movement, but I will tell you, the movement is in an embrionic state, it is not a unified ideology or even a group of entirely like minded people. You have the chance to shape the future of what may be the next viable political party. Will you continue to whine about the evils of the Dems and Pubs or are you ready to get off you a** and get involved?

I doubt that you could have made Law Review at Harvard Law though . . . lord knows I couldn't.

Being book smart and having a grasp on what works in the real world are two different things. I don't think anyone is challenging the former but the latter.

True, but having neither book smarts nor a grasp of what works in the real world is an even greater detriment, yet we have political leaders with large followings right now displaying these traits. That's what scares me.

[carlfense]

I was an early fan of Palin. Her home spun, blue collar conservatism appealed to me (nice cans didn't hurt either). I intially saw her as very raw politically and in terms of public speaking, I assumed she would mature into the role. As a conservative, I supprt her campaigning for others, but if she has any aspirations for the white house, I'd have to vote elsewhere.

 

I think most peoples' public estimation of other peoples' intelligence tends to be way off base. I would assume most presidents are like most people, that is mostly pretty average. The public perception however is offen swayed mostly by media. How is Quale an idiot for a few gaffs and Biden is just a tad eccentric. Really?

 

I've also heard enough of this well, he went to Harvard or Yale, I have to say, if my dad had the cash, I could of gone there too.

 

Now, we do have opportunities to do something about these parties, I have attended some 911 seminars and certainly read alot about the other various movements cropping up. The press seems content to paint the Tea Party thing as just a right wing freak movement, but I will tell you, the movement is in an embrionic state, it is not a unified ideology or even a group of entirely like minded people. You have the chance to shape the future of what may be the next viable political party. Will you continue to whine about the evils of the Dems and Pubs or are you ready to get off you a** and get involved?

I doubt that you could have made Law Review at Harvard Law though . . . lord knows I couldn't.

Being book smart and having a grasp on what works in the real world are two different things. I don't think anyone is challenging the former but the latter.

 

In my experience the book smart/real world smart distinction is generally excuse making by those who didn't/couldn't do well in school.

[Ponderosa]

In my experience the book smart/real world smart distinction is generally excuse making by those who didn't/couldn't do well in school.

 

Already an elitist.

 

There are some damn fine and capable people without degrees in many walks of life.

Depending on the year, as many one-third of the members the Fortune 400 list do not have degrees (including Gates, Dell & Ellison, etc.).

 

Perhaps you should reconsider or get out more?

 

 

[Manhattan]

About party association, I think sports work pretty much exactly the same way.

 

How is it possible that through individual reasoning of events and information, that Nebraska fans all view the :01 second one way and Texas fans another way? One side will always believe that their reasoning is obviously superior and the other side is stupid when clearly the only reason you believe one way or another is because you're a fan of the team on that side of the argument. The fans who could concede that perhaps the other team's fans are correct on a certain issue are one in a thousand - just like with people about politics. Even if they're side is wrong, they're too committed to believe anything else they hear.

[carlfense]

In my experience the book smart/real world smart distinction is generally excuse making by those who didn't/couldn't do well in school.

 

Already an elitist.

 

There are some damn fine and capable people without degrees in many walks of life.

Depending on the year, as many one-third of the members the Fortune 400 list do not have degrees (including Gates, Dell & Ellison, etc.).

 

Perhaps you should reconsider or get out more?

 

Absolutely agreed, regarding the bold. Two of my best friends went to trade schools and are doing quite well for themselves financially. Then again I've never heard them talking down about "book smarts."

 

My point was that it's ridiculous to assume that someone lacks "real world smarts" just because they do well in school. Wouldn't you agree?

[Ponderosa]

 

My point was that it's ridiculous to assume that someone lacks "real world smarts" just because they do well in school. Wouldn't you agree?

 

Yes, I do agree. Doing well in school and “real world smarts” are not mutually exclusive.

 

 

 

[husker_99]

Thanks to the teleprompter. Have you ever heard him speak without it? It's frightening. The left would KILL any Republican that has his skillset (or lack thereof) when speaking.

 

This is a typical character assassination you hear from "the other side" when the OTHER other side is in power. If you believe Obama can't speak without a teleprompter you probably believe Dick Cheney was really running the whole show and Bush was a figurehead, or some other such nonsense propaganda the Left was putting out when Bush was president. It's all bunk.

 

No it's not a character assassination. He literally can't speak coherently without a teleprompter. The news even showed it and since then he has never spoken without a teleprompter.

[knapplc]

Thanks to the teleprompter. Have you ever heard him speak without it? It's frightening. The left would KILL any Republican that has his skillset (or lack thereof) when speaking.

 

This is a typical character assassination you hear from "the other side" when the OTHER other side is in power. If you believe Obama can't speak without a teleprompter you probably believe Dick Cheney was really running the whole show and Bush was a figurehead, or some other such nonsense propaganda the Left was putting out when Bush was president. It's all bunk.

 

No it's not a character assassination. He literally can't speak coherently without a teleprompter. The news even showed it and since then he has never spoken without a teleprompter.

 

[Husker_x]

It's true that Obama is much worse off without a teleprompter. He's not a stuttering idiot without one, but he prefers his oratory to be written. And I'm completely fine with that. George Bush couldn't get two sentences together whether they were written down for him or not. This didn't make him an idiot; it made him a terrible speaker. Terrible speaker's can be effective leaders.

 

I honestly don't see what the bitch is about Obama's teleprompter. What difference does it make?

[sarge87]

I was an early fan of Palin. Her home spun, blue collar conservatism appealed to me (nice cans didn't hurt either). I intially saw her as very raw politically and in terms of public speaking, I assumed she would mature into the role. As a conservative, I supprt her campaigning for others, but if she has any aspirations for the white house, I'd have to vote elsewhere.

 

I think most peoples' public estimation of other peoples' intelligence tends to be way off base. I would assume most presidents are like most people, that is mostly pretty average. The public perception however is offen swayed mostly by media. How is Quale an idiot for a few gaffs and Biden is just a tad eccentric. Really?

 

I've also heard enough of this well, he went to Harvard or Yale, I have to say, if my dad had the cash, I could of gone there too.

 

Now, we do have opportunities to do something about these parties, I have attended some 911 seminars and certainly read alot about the other various movements cropping up. The press seems content to paint the Tea Party thing as just a right wing freak movement, but I will tell you, the movement is in an embrionic state, it is not a unified ideology or even a group of entirely like minded people. You have the chance to shape the future of what may be the next viable political party. Will you continue to whine about the evils of the Dems and Pubs or are you ready to get off you a** and get involved?

I doubt that you could have made Law Review at Harvard Law though . . . lord knows I couldn't.

Being book smart and having a grasp on what works in the real world are two different things. I don't think anyone is challenging the former but the latter.

 

In my experience the book smart/real world smart distinction is generally excuse making by those who didn't/couldn't do well in school.

A simple statement that wasn't meant as a slight, but an observation in my experience dealing with kids straight out of college coming to work for me. Maybe you should switch to decaf or something.

[carlfense]

I was an early fan of Palin. Her home spun, blue collar conservatism appealed to me (nice cans didn't hurt either). I intially saw her as very raw politically and in terms of public speaking, I assumed she would mature into the role. As a conservative, I supprt her campaigning for others, but if she has any aspirations for the white house, I'd have to vote elsewhere.

 

I think most peoples' public estimation of other peoples' intelligence tends to be way off base. I would assume most presidents are like most people, that is mostly pretty average. The public perception however is offen swayed mostly by media. How is Quale an idiot for a few gaffs and Biden is just a tad eccentric. Really?

 

I've also heard enough of this well, he went to Harvard or Yale, I have to say, if my dad had the cash, I could of gone there too.

 

Now, we do have opportunities to do something about these parties, I have attended some 911 seminars and certainly read alot about the other various movements cropping up. The press seems content to paint the Tea Party thing as just a right wing freak movement, but I will tell you, the movement is in an embrionic state, it is not a unified ideology or even a group of entirely like minded people. You have the chance to shape the future of what may be the next viable political party. Will you continue to whine about the evils of the Dems and Pubs or are you ready to get off you a** and get involved?

I doubt that you could have made Law Review at Harvard Law though . . . lord knows I couldn't.

Being book smart and having a grasp on what works in the real world are two different things. I don't think anyone is challenging the former but the latter.

 

In my experience the book smart/real world smart distinction is generally excuse making by those who didn't/couldn't do well in school.

A simple statement that wasn't meant as a slight, but an observation in my experience dealing with kids straight out of college coming to work for me. Maybe you should switch to decaf or something.

 

Switch to decaf? You kidding me? I drink 10 cups of coffee a day. I'd still be asleep if I switched to decaf.

 

[huKSer]

It's true that Obama is much worse off without a teleprompter. He's not a stuttering idiot without one, but he prefers his oratory to be written. And I'm completely fine with that. George Bush couldn't get two sentences together whether they were written down for him or not. This didn't make him an idiot; it made him a terrible speaker. Terrible speaker's can be effective leaders.

 

I honestly don't see what the bitch is about Obama's teleprompter. What difference does it make?

Unless it was Spanish, then he was fluent