The photo above, copyright wired.com, shows the woman some think will be running for President in 2012. Some think she’s already running and just hasn’t declared.
She is not the most stupid woman in the world; that’s just a character she plays on the world stage to continually re-establish her “brand.” It has to be. Nobody who ran for the second-highest office in the U.S. could possibly be as ignorant of American history….could they?
It’s not just that she seems to say the first thing that pops into her head when she’s asked the “hard questions” by what she calls the “lame-stream media.” After she’s called on her gaffe…..like the most recent one about Paul Revere’s ride….she goes to great lengths to defend her completely incorrect statements about whatever stupid error she’s been caught in.
It’s been said that intuitive improvisation is a mark of genius. She seems quite able to make up stories instantaneously. Paul Revere rode to warn the British not to take away our guns. Right?
I believe her whole schtick is an act, and that it’s concocted to keep her in the public eye and atop the Tea Party. From that “lofty” perch, Palin can be a king-maker for the Republican Party, which has apparently decided that it’s more important to lure Tea Partiers into the tent than less dogmatic soft-commits from the “center” of American politics.
Her brand is the opposite of Barack Obama’s. Where he’s portrayed as an effete intellectual, she’s established a brand as being a ditzy hockey mom given to outbursts of outrageous oratory. When he talks about folks clinging to their guns and bibles in tough times, she talks about the Second Amendment as if she actually understands it, Praise The Lord.
She’s not running. She’s just building her brand.
For a VERY well-informed discussion of Revere's ride and the military strategy employed, read this:
ReplyDeletehttp://grimbeorn.blogspot.com/2011_05_29_archive.html#3595842456700994111
Then you may politely retract your post.
No retraction from TM is necessary. Ms. Palin made a mistake, merging two events into one. Professional historians have already explained it and she should have just acknowledged it and gone on. Instead, she lied.
ReplyDeleteAnd I am not impressed with referencing "Conservatives4Palin" as a source for history.
Read Grim's post. Didn't find anything about "warning them not to take away our guns" or "ringing those bells." Point on "warning the British" conceded.
ReplyDeleteThe rest stands.
/tjm
Gee.
ReplyDeleteLooking now for the "57 States" rant about Teh Won; or the "500,000 jobs/month" rant about Biden's promise of last summer; or the "GM TARP deal" takedown of Teh Won's speech of last week.
Or is it only Palin who gets ripped--and for what can only be called minor twaddle?
@Dad29, considering that the whole point of Palin's tour is supposedly to raise awareness about our great American history and culture, and that her "twaddle" was in answer to a softball question about the trip's daily lesson, it is hardly minor. Is her tour meant to confuse Americans about our history? Or perhaps to celebrate ignorance? What kind of ROI are SarahPAC contributors getting for this expenditure?
ReplyDeleteIf your boss sent you to a conference and then asked you to write a summary of what you had learned, do you think it might reflect poorly on your next performance review if you completely jumbled the agenda and then added in some totally made-up inaccuracies? Do you think he might wonder if you spent all of your time in the hotel bar instead of at the sessions?
Two words we'll never worry about hearing: "President Palin." Her numbers have fallen off a cliff http://goo.gl/uXxmr
ReplyDeletePalin, Palin, Palin! My word! The snark flows freely whenever her name is mentioned.
ReplyDeleteI suppose that what she does to annoy progressives/liberals is much higher up the aggravation scale than how conservatives feel about what Weiner did, eh? Excedrin headache #355?
The Town Crank
Neenah
Ahh, Crank ... The Monster Raving Loony wing of the GOP, to which you seem to subscribe, is blessed with a gift for rhetorical legerdemain. Your political synapses are misfiring. We're not evaluating randy congressmen here (don't get me started), we are considering our options for selecting an heir to Washington and Jefferson and Lincoln.
ReplyDeleteI probably should not spill the beans on this, but ... Sarah Palin does not vex "liberals" of any stripe or variation. Quite the contrary: We enthusiastically (if obliquely) cheer her on! She is endlessly amusing, discomfiting to the Republican establishment and a great money sponge, soaking up contributions that won't be spent on anything serious. What's not to like about that?
We are still enjoying the latest knee-slapper by former Huckabee huckster Ed Rollins, who is now shilling for Michele Bachmann. He lately averred that his candidate is preferable to Sweet Sarah because she's just as hot and not as dumb. Yes, he did: http://goo.gl/KL29u
As usual, HK has summed it up nicely. Every time an Obama Administration or Democratic Party official is asked "who do you want to run against in 2012", the answer is invariably "Palin."
ReplyDeleteHieronymous,
ReplyDeleteNo, not a subscriber to the MRL wing of the GOP. Libertarian more than conservative...at least, I was one of those nuts who held up Ron Paul signs during the snowstorms of '07-'08.
And I'm certainly no "establishment" Republican. The Colonel is aware of my bona fides in this matter: pure counter-culturalist. A 2/2 on the Pournelle Political Axes. The only time I've seen him in the flesh over the past 30 years or so is when we both attended an Ed Thompson fundraiser at Sly's house in the PRM in '02. Pictures here.
I don't care one way or the other about Ms. Palin. I'm simply enthralled by the vituperation that is heaped upon her...usually the "she's really really really really dumb" type. Get's old. I think it must be a rally-round-the-flag test for progressives/liberals: Honk if you think Sarah Palin is dumb, or something to that effect.
The Town Crank
Neenah
P.S. For the record, I'd rather have Palin than Obama as President. At least she wouldn't bow to the Saudis! "You may fire when you are ready, Gridley!"
But she might kiss the Saudi king and walk hand-in-hand with hime like Bush did.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous,
ReplyDelete>> But she might kiss the Saudi king and walk hand-in-hand with hime like Bush did. <<
Ah! The one-liner contest! OK, how about:
Equal is better than subservient!
Of course, superior is better than equal...
The Town Crank
Neenah
OK, smarty. Glib away on these http://bit.ly/c8Kbve
ReplyDeleteAnonymous,
ReplyDeleteOh, I'm aware of the kissing and hand-holding. I'm just saying that that's better, in my humble yet deadly accurate opinion, than bowing.
The Town Crank
Neenah