Posted on 02/14/2010 4:44:35 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Sarah Palin may very well be the worst presidential candidate in the history of U.S. elections. It’s not because she’s a Conservative and I’m a Liberal. It’s because she’s plain unqualified to manage a game of “Civilization IV,” much less the political affairs of the office of the president.
It is a mystery to me, to be honest, why she has so many supporters, because anyone with a vocabulary larger than the words “you” and “betcha” understands she rivals former President George W. Bush in literacy.
For those of us that don’t watch Fox News, this was illustrated perfectly at the National Tea Party last week. The Associated Press story printed across the nation started with the following line: “Sarah Palin, in a speech that was short on ideas but big on enthusiasm, took aim at President Barack Obama ...”
Therein lies the problem. Enthusiasm will get absolutely nothing done in international politics nowadays. Palin would make an absolutely terrible president. She has a lot of enthusiasm, I’ll give her that. She knows how to get all folksy and talk to an audience like my mother. The problem with this is that my mother would probably make a terrible president.
For some reason, there has been an intellectual backlash against Obama. The term intellectual was bounced around during the 2008 campaign in a derogatory fashion.
Personally, I would love to be called an intellect, but it seems to play directly into the conservative movement of anger and hate. The conservative movement, ever since the Civil Rights Act of 1964, has considered the Democratic Party elitist and for the intellectuals.
The backlash could be attributed to the lower education standards in conservative states. In 2006, the Census Bureau released a report detailing the percent of people in each state with a bachelor’s degree or more. A key statistic behind the highest 15 states: each one of them Obama won in 2008.
I don’t think that’s a coincidence. The most intellectual states want an intellectual president. But the question begs, why doesn’t everyone? Shouldn’t we elect the smartest capable person to the most powerful office in the land?
Typically, it’s hard to judge people based on their educational alma maters. However, every president since Lyndon B. Johnson has been to a very prestigious university, ignoring the brief period an actor with terrible leadership qualities led the country between 1981 and 1989. It shows having a good education is necessary to even become the president, much less become a good president. Bush was actually a Harvard grad, if you can believe that.
Since her brief stint in the world of academia, it seems unlikely that her political prowess has sharpened her understanding of the world. Her most recent gaffes are far more embarrassing, as they show her distinct lack of understanding of the nation’s political system.
Four days after her resignation as Alaska governor, she famously referred to the non-existent Department of Law in Washington in an interview with ABC News. Mere weeks before the election, she completely melted down in a CBS interview with Katie Couric, insisting she reads all of the newspapers. In that same interview, she could not name a Supreme Court ruling other than Roe v. Wade.
Perhaps her most famous quote from that interview was her response to a Couric question regarding the $700-billion bailout. “But ultimately what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health care reform that is needed to help shore up our economy.” A 4-year-old playing Mad Libs can construct a more competent sentence.
This week alone featured her using her hand as a notepad at a Tea Party convention and incorrectly characterizing fellow right wing pundit Rush Limbaugh’s use of the word “retard” as satire on Fox News Sunday.
It’s fairly obvious she is far too unqualified to become leader of the once-free world. Not only is she about as politically savvy as the lipstick she puts on a pig, her credentials just don’t stack up. Obama was again targeted by the Conservatives for being unqualified and not prepared for the job. He served in the Illinois Senate for seven years, followed by a term as the junior Illinois senator in Washington.
Palin, meanwhile, hasn’t had a position of national prominence. Her highest office was the position of Alaska governor, and she resigned that position after two-and-a-half years. Her previous international political experience involved looking at Russia from her house. She cannot, and should not, be expected to deliver a speech to the United Nations without even knowing Kenya’s location. She could start a war with the country of Africa without even knowing it is more impossible to win that war than our two current wars.
I only get one column a week, and I’ll be going well over my word count again this week. I can’t even discuss half of the stuff that makes her a terrible candidate. However, presented with the aforementioned proof, I have to ask her supporters one question. Why, exactly, do you support this woman?
If the people who bash Palin for being unintelligent could maybe one day demonstrate an iota of intelligence in their critique of her that would be truly refreshing. Why I might even say it would be unprecedented.
As for this poor guy that wrote this crap, it's just a sad commentary on what passes for J-schools these days.
Simply put, no. We should elect the wisest person; often the smartest knows they're the smart and their pride causes them to make unwise decisions. Much like our current leadership.
Give me wisdom - discernment of the proper course of action, coupled with the humility to seek counsel and facts to determine that course.
Here’s another similar one by a slightly more intelligent kid:
Palin uses media to keep fresh for 2012 election
http://www.thelantern.com/opinion/palin-uses-media-to-keep-fresh-for-2012-election-1.1128925
Intelligence is really a non-issue. There are many intellects that would make terrible leaders. Common sense and the ability to act in a manner that is congruent with the constitution is what matters.
Hell, I’d make a better leader than Obama. And I’m no brain surgeon.
She is more qualified than the current occupant of the Oval Office!
Good point.
I received an e-mail the other day that pointed out the kids starting college this year were born in 1992.
This gave me two fears:
The kids are coming to adulthood in the age of rock star Obama and ultra liberalism (this young man is a perfect example)and...
OMG, I’m gettin’ old!!
“Tony is a woman”-—
I was just looking at the picture. Are you sure? I’m not.
LOL...thanks for the info. I couldn’t tell from the pic.
I keep thinking of two words reading about intellectuals... “Corpse Man”.
You are correct. Eggheads have no concept of this encompassing society and fail everytime they try to capture it.
I’m having fun with the comments on the source. Let’s see if we can make him/her/it cry.
And Mr. Smart Liberal apparently has no clue what the expression "begging the question" actually means.
Yes, it is. Next.
Even a word count of just one word, is too much for a retard. What kind of newspaper offers a forum for such mentally deranged escapees from the lunatic asylum to spew out such nonsensical garbage on their pages anyway?
The person in that picture looks a little old to be still in college....
More wisdom from Tony:
Tony Cardone - Twitter - Public - Muted
RT @StephenAtHome: global warming doesn’t exist because it’s cold outside. simple equation: eyes + snow = science.
“OMG, I’m gettin’ old!!”
Yes, and the older we get, the faster it goes.
I can not believe that I am now 65.
20 years ago seems like last week.
Yark!!!!!
My FReepin eyes!
This writer is going to have a miserable 8 years.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.