The irresistible allure of Sarah Palin
Synova on Feb 10 2009 at 10:59 pm | Filed under: Uncategorized
I view this as near proof positive that Sarah Palin has a real, concrete, chance at being President some day. 2012 if Obama messes up too badly, and 2018 otherwise. I just can’t conceive of any other reason for her to provide such an obvious fascination for so many people.
It seems that Sarah didn’t just energize the Republican base, she energizes Huff-Po as well.
You can just about hear the valley-girl squeal; Omygawd, Todd is like, destroying the Earth, dude. And he’s, like, on that snow machine, like, in the snow. And like, I’m not going to say anything, like, uncool, but… woah… Sarah must really be a bitch.
The constant criticism of Sarah Palin is so gratuitous that I can only assume that “no publicity is bad” applies. No one with a brain could take this seriously, and it will get her name out in front of the “other side” and keep it there. And it will solidify criticism OF her, as being baseless. A couple of years of this and nothing bad anyone will say about Palin will stick.
Nothing.
Sphere: Related Content3 Responses to “The irresistible allure of Sarah Palin”
Trackback URI | Comments RSS
Unfortunately what HAS stuck is evidant if you use your search engine. Punch in PALIN LIKE and you come across articles about other people´s stupidity.
There was one in the paper today about Michael Steele, they called him Palin like meaning he was not a very articulate.
Other uses of Sarah´s last name, besides verbally challenged, are incurious and backwards.
I honestly think it’s going to desensitize everyone to those sorts of charges.
IS Michael Steel not articulate? I’d never before heard anything like that associated with him. So unless it’s *very* apt, and he misspeaks more than Biden does, the result will be (if this continues) that people will figure that Palin must not be inarticulate *either*.
Should she slow down a bit? Sure. Is she inarticulate? No, she’s really not. The problem is that she talks pretty much just like I’m used to hearing… and other people aren’t used to hearing.
Is she “incurious”? I don’t see any evidence for that at all. It’s an all purpose slur for anyone you don’t like in politics, who might not share your *exact* interests and passions. So every time someone says, “He has a Palin-like incuriosity,” and it’s not blindingly obvious that the guy is dumber than a bag of rocks, it’s going to seem an indictment of the speaker.
Is she “backward?” Well, obviously not, if you agree with her. Accusing someone of Palin-like backwardness is most likely to come off sounding elitist or else condemning by association other people who believe they share the same values. People who think it’s good to have children, for example. Or who think that racing machines of whatever sort is something other than “hanging on” while raping Gaia. NASCAR fans vote, after all.
fyi, type on this website is so impossibly small i cannot read a single word.