From Politico:
Gov. Sarah Palin (R-Alaska) believes Caroline Kennedy is getting softer press treatment in her pursuit of the New York Senate seat than Palin did as the GOP vice presidential nominee because of Kennedy’s social class.First of all, Gov. Palin, love the syntax in that quote. I would try to diagram that sentence, but I fear it would provoke a seizure.
[snip]
"It’s going to be interesting to see how that plays out and I think that as we watch that we will perhaps be able to prove that there is a class issue here also that was such a factor in the scrutiny of my candidacy versus, say, the scrutiny of what her candidacy may be.”
Secondly, while I am no supporter of Ms. Kennedy's pursuit of a seat in the Senate, I don't think she is skating to the appointment with no scrutiny. Palin's straw man argument is easily refuted.
But even if there had been greater scrutiny for Palin than for Kennedy, it's because the jobs in question are not equivalent. Perhaps Gov. Palin is not aware of this, but the stakes for being Veep to a 72-year-old cancer survivor are not the same as those for being New York's junior Senator. If Chuck Schumer kicks the bucket, Kennedy doesn't get nuclear codes. That Palin would compare the two reaffirms my disdain for her brainpower.
As does this quote:
She also expressed frustration with Couric’s characterization of her since the interviews. After being shown a clip of Couric complaining to David Letterman that no post-election interviewer has asked Palin why she would not tell the CBS anchor what newspapers she reads, the Alaska governor responded: “Because, Katie, you’re not the center of everybody’s universe.”What are you, twelve? This is your response? You fail to name a single publication that you can even pretend to read, and your ex post facto come-back is a rejoinder worthy of a middle-schooler? Oh, please run for the Senate, Gov. Palin. The posts just write themselves.
Posts
Be careful what you ask for-- if she runs in Alaska she will probably win. Then we'll be stuck with her in the Senate for 50 years until baby Trig/pp is dynastied in!
ReplyDeleteI know that it's not a good idea to have her in the Senate, but it would be replacing one hack with another, so let's call it a wash.
ReplyDeleteHer syntax? Yes, as we all know, repor^H^H^H^H^H journalists do not fix up interview responses. Otherwise, you know, we'd uh uh uh uhm, be, you know, ah you'd be, uh uh uh uh, you know, reading these, uh uhm, bright and, ahhh, you know, articulate uh uh uh, responses, uh. Uh, and you know, that just not, uhm, the image I, rather, we, want, uhm uh uh, to, uh, print.
ReplyDeleteJohn, I would be more inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt if her answers in the interviews I have already seen had sounded vaguely coherent at the time. Your comment implies that what looks ridiculous on paper can sound perfectly intelligent live, but her answers sound just as ridiculous when she speaks as when one reads the transcript.
ReplyDeleteOK, I'll bite, what is incoherent in the Palin quote you provided? I understand her to say that Kennedy might get better treatment by the press because of the Kennedy political pedigree. That doesn't really seem all that incoherent, but hey, what's your take?
ReplyDeleteOn a side note, I've never understood the Kennedy aura; Joseph K as US Ambassador in 1940 advocated leaving England to the Nazis, and John brought the world to the brink of thermonuclear war through ill-advised diplomacy.
Ya got me on the Kennedy mystique, John. And I have nothing good to say about Caroline for the Senate.
ReplyDeleteThis particular quote isn't incoherent per se, though plenty of what she said to Katie Couric was. This one was just terribly constructed, and I'm disinclined to give her the benefit of the doubt that it sounded better than it read because she's never sounded all that great.
johnv2, you gotta be kidding, right? The woman is dizzying, listening to her speak is like going on a verbal rollercoaster, you never know what is going to follow next, what misplaced modifier or extraneous words will come next. Good lord she does drone on when she speaks. Look at what she says above:
ReplyDeleteIt’s going to be interesting to see how that plays out and I think that as we watch that
Why the second clause? Eliminate it and it makes as much sense, observe:
It’s going to be interesting to see how that plays out and we will perhaps be able
Now the next part: we will perhaps be able to prove that there is a class issue here also
That is just terrible from anyone over the age of 15. Why the qualifier, why the also, why the redundancy?
I am busy so I will cut to the chase and say it in a more normal fashion:
It’s going to be interesting to see how that plays out and perhaps we can prove that there is a class issue here which was such a factor in the scrutiny of my candidacy, versus what her candidacy may be.”
Even that is simplified version is pretty bad.
She is a nitwit, I know many Mexicans who can speak better English than her, in fact my English is better than hers and I am just a washed up Latina sex kitten
Charo
"This particular quote isn't incoherent per se, though plenty of what she said to Katie Couric was."
ReplyDeleteOK, fair enough. I haven't read the entire interview, and I am unlikely to do so unless something really egregious is in there.
I don't think she is nutty. I find it difficult to reconcile her ability to win high office with low intelligence. I suspect that when we disagree with someone's weltanschauung in many areas, we tend to see them as nuttier, relatively, than people we agree with. I know it affects my view, and I have to be careful not to confuse disagreement with stupidity. We can learn a lot from people with whom we profoundly disagree.