Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiBonkers in Alaska
Barrack Obama proved, finally, that anyone can grow up to be president. Sarah Palin, however, proved him wrong. Happily, lunatics are still not able to win the White House.
Sometimes presidents turn into lunatics while living in the Booby Hatch Capital of the World (Richard Nixon is a case in point), but Americans are still reluctant to make a national leader of someone who proves herself bonkers before even running.
She certainly appeared to be a certifiable maniac last Friday when she announced that she was quitting her governor job because ... well, basically because she's not a dead fish:
"And a problem in our country today is apathy," she explained at her hastily called press conference. "It would be apathetic to just hunker down and go with the flow. Nah, only dead fish go with the flow. No. Productive, fulfilled people determine where to put their efforts, choosing to wisely utilize precious time ... to BUILD UP."
Among the many mysteries as to what she meant by this, I confess I wasn't aware that dead fish ‘go with the flow.' I thought they kind of ‘float up to the surface and stink.' But then, I am not a fisherperson. Perhaps it's common in tackle shops to say, "Only dead fish go with the flow."
Perhaps there are even little wooden signs with those words carved into them that the rod and reel crowd hang on the wall in their fishing huts. (If any of you are in the know about this, please tell me. I'd hate to be unfair here.)
But I digress. The speculation, of course, is that Alaska's rogue maverick diva is stepping down in order to make a full-time job of preparing for a presidential run in 2012. For Tina Fey's sake, I hope so. She must be devastated.
But on the off chance that anyone who isn't a comedian thinks electing a President Palin is great idea, a little review of the past eight months might be in order:
She trotted her children, all named after imaginary things or sporting events or math functions, onto the public stage at the Republican Convention, where they sat, glassy-eyed, looking like refuges from the Village of the Damned. And that high school hockey player dude was sitting there, too -- Levi Johnston -- almost visibly praying the rosary that Sarah the Lunatic would lose the election so he wouldn't have to marry the very pregnant Bristol and have Sarah for a mother-in-law. Then, of course, the vice presidential hopeful got upset when the press wrote about her kids. Children should be off limits! she screeched. Indeed they should, Mom.
In an interview on CNBC last July she announced her confusion about the duties of the job she was aspiring to: "As for that VP talk all the time, I'll tell you, I still can't answer that question until somebody answers for me what is it exactly that the VP does every day?"
Speaking to students in Wasilla last June, she revealed her understanding of God's role in our invasion of Iraq: "Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending soldiers out on a task that is from God. That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan." She was sort of right about one thing. It would have been useful if there had been a plan.
When asked by Katie Couric during that disastrous interview last September what newspaper or magazine she reads, she was unable to name a single periodical: "All of 'em, any of 'em that have been in front of me over all these years."
She also revealed to Katie that she has a lot of foreign policy experience due to being able to see Russia on a clear day. And, who knew? She revealed at a fundraiser last fall that Afghanistan is also located pretty close to Alaska: "They are also building schools for the Afghan children so that there is hope and opportunity in our neighboring country of Afghanistan." (Apparently, she can see bin Laden's former cave from her house on a clear day, too.)
Then there's her lack of clarity on the abortion issue. She THINKS she's against abortion, but in fact she's pro-choice. At a recent Right to Life fundraiser, she described in great detail the fact that she considered an abortion when she found out she was pregnant at the age of 44, then again when she learned the baby she was carrying had Down syndrome. In the end, she chose to have the baby, not abort it. Bully for her. That was, apparently the right choice for her. But, oh Saaaarah ... that's called Choice. My two kids could be named Choice One and Choice Two. The fact that I chose to have them doesn't make me anti-abortion, you moron. It just means I chose to have them -- just like you.
There is so much more, but I'll move on now to last Friday when, in her rousing Tour de Force of Incoherence, she further explained her reason for quitting Alaska by announcing: "I choose to work very hard on a path for fruitfulness and productivity. I choose not to tear down and waste precious time, but to build up this state and our country and her industrious, generous, patriotic free people!!!!!"
Evidently, this fruitfulness can only happen if she's not a governor.
Now that I think of it, perhaps we should encourage her to run for president in 2012. Having Sarah Palin as the Republican candidate might well be the best thing that ever happened to the Democratic party. And it would sure keep Tina Fey happy.
p.s. If you haven't already done so, read Maureen Dowd's July 8 column, Sarah's Secret Diary. Very, very funny. And scary.
53 Comments so far
Show AllGood bye Sarah! Thanks for the chuckles. Now get back under that Alaskan rock from which the desparate Republican party yanked you. Unfortunately, all this is bad news for the wolf population. With precious little else to do, this looney lady will likely spend more time in the air with a rifle in her hands.
Personally, I'd be very happy if I never again heard the words, "Sarah Palin."
IF I DIE, I DIE, SO BE IT
I just ran across this bit about something she said. It creeped me out when I heard her say it, "If I die, I die, so be it", what, is she going to Iraq now? Then this on Daily Kos stopped my laughter.
---------------------------
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/7/7/751033/-Palin,-please-dont-let-it-be-this...
Palin, please don't let it be this...
by Plain Speaking
"I thought evangelicals were getting less in number, then I find out that the one sect that is most dangerous is not only growing but is growing in our military because they are being recruited by top brass, from commanding officers to the Pentagon. In fact recruiting films were made for this sect by men in uniform at the Pentagon. And there is a Palin tie in. I give the links at the end of the piece.
-snipped-
Then today Palin said something that just made me feel sick.. and more frightened....
-snipped-
The piece I came across was a link to a You Tube video. The man's name is Lou Engle and he is the founder of something called "The Call". The call is for people to martyr themselves for God. Right. It's an honor to die for God as long as you kill an infidel in the process. First there was an intro of a teen listening, then it cut to this man "blessing" Newt Gingrich and Mike Huckabee. Then it went on to show him preaching to these teens and near the end one had on a T shirt that said "IF I DIE, I DIE". I had to stop the frame to read it... last line on a black T shirt. "
-snipped-
Then today I see a headline above a picture of her face on CNN. (The headline was on Politico I think). The headline said "IF I DIE, I DIE, SO BE IT". I was shocked that she used the exact quote that is the "mantra" of this sect that calls for murder. I hope it was a shout out to her followers and nothing more."
----------------------------
So it seems possible that this nitwit twit, who seldom completes a sentence but is always painful to listen to, knows enough to use coded messages, knowing they'll be seen as amature attempts to sound intelligent by using almost-big words cobbled together with important sounding additions of "that" and "this" to any noun or verb. Sarah Palin. That Sarah Palin. This country of ours. That evangelical threat. Who knew?
"Happily, lunatics are still not able to win the White House."
They _CAN_ steal it though...
...George W. Bush spent 8 years there, but I can agree with your statement, only because George Bush didn't win. He was appointed unconstitutionally by the Supreme Court in 2000. (An act of Treason for which they will never stand trial ... read Article II, Section 1, and note that the choosing of Electors is _specifically_ given to the states ... then read the Tenth Amendment. Interference inthe choosing of Electors by the Federal Courts was _clearly_ a violation of the Constitution.) It is also highly questionable whether Bush actually won in 2004, so I will concede, that particular Lunatic didn't win the White House, either time, even though he occupied it for 8 years.
I enjoyed this column. .. but I think the writer misunderstands Tina Fey's interest in Palin. When Quinn makes it sound like Tina Fey would like to keep her career going by impersonating Palin, Quinn kinda insults Fey . .. plus she kinda insults Fey's substantial achievements which far surpass her imitation of Palin. I have read several quotes from Ms. Fey in which she makes it clear that she is not particularly interested in reprising her performance imitating Palin. It's not important to this article except Ms. Quinn subtly comes across as not quite as savvy as, I suspect, she actually is. Ms. Quinn seems very sharp in what she says and the off-note references to Ms. Fey undermine that sharpness. just some editorial, writing notes. . . . not a comment on the overall substance of the article, which is great. You can become a better writer, Ms. Quinn, 'that's all I'm sayin'.
I think that Sarah Palin ought to get a job with Saturday night live doing parodies of Tina Fey.
She did appear doing a parody of herself and screwed that up as badly as she does everything else.
I have to confess I just couldn't get enough of Sarah Palin. She just seems so confidant and so dumb and so scary. But, even while thinking this amidst my guffawing, I felt a twinge of guilt. I think the press has really gone overboard in attacking her. And how could they resist. There's so much to attack.
Aren't we all a little sick of the rabid reporting on Michael Jackson and Sarah Palin? It's am obsession. And it's also a way to get away from reality.
Reality is so damn hard. Just read Derrick Jensen today in Common Dreams. Are Sarah Palin and Michael Jackson there to entertain us so we don't have to face reality? I think so. I think we're scared, we feel powerless and "news" about them is an escape. It makes me sad.
Perhaps it is the de-evolution of the Republican party. Nixon was evil but he was not dumb. He didn't like anybody including himself. He called Reagan a "dumb son-of-a-bitch" and about that he was right. Reagan was dumb. Bush II was dumber. Palin is even dumber than Bush II. Do not dive into the GOP gene pool. It's gotten way too shallow.
Why does anybody even pay attention to what that dingbat has to say? If she comes anywhere near 1600 Penn. Ave., just put her in a straitjacket.
Palin's kids are from the Village of the Damned, but Obama's kids are cute and precious?
I am a liberal who agrees with nothing Palin stands for, yet I will defend her against the North Eastern media and their vicious attacks. Now if she had put in some draconian, regressive laws in Alaska, she would deserve these attacks. But she seems a live and let live kind of person. And if she doesn't know where Iran is, she can't bomb it, can she?
Vanity Fair just did a hatchet job, but unearthed nothing bad. Palin is a product of her environment and upbringing, nothing more.
If she runs for President in 2012 and wins, it means Obama turned out to be an inept weakling. Think about it...
Calling her bonkers is so wrong, because she isn't.Two or three more of these attacks and I'll actually be working for her campaign. If Obama, with all his intellect, can't steer this country right, maybe it's time for bonkers.
"I am a liberal who agrees with nothing Palin stands for, yet I will defend her against the North Eastern media and their vicious attacks. Now if she had put in some draconian, regressive laws in Alaska, she would deserve these attacks. But she seems a live and let live kind of person."
Have you even paid ANY attention to Palin's policy stances? Even a little bit? She is a live and let live kind of person. When the person involved is her. When it is others, she is perfectly willing to tell others what they can do and cannot do, and what is ordained by her god.
"Calling her bonkers is so wrong, because she isn't.Two or three more of these attacks and I'll actually be working for her campaign."
Yep, she's not bonkers. You are.
You actually declare, Wolynski, that with 'two or three' more attacks on Palin, you will work for her. . . . your statement, which is about as weird as some of Palin's crazy shit . . your statement kinda illustrates what is wrong with Palin and why she is so scary . . . it is because when you inject wacky daffiness into the public discourse, it turns out that a scary number of putatively rational citizens decide to vote for her or campaign for her, like having a wacko not job in the White House might be a good, immature, adolescent prank. Head's up, Wolynski: having someone like Palin in the White House is not just a television show that punks and pranks . . . it would be real life. REal life is, um, real, Wolynski and in real life, there are people who have a right to vote who are willing to cast their vote insanely . . . that is why Palin is scary. . . because there are power-hungry, smart people willing to use her as a front, jlike a Manchurian candidate. . . like George W. only less polished. . .
seriously, Wolynski, you say you might campagin for her. . . . let us imagine it is 2017 and Palin is President and Iran detonates two nuclear bombs in Western Europe, eviscerating Paris and Prague (I don't know why Iran bombed Prague. . . this is a fantasy) and the whole world turns to the U.S.A. for leadership in deciding how to respond. Would you seriously want Sarah Palin to be the decider? Palin can't be ignored, Wolynski, because lots of people actually would say yes to my question. Some people, because they vote for minor cultural issues like abortion, would put her in the position of deciding how to respond to nuclear war.
I know this stuff I am writing is veering into crazy-town.j . . but that is my point. . . .Palin is dangerous because she is insidious, she is charismatic and lots of people vote with their dicks and wallets.
The only thing a thinking person can say is: the Palin phenom simply illustrates the lack of critical thinking on the part of everyone - pols, pundits, men on the street etc. News as "info-tainment", policy as "stuff for wonks" and hard work as something to be avoided. We are doomed.
The scariest thing about Sarah Palin is the number of people who took her seriously, and the number that still do. I thought for sure that in choosing her as running mate, McCain (or rather the puppet masters behind McCain) were guaranteeing they would lose the election. They did, but it was damn scary all the same. Still, the real question in my mind is, if I was right, why?
I agree with you Cosmobilly. . . if the puppetmasters forced McCain to choose Palin, it has to be because they thought they might need her to have national exposure, like they hoped to use her as their puppet at a future point in time and needed to start getting her ready. . .
I agree. . . the real question, and it is a very scary one, is why did McCain's puppetmasters want Palin on the national stage?
I take comfort in this: I think said puppetmasters grossly overestimated her ability. I think she is proving herself to be just way too unstable for them to use. Putting her in the White House would be like letting a toddler play with a loaded shotgun.
"...what is it exactly that the VP does ever day?"
Actually, that's a very good question, particularly in the days of Cheney.
With Cheney, you would know. In fact, since Nixon as far as I can tell, when it comes to Republican vice presidents with the exception of Dan Quayle, it wouldn't be too hard to find out. With Democrat vice presidents, who knows? I'll bet Biden is busy working behind the scenes to make sure Obama sticks with the corporatist and militarist agenda. That weasel did one hell of a job pushing that Bankruptcy Bill 2005 to be signed into law and when he used to show up on TV back when I'd see him, he sounded more nauseating as a Democrat Party Apologist. I may not like what Palin has to offer but with her you would know what's coming and be prepared. Biden's a sneaky one. I guess that's what Wall $treet and the Military Industrial Complex wanted so desperately.
"Among the many mysteries as to what she meant by this, I confess I wasn't aware that dead fish ‘go with the flow.' I thought they kind of ‘float up to the surface and stink.'"
Um, no:
http://www.thenewyorkerstore.com/product_details.asp?mscssid=4P9F5XL1P94G8H&sitetype=1&sid=120806
Some say the new scandal will be a discovery that Todd and Levi are longtime gay lovers and there will be an underage problem ...Either that or DNA tests will show that Todd is actually the father of his daughters child. Or even better, that Levi is the father of Sarah Palin's kid (her daughter's first, actually) Somebody might get some of Palin's kid's hair and see who the father is....no wack job theory is too crazy for this bunch. Personally, the only concern I have is that the Republican party actually thought McCain/Palin was a good enough ticket for our country. As much as the vote was stolen...they could just not steal enough to get the job done with that crew. M-O-N-E-Y is the only God they really believe in, show a Republican a pile of it and they'll be standing on their heads to get their hands on it.
PDS:
Palin Derangement Syndrome
The saying is "even a dead fish can go with the flow" as a criticism of mindless or weak-willed conformity. As noted above, Jim Hightower used it as the suibtitle of his book, "Swim Against the Current," but it is an old country saying.
Leave it to Palin to get it wrong. It is also ironic that she calls anyone who goes with the flow dead ("only a dead fish . . ."), when one of the most stinging insults of her fellow right wingers is to accuse liberals of being "out of the mainstream", in other words not going with the flow. Right wingers don't like people who are alive (at least above the neck)?
I must be the only Amerikan who finds the grotesque, obsessive stoning of Sarah Palin to be far more significant than Palin herself.
When the Republican Party pulled her out from under her Alaskan rock, I thought of Katherine Harris-- another ditsy, ambitious Republican wingnut serving the reactionary cause.
Still, over the campaign period, and even into the present, I was shocked by the absolute brutal animosity that arose in the Democratic ranks.
To this day, as this trifling article demonstrates, the compulsion to mock and deride the woman persists at a level that can't be explained by the conviction that she's an incompetent dingbat without redeeming qualities.
Please note that I don't particularly dispute this opinion. I just don't think it's as important as the anaphylactic shock she induces in her detractors.
My 2¢ pop-psychology opinion is that at least some of this unremitting animus and rancor originated with the PUMAs and less obstreperous Hillary supporters. It was as if choosing an obscure WOMAN as Veep was considered the dirtiest of tricks-- an attempt to steal the identity-politics game that Democrats had owned for decades.
It was as if HILLARY, like Glinda the Good Witch, was SUPPOSED to be the first woman vice-president! And now those loathsome Goopers summoned the Moronic Witch of the Northwest to steal Hillary and the Democratic Party's Place in History!
For instance, the mushy moderate liberal Joan Walsh, editor of Salon.com, to this day pounces on every possible twist and turn of Palin's peculiar life to mock and deride her. Strictly speaking, I don't know that Walsh herself oversees this almost daily scourge. But Google for yourself to see the avalanche of Palin-sneering and criticizing published there.
Last summer, I mentioned to an Obama-supporter of my acquaintance that I was horrified by the anti-Palin overkill arising from both political opponents and the moderate-liberal blogosphere. He retorted heatedly that it certainly WAS contemptible and outrageous that the Republicans would resort to picking a provincial nitwit as a "Hail Mary" strategy to gain political traction. What was WRONG with me?
This Obama supporter, otherwise intelligent and perceptive, treated my observation as if I were "supporting" or commending Palin. I tried to explain that even if Palin WAS as pathetic and unfit for high office as it seemed, the hostility and rancor was a quantum leap greater than that elicited by other trashy opportunists. I maintained, and still maintain, that the anti-Palin hostility was, and remains, far deeper and more insidious than mere resentment at her unfitness for high(er) political office.
While I don't ENDORSE obnoxious cretins as model candidates, consider all of the Serious, Experienced, Impeccably Credentialed, and Highly Qualified Misrepresentatives we keep electing on every level.
Don't they, by and large, turn out to govern as plutocrats, dictators, and war criminals? I'm in no way "pro"-Palin, but the Fine and Upstanding "bona fide" players with sparkling curriculum vitae are as bad in their own way-- or worse.
· Yr Obd't Servant
I believe that when a piss-pious, sanctimonious, holier-than-thou, Republican slut and airhead tells me what to think or do, it deserves a LOT more than mockery and scorn. The only good Republican I ever saw was dead, but then, I'm only 65.
We have an intelligent president now and he is governing like George Wanker Bush, one of the most stupid men ever to be president. So intelligence is not necessarily the issue. In a severe crisis, however, like the Cuban Missile Crisis, a stupid person, like Palin, could easily blow up the world, especially if she surrounded herself with like-minded fools of an apocalyptic bent (which seems the entirety of the Republican party). SLOBama would at least (I hope) take a breath before pressing the button.
I think you make some good points, but I believe a crucial factor is that the Republican plutocrats do not like her either, so there is no powerful pushback when she is attacked as there is when other major Republican figures are similarly put under fire. Sure William Kristol still defends her, but I doubt he has much credibility left among the plutocrats. So she has become an easy target with little price to pay for those taking shots, no matter how trite, predictable, or lame, and the jackals love easy prey.
point taken serv
if bashing this weird lady is all they got then the media ought to be embarassed
problem is: that's about all they got
OS, excellent analysis and thank you for seeing through this sicko media distraction. Even today when I went back to one of the progressive sites that put another Palin autopsy article, I noticed that anyone who tries to bring up the fact that this is a distraction gets harassed at by the Obamabots. Worse, their responses are very childish but I can see where they're coming from. We'll be told that we're Republican just because we're sick and tired of hearing about Palin all the time. I don't support Palin whatsoever but I too believe that the media and the Obamabot crowd are overdoing their attacks on her. Sometimes, not only do I suspect that the attacks are a way to cover up for more of Obama's blatant moving to the Far Right but I'm beginning to get an uneasy feeling that maybe we would have been better off facing the known devil rather than wondering just how far off Obama will go and get away with it too. The media obsession on Palin and Jackson are completely sickening and making it difficult for people who rely on the TV to want to know what's happening.
P.S.: I'm also getting an uneasy feeling that this summer is a repeat of summer 2001 when the media were going wild and crazy over Condit just as they were over Palin and Jackson. I fear that this fall will be even worse than the one in 2001 !
OS: I say you raise a very good point. On the other hand, however, Palin offers up pretty good entertainment.
Sigh, "entertainment" to distract us as we're being bled dry ! :(
_
I have just one question. Sarah WHO???
Sarah Palin 2 years ago: "Please help me win the Governorship? Work the phone banks, canvas your neighborhood, donate, anything to help!"
Sarah Palin last week: "Take this job and shove it, I ain't workin' here no more!"
Sarah Palin in 2 years: "Please..."
"Of course you'd never know that from reading hit jobs like Todd Purdum's sepulchral piece on Palin in the current Vanity Fair. Scurrying around Alaska with his notepad, Purdum still managed to find comically little to indict her with. Anyone with a gripe is given the floor; fans are shut out. This exercise in faux objectivity is exposed at key points such as Purdum's failure to identify the actual instigator of Palin's extravagant clothing bills (a crazed, credit-card-abusing stylist appointed by the McCain campaign) and his prissy characterization of Palin's performance at the vice-presidential debate as merely "adequate." Hey, wake up -- Palin cleaned Biden's clock! By the end, Biden was sighing and itching to split.
Whether Palin has a national future or not will depend on her willingness to hit the books at some point and absorb more information about international history and politics than she has needed to know in her role as governor. She also needs a shrewder, cooler take on the mainstream media, with its preening bullies, cackling witches, twisted cynics and pompous windbags. The Northeastern media establishment is in decline, and everyone knows it."
http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2009/07/08/reader_letters/
I don't understand how you could suggest that Purdum's Vanity Fair piece on Palin was a 'hit job'. He accurately quotes her and the other parties involved. To me, a 'hit job' would imply dissembling, inaccuracy, or distortions of fact. .. . but accurately publishing her emails, which, of course, she has not challenged as inaccurate because they are, um, accurate. . . where do you get a hit job out of exposing FACTS?
Yeah, and no matter who is selected, thermonuclear war is still a very real possibility - even more so than in the '50s and '60s.
Sarah Palin resigns as governor of Alaska! What an attention-getting stunner! Front-page news all over the world. Plus which it poses the riveting question -- what is she going to do now? Furtrher front-page news and columnist analysis everywhere.
What's happening is that the money knows the depression will be worse than in the 1930s. This makes the Obama administration vulnerable in 2012. The money figures its interests would be safe with Palin in the White House (the hardships of the people notwithstanding) and that conservatism could flourish again throughout the land.
Sarah Baby thus has 3 years for world grand tours, conferring with heads of state, addressing economic summits, spectacular fund raisers, attention-getting stunts of all kinds.
This requires heavy backing. Will the mainstream media dig deeply into the sources? Based on current and recent performance -- no. But front-page coverage it will get.
And can we be sure the morally pure Sarah Palin will not make the classic blunder of being caught with a sub rosa soul mate? Yes we can!
Or can we? Think of the attention it would get!
Which would be more powerful politically -- dumping Todd for true love? Or giving Todd the sub rosa action while she does a courageous betrayed wife and mother performance? The attention-getting potential here is tremendous.
An attempt could even be made to spin her into a woman of substance. A challenge the best PR minds money can buy in America, having already come up with the governorship resignation, should find stimulating.
Well, I'm waiting for Levi's tell-all book. Maybe that will sink her, but from watching what has transpired up till now, they seem to take all of her vices and turn them into virtues somehow.
maybe she just read the book: 'so long and thanks for all the fish' by douglas adams...........
and got a bit confused.............
More likely, "One Fish, Two Fish, Dead Fish, Blue Fish" by Dr. Seuss.
or 'moby dick'..............
She was up against many ethics violations in the state, including those she brought against herself, (so her self appointed state investigator/prosecutor could absolve her of wrongdoing in most cases). The next big one would be for taking millions of dollars for a book advance (Alaska Governors cannot have an 'outside of office' job)...so she made a smart move for her, ditch the governorship, make millions, do the book tour and TV appearances, lectures and rallies...and promote the agenda of right wing reptilian brained, pseudo religious, reactive...what is that other 'R' word? Holding office will not be so important as advancing her ideas...like right to life, (as long as it's American), drilling in the arctic and everywhere despite the growing climate change situation and heating of that environment, and so forth...I would be happy if she did stand behind her supposed Christian beliefs and worked for stewardship and conservation for the planet, care for the poor, rights of the family, and respect for the diverse cultures in our country and world...but don't plan on it, and watch out!
I don't know what's more bizarre, this national obsession with Sarah Palin or Michael Jackson.
It's all a distraction to keep people from sensing Obama's "Justice" System which Gleen Greenwald discusses today here on CD. Our electorate is cornfed and brainwashed into getting hooked into celebrity gotcha distractions. Very sad. :(
When up against the wall (which is quite often), my right-wing debate-buddies usually retort "If you don't like it, leave" to which my usual reply is "I stay so that I can vote, and make a difference".
Now I'm thinking that my reply should be "Because I'm not a dead fish that goes with the flow". Alas, the irony and perverse nature of this soon-to-be-forgotten quote will be lost on them.
Try telling them this: What would they do if they had a father they loved who had over time become dysfunctional and destructive. Would they stay and try to turn their fathers life around or would the leave and and let their father self destructive?
Right wingers generally have a childlike view of the country as a strong father. But because their view is somewhat immature they view the country as a father figure that should not be questioned, like a small child would view their father. Maybe you can at least drag them into political adolescence where they can start to question what the country is doing
Palin sez: "... only dead fish go with the flow."
***
Anyone else think it's the height of irony that Palin lifted and paraphrased this line from Jim Hightower's book subtitle?
Then again, her intended audience would have no clue of that book's existence.
Quinn sez: "Happily, lunatics are still not able to win the White House."
***
If emphasis is placed on "win", perhaps this is true -- for the moment.
But the preceding eight years demonstrated that lunacy was welcome in the White House through appointment.
If Nixon would never have been elected president, then maybe people like Reagan, Bush II and Palin may never have made it to the national stage. Palin does a better job than Nixon, Reagan, or Bush of showing the ignaorance, hate, and religious fanaticism that the Republican party is today. Sometimes I wish Sarah Palin would just go away so we would never have to hear from her again. Other times I'm glad she keeps showing up to remind us all of how much worse off our country could be right now.
I'm curious about how one's ability to organize one's thought processes and speech may show more than simply a disorganized mind. Palin's nonsensical ramblings seem so much like Bush's.
"Regarding the situation specificity of psychopaths' emotional and more general semantic processing deficits, it appears that psychopaths display anomalous processing of semantic information that is incidental, as in the lexical decision assessments of emotion facilitation (Lorenz and Newman, 2002; Williamson et al., 1991)."
"Although the studies are limited, it seems clear that psychopaths do, indeed, manifest a number of language-related (i.e., semantic) deficits. In particular, the performance of psychopathic offenders suggests that they have greater difficulty integrating the affective connotations of words, processing the abstract meaning of words, and remaining coherent while linking words with meaning in the process of speaking." "Williamson (1991) analyzed the quality of speech produced by psychopathic and nonpsychopathic offenders using an established coding system and recorded speech segments. Her results indicated that psychopaths use fewer cohesive ties in their speech and are less likely to resolve plots (i.e. tie up loose ends) when telling stories. Moreover, there was some evidence that psychopaths' speech anomalies were most apparent when describing emotional or personal events."
Hugues Herve
John C. Yuille
The Psychopath: Theory, Research, and Practice.
There might be something to what you say, but then you have someone like Hitler who I would consider a psychopath who was a fantastic public speaker.
I suspect that if you compared politicians as a group to the general population you would find a much higher percentage of them are psychopaths.
Below is a list of characteristics of a sociopath/psychopath. Look at the actions of our wonderful politicians and see how many of them display these traits.
Glibness/superficial charm.
Grandiose sense of self-worth.
Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom
Pathological lying
Conning/manipulative
Lack of remorse or guilt
Shallow affect
Callous/lack of empathy
Parasitic lifestyle
Poor behavioral controls
Promiscuous sexual behavior
Early behavior problems
Lack of realistic, long-term plans
Impulsivity
Irresponsibility
Failure to accept responsibility for own actions
Many short-term marital relationships
Juvenile delinquency
Revocation of conditional release
Criminal versatility (Hare, 1986)
Personally I see nothing wrong with having psychopaths elected to responsible positions in that psychopaths too need to be represented in our governing bodies. Where I am uncomfortable is when they become rather over-represented in elected positions and positions of power, much as it appears to be happening currently. The relative under-representation of non-psychopaths in these positions is not due to a lack of or scarcity of qualified and willing non-psychopaths to man the positions, and the current situation can be taken as evidence that we need to rethink how we have been organizing ourselves so that this imbalance between psychopaths and non-psychopaths in positions of power is reduced. How to keep the psychopathic individuals from gaining too much control in our heirarchal systems is a problem that has plagued mankind for centuries. Unless we consciously address this systematic problem and correct it the problem will reoccur over and over again, mostly leaving mankind with the highly disfunctional decision making processes such as we see today. Does anyone have some ideas on how to approach the problem?
maybe if it were like jury duty..everyone is in the pool and subject to being called up periodically, but nobody makes a career out of it
Sometimes presidents turn into lunatics while living in the Booby Hatch Capital of the World (Richard Nixon is a case in point)
Richard Deathouse Nixon was already deeply paranoid and full of self-loathing in 1968. Like a gambler whose actual desire is to lose, Nixon's greatest triumph was Watergate and his own self-destruction. There is no other explanation for not burning the tapes. Nixon was the Death Wish incarnate. Had Nixon won the 1960 election, the Cuban Missile Crisis would have ended in thermonuclear war and I would have died in 1963 and many of you would never have been born.
P.S. "Dead fish go with the flow" should be the new motto of the Republican party, perhaps even of the United States.