Archive for the ‘Sarah Palin’ Category
As I once told a friend in the media, a good rule of thumb is probably that a source’s credibility is inversely proportional to the number of times he’s shown his dong in public.
Via Politico, it’s not as bad as it sounds at first when you realize that the organizers have decided to disinvite all American political figures:
In order to keep the focus on Iranian threats and to ensure that this critical message not be obscured, the organizers of the rally have decided not to have any American political personalities appear…We acknowledge and deeply appreciate those American political leaders who have been and remain prepared to stand with us as we collectively address the dangers of Iran’s nuclear program and its support for terrorism globally.
The problems with this are twofold.
- The mass disinvitation was prompted by Democrats who didn’t want to give Palin a platform. Supposedly they didn’t want it to appear that the non-partisan group was aligning with the Republicans. Strangely, I don’t remember hearing any complaints that Hillary Clinton speaking at the rally making it appear that the non-partisan group was aligning with the Democrats.
- If there was ever a time for the United States to appear united, this is it. The letter sent out from the groups hosting the rally states that this is a cause on which “Americans stand together.” It’s really hard to show that if our elected leaders won’t attend because they’d be in the same general vicinity of someone from a different political party.
Parting shot: how worried would Ahmadinejad others like him have been if both parties had made a strong showing here? Do you think they’d still be looking for a Democratic victory in 2008 if this rally had shown that it wouldn’t help them in the least bit?
Off to an appointment with a new client. Something to mull over while I’m gone:
Vodpod videos no longer available.
H/T Ed Morrissey
In grade school I was told the (possibly apocryphal) story that the Founding Fathers thought the common man was too ignorant to vote, and that was why suffrage was originally restricted to property owners. The older and more cynical I become, the more I agree with them. Lately, I’m starting to think that people deliberately stay ignorant.
Usually I restrict my cynicism to suggesting that U.S. citizens should be made to take classes in economics, accounting, business and political science and demonstrate understanding of the material before being allowed to vote — kind of like getting a driver’s license, but for something far more important. This election, however, my cynicism knows no bounds.
In my last post, I quoted Salon writer Camille Paglia accusing Democrats of turning politics into a “Manichaean battle of us versus them, good versus evil.” I’ve seen a lot of that on both sides. Take, for example, “Lipstickgate.” Yes, it’s entirely possible (perhaps even probable) that Palin’s pitbull vs. hockey mom with lipstick joke prompted Obama to use the “lipstick on a pig” line. That said, it’s an old line, one I’ve heard at least a few times before — and I live on the West Coast, a place not known for its down-home sayings — and Obama used the phrase correctly.
On the other side, you have the numerous attacks on Sarah Palin. The latest Palin rumors are consistent WordPress “Hawt Posts,” despite the fact that the rumors are debunked long before making “Hawt Post” status, or can be by spending 10-15 minutes on Google or Wikipedia.
For example, take the “scandal” of Governor Palin reimbursing herself for staying at her own residence while on work-related trips. As Allahpundit noted, a simple look at the Washington Post article that first made the claim shows that the reimbursement doesn’t exist. There’s a line item, for “Lodging — own residence,” but the dollar amount claimed is $0. In this case, a reader wouldn’t even have to search Google to debunk the rumor — the debunking is in the article itself.
Which brings me back to Manichaean battles and deliberate ignorance. People are trying so hard to demonize the “other side” that they’re willing to buy into any little tawdry insinuation, no matter how stretched the logic or easily debunked. They want to be lied to in order to advance an agenda. In essence, they’re deliberately keeping themselves ignorant.
Update: Original title of this post “Fooling Some of the People All of the Time” changed to give me an excuse to embed the following:
Update 2: Not only is the lipstick phrase old, but the picture that’s circulating is too, as demonstrated by this blog post dated 2006.