Jul 20 2009
Sarah Palin Is an Idiot
I know, I know. Isn’t this really old news? Don’t we all already know this?
The results of a new Rasmussen poll, released today, show that if the 2012 presidential election were held today between Barack Obama and Sarah Palin, 42% of Americans would vote for Sarah Palin. One wonders exactly why this poll was done this way, given that she’s resigned her gubernatorial post and may not be the most likely Republican candidate for 2012, but still: 42%.
I have only this to say in response: What the fuck, America?
Apparently 42% of us are not capable of understanding that this woman is an idiot. Not “idiot” as in “someone with whom I have serious ideological differences”, either. “Idiot” as in idiot. Stupid. Dim. Cretinous. I’m sure she’s a nice lady whom I’d really like in person but she shouldn’t be in charge of, well, anything. Certainly not a state or–God forbid–a country.
Consider George W. Bush. As president, he was kind of a funny guy. People like me, who thought his politics were kind of scary, liked to make fun of the way he talked because he wasn’t very good at it. He used words like “misunderestimated” and that made him look stupid. That was funny, because we all knew he wasn’t actually that dumb.
Unfortunately, the liberal-leaning folks made a tactical error in mocking Dubya, because the Republicans have now put someone forth as their sort-of-kind-of-leader who is actually stupid. Now it’s like the Boy Who Cried Wolf. She’s an idiot, but if anybody says anything they’ll look like an elitist or chauvinist.
I am prepared to take that risk. Sarah Palin is stupid, and you 42% who would even consider voting for someone that stupid should be ashamed of yourselves. This is not about politics or feminism, we’re not just making fun of her because she’s not a good speaker, and she doesn’t just look stupid because the media has portrayed her that way.
Just to review: She cannot name any Supreme Court cases other than Roe v. Wade1. She cannot name a single magazine or newspaper which she reads. Alaska’s geographical proximity to Russia gives her foreign policy experience. She told a third grade class that the Vice President of the United States is in charge of the Senate. These things are not cute malapropisms and they have nothing to do with her political leanings. These things are just plain dumb.
What happened to Mike Huckabee? He scares me just as much as Sarah Palin from an ideological standpoint, but he seems like an intelligent human being and you have to admire his will. Why can’t he be the imaginary 2012 Republican candidate who probably won’t run anyway?
1 – Anyone who took middle school Civics in the U.S. should be able to come up with at least one of Brown v. Board of Education, Plessy v. Ferguson, or Marbury v. Madison. I would have also accepted “Dred Scott” from Mrs. Palin without expecting her to name the defendant. If you couldn’t name any of these, it’s OK: You’re not aspiring to national office.
Those crafty Republicans are holding out on us. They’re parading out Palin and Steele just to keep us preoccupied while they work up a viable strategy for 2016 (2012 is a forgone conclusion – don’t waste any energy there…)
It’s like those old TV ads that were obnoxious and offensive only to get you to remember their brand, not the message.
Yeah, that’s it, it’s a wiley strategy, clever devils. Wile E.
Beep beep.
I wish there was enough party leadership on the Republican side that they could actually be doing something that clever. The current mob rule is just…weird.
i dunno about stupid but she’s definitely crazy. i’d like to see her elected just for that reason, just to see the crazy shit she could come up with.
While the points are well taken, most of the conservative base wants the power of the government to be limited enough that having someone stupid in office wouldn’t mess all that much stuff up.
On the other hand, Obama might be intelligent, in that he can be sociable and manipulative, and he demands that the government be in charge of everything. That way, his stupid *principals* can fuck us up real good.
I’ll take less-book-smart, right-principals, every day of the week, and twice on sunday. But I’d rather have alan keyes. Shit, I’d rather have Clinton than what we’re looking at now, and that’s saying a helluva lot for me.
Joel, I think you overestimate the intelligence of “most of the conservative base” because you are intelligent yourself. Just like the Democrats, where there are 2 people who shout “Yes we can” like the sheep from Animal Farm for every person who takes a more measured stance, most Republicans are, well, dumb.
Even if the conservative base wants small government, I do not think history supports the assertion that the Republicans are the party of small government — and yet they keep attracting the votes. If I ever actually find small government supporters that are organized and aren’t crazy, I’ll vote with them.
Also, I think we need and deserve a book-smart president. The last guy thought with his gut and I don’t think it turned out so well. The United States is a business, not a family, and it needs competent leadership.
Vote Cthulhu in 2012. The world’s going to end anyway.
Call me an idealist but I still believe if we’re the best country on Earth, we probably shouldn’t have to forsake intelligence for “right” principles.
Terribly late reply, I know.
“Even if the conservative base wants small government, I do not think history supports the assertion that the Republicans are the party of small government — and yet they keep attracting the votes.”
Recent history, yes. Distressing, I know, but the party is shifting. These tea parties are full of newly minted libertarians. — whatever else may be said about this, that the democratic party is somehow more about limiting the authority of the federal government; cannot be of it. It seems counter intuitive for a rational person to go to the complete other side of political philosophy, merely because you lack company where you immediately sit.
“Also, I think we need and deserve a book-smart president. ”
We certainly do. I’m merely referring to the imperfect candidates that have/are/will be presented. It matters more* to me that someone can say how and why the government powers should be limited, then be able to give a lecture on George Orwell, which isn’t to say that this doesn’t* matter, but that it matters less*.
Principles. You can’t chuck them out the window because someone is charismatic and/or intelligent, because when a very intelligent nihilist that you elect creates a death star, you’re dead. Book smarts are*absolutely* forsakable in the face of prinipal. Not ideal, but necessary, or maybe to put it as lightly as it can be: Preferable.
“The last guy thought with his gut”
Pushing for principled leadership isn’t the same thing as saying “I want an emotionally driven leader”. It’s actually the opposite — There’s no case to be made that Obama’s source of influence over people is derived of anything other than Charisma. This is much less the opposite.
It blows my mind that people can give vocal support to someone like, say, Ron Paul, and then turn around and show support for Obama, and not contempt for the government initiatives happening. This is puzzling, apart from my lack of faith in humanity.