TPMCafe
« It's Official Now: GOP Campaign Among Jews Only About Race (See Video) | Home | Television Stations: You Don't Have to Run These Ads »

Sarah Is Hot, You Betcha

user-pic

When I heard about the flap regarding Governor Palin's inability to cite a Supreme Court case, I paused to reflect on how many case names I could come up with. After a period of some duration, which on television would have looked like an eternity, I came up with Brown v. Board of Education. So I don't put much in that flap. Its currency is yet another flag to the inanity of our campaign discourse, liberal edition.

There was a fascinating profile of SP's upbringing in The Washington Post a couple of days ago. The short of it is she was raised strictly in a rugged, economically impoverished environment, and she thrived.

I watched the debate. She is not stupid. She is smart. It's just that she knows nothing pertaining to the substance of public policy, she is beholden to a bankrupt ideology, and she is not forgiving of those with different views (such as small-town librarians). Plus she does not hesitate to insult the intelligence of her audience for the sake of self-promotion. Smart, ignorant, and mean -- good qualifications for a Republican politician. Most Americans don't know much either, though in some measure they can recognize the same shortcoming in candidates, and in some narrower measure make judgements on that basis. Ordinarily they don't mind smart, ignorant, and mean, but now they are frightened and will look for help from someone who may actually know what the H they are doing and care enough to do it.

Biden displayed a superb grasp of ruling class ideology and policy. I'll spare you rants in that vein, except to note his anti-populist defense of the bankruptcy bill, and his forthright case for humanitarian interventionism, the classic cover for the exercise and extension of U.S. imperial power. That's what is basically on offer in this election -- the choice between dumb and smart flaunting of American power. Hopefully, the smart use will recognize what situations to avoid, rather than providing more sophisticated, nimble defense of pointless military adventures.

I especially enjoyed his point about the Palin jihad against the oil companies operating in Alaska. If a windfall profits tax is o.k. for Alaska, why not for the U.S.? He might have gone on to note that Palin's braggadocio about her tax-cutting is founded on the weird, unique nature of Alaska's tax system. You see, Alaskans don't pay much taxes. They get a rich public sector from taxes on oil exports, one she has tried to expand. They've been taxing you. Remind me, who is the dumb one here?

From Hero to Zero

In the next three weeks, thanks to the McCain campaign, the most famous Americans are going to be Bill Ayers and Tony Rezko. It will behoove all good people not directly associated with the Obama Campaign to respond in kind. As The Editors at The Poor Man say, "People, these rats ain't gonna fuck themselves."

Regarding Ayers, a former Weatherman terrorist who for 30 years has tried to rehabilitate himself as a solid citizen, the Right's guilt-by-association machine is in full swing. But two can play that game. In the case of Senator McCain, there was his prominent friendship with a fellow named David Ifshin. Mr. Ifshin, now deceased, was president of the National Student Association back in the day and distinguished himself by traveling to North Vietnam with Jane Fonda and saying things over the radio that annoyed many patriotic Americans, not least those languishing in the Hanoi Hilton. Later Ifshin renounced his radical recreations and became a nasty leader of the nasty Zionist lobby. In the latter incarnation he became great friends with John McCain, who forgave Ifshin and spoke emotionally at his funeral. So if McCain could forgive Ifshin, why can't he forgive Bill Ayers? Evidently, repentence for left-wing sins requires conversion to right-wing allegiance. Partially reconstructed liberals like Ayers need not apply.

Regarding Rezko, a small-time Chicago sleazebag, we can see him with Charles Keating, and raise with Jim Hensley. Keating, with McCain's assistance, cost the U.S. taxpayer $3 billion dollars. McCain's mobbed-up father-in-law and financial sponsor grew out of the muck of Arizona liquor politics, a veritable Joe Kennedy of the sagebrush. Then there's Sarah's trooper-gate shenanigans. I might also ask how, on "working class" salaries, have the Palins, in their 40s, managed to accumulate a couple of million dollars, along with assorted motor vehicles, watercraft and a friggin airplane? Nice crib, too. Who knew, the workers' paradise is Alaska.

Obama need not stoop to this level. A McCain onslaught will find the Flamin' Liar Express engaged not necessarily with the his adversary, but with the constellation of pro-Obama allies not bound by the same standards of decorum as the golden candidate. For Senator McCain, the low road goes through some bad neighborhoods. We might regret bringing low a man who at one point in his life distinguished himself with some honor, until we remember what the Republicans did to John Kerry. Kerry may not have been quite the hero he was made out to be, but he did serve and he actually got himself to Vietnam, unlike many notable, patriotic Republican politicians, foreign policy experts, and warbloggers. Dexter_Morgan.jpg
And frankly, it has become tedious to hear McCain raise his incarceration in irrelevant contexts, such as a discussion of health care reform. Regarding the McCain campaign (may the man live long and prosper), as Dexter whispers to his beloved, even more-insane brother, . . . you need to be put down.


26 Comments

| Leave a comment

Ok here's where I disagree on the Supreme Court flap. All she had to say was Baker v. Exxon. A case that directly effected her state and was just completed in June and that she came out in disagreement with the Supreme Court's decision.

After the Supreme Court ruled, Gov. Palin was critical of the outcome. “I am extremely disappointed with today’s decision by the U.S. Supreme Court,” she was quoted as saying. “While the decision brings some degree of closure to Alaskans suffering from 19 years of litigation and delay, the Court gutted the jury’s decision on punitive damages.” She also said, “It is tragic that so many Alaska fishermen and their families have had their lives put on hold waiting for this decision. My heart goes out to those affected, especially the families of the thousands of Alaskans who passed away while waiting for justice.”

http://conservationreport.com/2008/09/05/exxon-shipping-co-v-baker-sarah-palin-was-critical-of-supreme-courts-exxon-decision/

but she was 'annoyed' that couric was not paying her deference! from palin's point of view, the media should assume that palin has intelligent answers to any question they could ask her so they need not even bother asking the questions. expecting her to answer questions about issues and ideology is just rude. the media should just let her be perky and folksy. why should the media force her to admit to the american people that she's actually an Economist-reading nerd?! besides, she's 'only been at this for five weeks'...

Yes, this is what puzzles me. Back when she was made the vp nominee I searched the video archives and saw an interview on c-span she gave on that case when it was pending. She clearly knows all about it. It may be the only case she knows about but she does know about at least that one. Why didn't she mention it?

I think it's also interesting to note that when Biden was asked the exact same question not too long prior he had an answer right away. He might have had to pause a moment in order to think of it and that pause might have been edited out, but at least he didn't spout utter B.S.

Just because the average person can't answer the question (I couldn't have) doesn't mean that it's forgivable for someone who's potentially going to be in the position to advise or choose someone else to be on the Supreme Court. Don't you think someone trying to be in that position had better know of some decisions that court has made that they either agree or disagree with, and the reasons behind those said rulings? It's not a joe-six-pack issue, and therein lies the problem I have with a 'joe-six-pack' in the white house.

user-pic

"Havoc!"

Shit yeah. Anyone referencing TPI gets a 'commendation.

Also, rat fuck.

She didn't have to know the names of the supreme court cases. All she had to do was state that she disagreed with one, such as the case that ruled segregation was constitutional, and the one that said that it was legal to round up Japanese Americans, and put them in concentration camps.

There are many that she could have just described, without knowing the specific case titles.

user-pic

In an odd way, Obama's race makes the cultural attacks irrelevant. People who can overcome the racial hurdle aren't going to be scared off by Ayers and Rezko.

user-pic

Thanks, I don't think I've seen that idea elsewhere. Maybe you're right. I'd like to think so.

OTH for someone who is struggling with a racist perspective Ayers and Rezko may be the feather on the scale tipping them towards McCain . Or just a self deluding alibi letting them indulge their racists beliefs without admitting to themselves what they're doing.

We'll see.

I remain terrified about the "Bradley effect". A little less so as the campaign continues and Barak continues to maintain a "statemanlike" pose which many here would like him to abandon.

user-pic

Not to sound elitist -

But anyone who cannot come up with at least 5 famous Supreme Court cases (including at least 1 or 2 they disagree with) cannot be said to be well-educated.

user-pic

Well, I think your statement is a little too strong.

Engineers are well educated, but few of us would be able to comment, extemporaneously, on five different Supreme Court cases.

But we engineers are not running for Vice President, and I think that's the point.

-- ARG

user-pic

ARG:

I think you sell yourself short.

Certainly any reasonably-educated American would be able to extemporaneously remember:

1. Brown vs. Board of Education
2. Plessey v. Ferguson
3. Gore v. Bush
4. Alaska v. Exxon (Sarah Palin ESPECIALLY should be able to remember this one)
5. Marbury v. Madison
6. Miranda v. Arizona
7. Lawrence v. Texas (Sodomy statutes overturned)
8. Loving v. Virginia (miscegenation overturned)

And if one cannot name them by title, they should at least be able to address them by ISSUE.

user-pic

I would also add:

11. Dred Scott

to that list.

I'm working on a doctorate (a.b.d) right now, and consider myself very well educated (despite my sometimes unusual sentence structure I sometimes write on the internet). The only one on the list I could have named on that list was Brown v Board. The sodomy one I am vaguely familiar with only because that one is fairly recent and I read Savage Love, although I didn't know the X v X title. As for the rest, even Bush v Gore and Dred Scott were things I didn't know about until I saw them being mentioned in relation to the Couric interview.

Again, I think the point is that I'm not aspiring to be part of the Executive Branch - the part of the government that nominates supreme court judges - so I shouldn't really be expected to be able to rattle off that stuff unless I was studying to be on Jeopardy.

I guess I did know about Miranda, but really, why would one even think of such a thing when asked for things you don't agree with? I forgot until looking it up that it was even a supreme court decision at all.

user-pic

hooya:

See? You at least could DISCUSS three of them (even if not naming them) without having to consult GOOGLE or an encyclopedia.

I still maintain that if someone has graduated from high school, college, AND graduate school - and cannot after some thought come up with 3 or 4 famous Supreme Court cases (even one they DISAGREE with - something one is FAR more likely to remember, since we usually remember what we DISAGREE with longer than what we AGREE with), then their education or their retention skills are lacking.

But to be completely clueless on the subject and to aspire to the 2nd highest office in the land is absolutely absurd - and a general indictment of our educational system.

user-pic

Not to beat a dead horse here, but I'm more comfortable with the "3 or 4" than with the "5", where you started. (A little more negotiation and I think we'd be in agreement!)

I remember learning about (or living through) all those cases you enumerated. But I'm not sure I could have come up with that list on my own.

My analogy would be stuff we all "should" know from math. And suppose it were asked like this:

"Can you name any mathematical principles you think are critically important or that you use in your daily life?"

So now you should be able to come up with at least the Pythagorian theorum, the formula for the area of a circle, and the quadradic equation -- all off the top of your head. (What, you couldn't do that? Well, then, you're not well educated!)

The analogy is not perfect, but I hope the point is clear. (And if you were running for City Engineer, that might be a relevant question.)

An aside: One case I would add to your list is the decision the Court made that President Clinton could not avoid or delay being deposed on a civil suit (~January, 1998, I believe -- don't know the title of the case). I remember that case particularly because for the first (or one of the first?) time(s) the Court released audio of the arguments. And, of course, the outcome of that case led eventually to the impeachment of the President.

-- ARG

In the next three weeks, thanks to the McCain campaign, the most famous Americans are going to be Bill Ayers and Tony Rezko.

Also thanks to the friggin' NYTimes's front page today. This Ayers crap would have died down if Stephanapolous hadn't crumbled under Hannity's complaining and whining before the raunchy ABC debate with Charlie "Capital Gains" Gibson. Pathetic.

user-pic

yet another flag to the inanity of our campaign discourse, liberal edition.

Thank you for this. I doubt it will help with this new invention called teh blogosphere, but appreciated nonetheless.

And frankly, it has become tedious to hear McCain raise his incarceration in irrelevant contexts

This is an interesting phenomenon for me, someone who comes from a generation who remembers the whole "America, love it or leave it, support our troops" blowback, and had the resultant guilt for quite some time. I believe this has gotten to the point where it already negatively affected not just you and me but a lot of voters paying attention. If he continues to do it to such a ridiculous level, that will allow the late night comedians to pick up on it, and the negative affect will spread to the less informed. I therefore think that Obama, Biden and the Clintons gently playing along rather than challenging is a very wise course that I think is quite intentional.

The times they have indeed changed, along the lines of "enough already with the Vietnam." People support the troops by wanting them home from Iraq, not having them under threat of capture and torture and not having them involved in torturing. Perhaps some of those people might unfortunately want them patrolling the streets of the U.S. during possible forthcoming civic unrest, but they still want them home, and one takes what one can get in that vein. :-)

user-pic

Smart, ignorant, and mean

A great description.

Thanks for recognizing that it is possible to be both smart and ignorant just as it is possible to be educated and dumb. You can see numerous examples of the latter in Recent Posts that ridicule ignorance as stupidity. That is the perspective/attitude that gets the left scorned as elitists.

user-pic

Sorry, but I think it's quite a stretch to call anyone with Palin's weak command of her native language's syntax smart.

user-pic

I can imagine pure nervousness causing her to choke. Possibly another indication that she's not ready to be president.

It's off the thread but Kerry was enough of hero to justify his attempting to use that in his campaign. The guys from his boat wouldn't have stuck by him as they did if that weren't true. And the swiftboaters claim that he had not rescued another officer under fire in the water was confirmed by the guy himself - a Republican who had intended to remain silent but surfaced to rebut the lies.

I've always assumed that Kerry's use of that part of his history was an attempt to head off the expected attacks on his War Resistor period. "Not Fonda Kerry".

And of course the fact that he first volunteered for service and then volunteered for Vietnam is in pretty stark contrast to ,say, Hank Paulson
whose service to his country was as an assistant to Ehrlichman.

And I'll amend that to say "only service" since I deeply resent his being praised for trying to manage of the recovery from a crisis which he could have,but failed to , prevent.

The sanguinity of Joe Six Pac's racism, homophobia, xenophobia, chauvinism--facing foreclosure and unemployment, soaring gas and food prices and the unavailability of affordable housing and health care--is has been crushed.

Having hitched a ride on the non-reality based community (twice) and gotten beaten to a pulp they "don't talk so loud and proud these days". They still viscerally can't see themselves "voting for a N*****" even if he is one of them most intelligent candidates to have emerged on the national scene since Bill Clinton who promises to help them out. The stupidity of people ruled by primal fears knows no bounds but this time it was just too much.

Here they are living in McMansions with half a million dollar mortgages that have some nasty arms, driving huge pick-up trucks that guzzle at least 100 dollars a tank and get maybe 10 or 15 miles to the gallon, paying $300/dollar-a-month car payments in perpetuity and to top it all off their construction jobs have evaporated in thin air. They’re facing the street. "Now they don't talk so loud having to scrounge for their next meal”. They can't quite bring themselves to admit they got hustled like a three card monte chump.

No they don't have any enthusiasm for more of the same, but darn they can't seem to grasp that the royal screwing they got is by the very people they so enthusiastically supported for all these years.

The bitter irony is that the Palin/McCain wingnuts are the very same ones who beat the drums to go to war in Iraq, then finally had to shut up after years of the truth coming out about: lying (Iraqi WMDs), treason (Plamegate), incompetence (the Bremmer regime), malfeasance (unaccounted billions lost or squandered), crimes against law (US Attorney scandal) and humanity (torture).

Now, they have their chance to bloviate again, as if this all never happened. They need to be reminded of how Wrong, Wrong, Wrong they have been these past 8 years, and, sorry, the accountability moment has not yet passed!

And as I've said many times elsewhere (and will KEEP saying), McCain's adoration of rightwing thug G. Gordon Liddy should also be brought up.


http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-oped0504chapmanmay04,0,6061828.column

user-pic

How come the fake guy gets the best comments?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotwang

Leave a comment

Advertisement
Please disable your adblocker!
Ads are how we pay the bills!

Subscribe

The Coffee House
TPMCafe's regulars

House Brew
From Your Cafe Editor

Special Guests
Big names and big brains

Special Features
Pressing topics and trends

Table for One
An expert's week-long talk.

All Reader Posts
TPM readers discuss.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address