I watched the election results on the BBC, partly in order to avoid having to view the same smug talking heads saying the same smug things, but mainly because they had some really interesting guests, like John Bolton, Christopher Hitchens, Jay McInerny, and Gore Vidal.
Vidal was a disappointment, since all he did was insult his hosts. But Hitchens calling Sarah Palin a “nut job who believes in witches” was a sweet moment.
Ted Koppel set a more gracious tone by remarking that this felt like the first year of the 21st century. So it does.
Kenya Declares a Holiday
Previous post: Back from Canada
Next post: A Remarkable Encounter With One of the Most Significant Writers of This or Any Time
“But Hitchens calling Sarah Palin a “nut job who believes in witches” was a sweet moment. “
Because, as we all know, it’s more important to call your political opponent a cunt than it is to actually discuss her political positions. Style over substance, baby; Style. Over. Substance. (although I guess that makes sense, considering that you’re one-time cyberpunk writer.)
I have to say, it’s been amusing to see liberals give free rein to thirty years of dammed-up misogynism. It’s refreshing to know that, underneath their rhetoric, they’re just as nasty and brutish and short as the conservative Republicans they claim to despise.
I don’t recall Hitchens using the word you claim he did. You seem to be projecting that from somewhere in your own id.
Nor did he attack her because she’s female and he’s a misogynist. He attacked he because she =apparently believes in witches.= I mean, that’s a =position,= right? Hitchen’s =engaging= with it, right?
Her pastor not only believes in witches but conducted a genuine witch hunt in which imtimidation, vandalism, and the threat of physical harm were used to drive out of the community a woman who he claimed was a witch.
Note that the media and the Dems did not demand that Palin renounce her preacher, the way the conservatives demanded that Obama renounce Rev. Wright. Apparently they felt she has a perfect right to follow in the train of a witch-finder. Or maybe they were just too embarrassed to bring it up.
Criticism of Palin, at this point, is rather like kicking a sick dog, but since you asked for something more substantial than Hitchen’s comment, here goes:
Palin was woefully unprepared. See the interviews.
Palin is greedy. Her shopping spree cost ‘way more than the $150,000 first reported, and included twenty to forty grand for her hubby. A McCain staffer today referred to Mr and Mrs Palin as “Wasilla hillbillies looting Nieman Marcus from coast to coast.”
Palin is corrupt. Her house was built by contractors who she later rewarded with big city contracts.
And— just a personal note— what’s with the wacky Youper accent? She doesn’t talk like that in her video appearances from early in her career. It seems to be something she adopted in the last few years in order to sound more like a hockey mom. Where’s that come from?
Please, can’t we have someone from the sane, non-testifyin’, non-witch-huntin’ wing of the Republican party to take charge and convince us they’re responsible enough to, say, possess a driver’s license? Because that’s not what I see in Palin.
“Her pastor…”
Oh-ho, so now churches DO matter? I look forward to your denunciation of Obama’s association with Jeremiah Wright.
“Note that the media and the Dems did not demand that Palin renounce her preacher…”
You’re right. They were content to make like John Stewart, where they’d play the clip and then stand there with a smirk. It’s Humor 2.0, the audience pays YOU for the opportunity to make THEIR OWN jokes.
“Palin is greedy…”
Obama outspent McCain ten-to-one.
Also: Imagine the eye-rolling we’d see from the commentators if Palin had showed up in jeans, beat-up sneakers, and and a jacket purchased at a high-school band fundraiser four years ago. She’d be laughed off the stage. Or hey, maybe she could buy one suit, and then have to put up with “this lady can’t even buy clothes, what makes her competent to lead the free world?” Meanwhile, we hear all about Obama’s “charisma”, as though he maintained his appearance through sheer force of personality.
“Palin was woefully unprepared. See the interviews.”
Yeah. “Do you agree with the Bush Doctrine?” “In what sense, Charley?” “th-the, uh, bu-b…Bush…Doctrine.” Tell me again who was “unprepared”.
“Please, can’t we have someone from the sane, non-testifyin’, non-witch-huntin’ wing of the Republican party…”
Congratulations, you’ve described John McCain.
I mean…shit, you complain about religion when you just elected a Baptist? Pull the other one.
Of course religion matters. Beliefs matter. (And I think I have a perfect right to ridicule beliefs that I find ridiculous, right here on my own blog.)
An important distinction here is that while Rev Wright said a few dumb or uninformed things, =he didn't get his posse to drive people he disagreed with out of his town.= While Palin's pastor did.
>"Palin is greedy…"
>Obama outspent McCain ten-to-one.
You have a point, other than that Obama is really popular with rich, intelligent, successful people? You'll note that Obama didn't pocket the money.
Yeah, he's well-dressed. He's a senator. He can afford some nice clothes. My guess is that they didn't cost him $20-40,000, like Todd Palin's new wardrobe.
According to the Republican staffer who dished on this, Palin was told to buy three suits and one formal outfit, and that a rich Republican contributor would pay for them. You can only imagine how his eyebrows went up when he got the credit card bill.
(And by the way, how hard to you have to work to spend twenty grand on a =male wardrobe???= What was Todd buying, diamond-studded Elvis jumpsuits?)
In any case, the GOP has now sent an attorney to Alaska to bring all the clothes back. How much fun -he- must be having, eh?
>"Please, can't we have someone from the sane, non-testifyin', non-witch-huntin' wing of the Republican party…"
>Congratulations, you've described John McCain.
I described the John McCain of 2000, not the one who decided he needed a wingnut as his VP. I understand that he had to make some gestures to the evangelical wing of the party in order to make them feel comfortable about voting for him, but putting someone like Palin on the ticket was the single biggest mistake of the campaign.
But yes, I would like to see the Republicans that admit to believing in evolution dominate the party. I would like to see Republicans who share my values, such as a firm commitment to civil liberties and to keeping religious superstition and pseudo-science out of our schools. And I would like to see a GOP that doesn't tell us to fear foreigners, scapegoat gays, respects reproductive rights, and build walls to separate us from our neighbors.
“..how hard to you have to work to spend twenty grand on a =male wardrobe?”
Not that hard, actually, if you want to have more than two ill-fitting suits and one pair of shoes.
“I would like to see Republicans who share my values, such as a firm commitment to civil liberties and to keeping religious superstition and pseudo-science out of our schools. And I would like to see a GOP that doesn’t tell us to fear foreigners, scapegoat gays, respects reproductive rights, and build walls to separate us from our neighbors.”
We saw that in McCain/Palin. Unfortunately, everyone fell in love with the Magical Black Man.
“We saw that in McCain/Palin.”
Either you’re dumb as a sack of hammers, you lie for a living, or you live in a mysterious parallel universe, because McCain/Palin failed the test on every single point Walter mentioned there. Every single one.
“Unfortunately, everyone fell in love with the Magical Black Man.”
Uh, your racism is showing. You might want to tuck that back in.
I mean, do you even have a point to make other than sour grapes and whining?
We get it. You think McCain was the gr8ist evar, and Obama sucks. Now move along.
Comments on this entry are closed.