I thought she had just been advised not to answer direct questions directly, advice she took too literally. I mean, no one can be that dumb that they can’t even name a newspaper even if it’s one they don’t read. And yes, she was set up with trick questions by the liberal media, all of which she handled poorly.
Once again, she can be dumb, but not that dumb. As the keynote speaker at a tea party event this weekend she had notes written on her hand. Now it’s not dumb to have notes during a speech (the President doesn’t even talk to 6th graders without a teleprompter), what’s stupid is writing them on your hand like a kid cheating on an algebra exam.
But I still think she’s going to be our next President.
13 comments:
a much better tactic would have been to print the notes on a small piece of paper in 4 point font
or to ask mr. wakeham to join her on stage and review the key points throughout her speech
Two scary thoughts:
1- This ditz being our next president
2- That you still think the media is liberal
Paul you're WAY too smart to think she is going to be President. Imagine her in debates with Romney, Crist, Petraeus, Gingrich, etc. She thought Charles Gibson asking for her general view on the Bush Doctrine was tough, and will get bowled over by these way more viable Republican candidates.
1) I don't really think she will be the next President. I'd say there's a decent chance she'll be the Republican nominee but wouldn't beat Obama in the general unless things get really bad over the next two years.
2) Reissberg, if you don't think the media is overwhelmingly liberal then you're not paying attention and you're listening to the wrong people. I know from what I speak on this one buddy.
yes she is that stupid. She wrote her buzz words on her hand. Energy, tax cuts, lift American spirit. And this after she criticized Obama's use of the teleprompter
She is much more than a ditz she's a moron. I cannot imagine that she would win the GOP nomination - especially if Obama continues to accomplish nothing during his first term. I can;nt see they would waste a shot at winning back the White House with her as the candidate
What makes you think she has a decent chance to be the nominee - b/c you work for the same company?
I forgot... You're the Fair and Balanced network
Romney/Rubio 2012
MB, I think she can get the nomination (probably one of 5 contenders at this point) because people like her. And the people who like her feel she is being demonized by the left-wing media and also feel like they are being demonized by the left-wing media (the teabaggers as they are so affectionately known).
I actually think Scott Brown has a decent chance, by 2012 he'll have as much experience as Obama did when he ran.
Reissberg, even if you think Fox News leans to the right, or even really far to the right, can you think of another news television new organization that isn't left-leaning?
Major newspapers are a slightly different story but most of the big ones are hopelessly left and aren't even shy about admitting it.
Conservatives do own talk radio, I must say.
people liking her is debateable. Even if you go with the premise that she is well liked, she is all fluff an dno substance.
When she is stuck debating with other intelligent GOP hopefuls (Romney for example), there is no way she will stack up. For now, she serves a purpose, as she is out front bashing Obama and the dems and there is no reprucussion to the real cotenders.
Let Scott Brown accomplish something first. We're seeing how well someone with little experience does in office.
General elections are not decided by the fringes of the political spectrum. You're never going to convince some drugged out hippie in northern Cali to vote Republican, just like some 70 year old riding his rascal scooter to tea party protests is never voting for Obama.
It's the 30-40% in the middle that matter. Bush won twice because he did very well with that group, and I think that Palin was a huge turn off for middle ground voters in '08. I think Obama's waning popularity is a great opportunity for Republicans to do really well with that segment in '12, but Palin will not serve that purpose.
The other issue as MB and Reissberg and I noted, is competence. Romney is a really smart guy and so is Huckabee and so is Gingrich and so is Jeb Bush by the way. Palin is not.
I'll grant you MSNBC is fairly left-leaning, but no news organization comes anywhere close to being as ideologically biased as Fox, unless you include the New York Post.
CNN has an increasing amount of right-wing commentators.
As you said, talk radio is dominated by the right, if not exclusively right.
Wall Street Journal is extremely right wing.
Most of the pundits that appear on the Sunday news shows are right wing.
Sarah Palin is not getting elected to anything. MB is correct, she is currently doing her purpose, softening up the Dems for the midterms. She would get killed against anyone. It is too bad Huckabee is a Jew hater because I actually like his politics. Romney will be your next President, after Barry is deemed ineligible for not being born in the US.
"I'll grant you MSNBC is fairly left-leaning."
Absurd comment. Rachel Maddow? Keith Olbermann? Chris "Tingle Up My Leg" Matthews. It is on par with Fox.
"As you said, talk radio is dominated by the right, if not exclusively right."
That's just supply and demand. They've tried liberal radio (Air America) and it was an utter disaster which failed. This is another reason liberals support the "Fairness Doctrine" (how creepy and Orwellian does that sound, by the way). "No one wants to listen to unfunny creeps like Jeanine Garafalo so we'll make them!"
"Wall Street Journal is extremely right wing."
Editorial Page yes...other Content no. And certainly no more so than the New York Times...Paul Krugman, Frank Rich, Bob Herbert, that skank Maureen Dowd, Gail Collins. The paper has one token "conservative", David Brooks.
"Most of the pundits that appear on the Sunday news shows are right wing."
Simply wrong. These shows always have one from each side...Carville and Mary Matalin for example.
Post a Comment