| ABOUT US | ARCHIVES | LINKS | RSS FEED | MONDAYS | |

3quarksdaily

An Eclectic Digest of Science, Art and Literature

« Faust and the Physicists | Main | You’re Sick. Now What? Knowledge Is Power »

September 30, 2008

Palin Is Ready? Please.

Fareed Zakarya of Newsweek:

Screenhunter_02_sep_30_1145Couric asked her a smart question about the proposed $700 billion bailout of the American financial sector. It was designed to see if Palin understood that the problem in this crisis is that credit and liquidity in the financial system has dried up, and that that's why, in the estimation of Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and Fed chairman Ben Bernanke, the government needs to step in to buy up Wall Street's most toxic liabilities. Here's the entire exchange:

COURIC: Why isn't it better, Governor Palin, to spend $700 billion helping middle-class families who are struggling with health care, housing, gas and groceries; allow them to spend more and put more money into the economy instead of helping these big financial institutions that played a role in creating this mess?

PALIN: That's why I say I, like every American I'm speaking with, were ill about this position that we have been put in where it is the taxpayers looking to bail out. But ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health-care reform that is needed to help shore up our economy, helping the--it's got to be all about job creation, too, shoring up our economy and putting it back on the right track. So health-care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions and tax relief for Americans. And trade, we've got to see trade as opportunity, not as a competitive, scary thing. But one in five jobs being created in the trade sector today, we've got to look at that as more opportunity. All those things under the umbrella of job creation. This bailout is a part of that.

This is nonsense--a vapid emptying out of every catchphrase about economics that came into her head. Some commentators, like CNN's Campbell Brown, have argued that it's sexist to keep Sarah Palin under wraps, as if she were a delicate flower who might wilt under the bright lights of the modern media. But the more Palin talks, the more we see that it may not be sexism but common sense that's causing the McCain campaign to treat her like a time bomb.

More here.  [Thanks to Tasnim Raza.]  I thought the Tina Fey parody of Sarah Palin on Saturday Night Live was unbelievably brilliantly performed and written. What I didn't realize was that the writers didn't really do much, and most of the parody was just actual transcripts of Palin's interview with Katie Couric! It is truly astounding. Check out the SNL skit if you haven't seen it yet:

And here's part of the real interview with Couric:

Posted by S. Abbas Raza at 05:47 AM | Permalink

Comments

O.........my...........God.

I am sorry, but I am left UTTERLY dumbfounded by this video (the real one). Sit back, stop bickering amongst yourselves and let the Republican team implode. There's too long between now and voting day for their ship to survive with this one on board.

I didn't know it was possible for Katie to look so smart.

Posted by: MattInOz | Sep 30, 2008 8:39:42 AM

Thanks for poting these two videos side by side Abbas. It is incredible that John McCaine actually picked up this moron to be his running mate and Americans are actually considering her as a serious candidate for the Vice Presidency. This decision alone should disqualify McCaine as a candidate for President. There is a slow but rising chorus of conservative voices asking for Sara Palin to drop out voluntarily from the race, including George Will, David Brook, and now Kathleen Parker. I hope McCaine will see the light and may actually pay less of a price by withdrawing her than if he keeps insisting that she is qualified. It is embarassing.

Posted by: Tasnim | Sep 30, 2008 9:42:55 AM

http://nl.youtube.com/watch?v=6hELjmWfVBU

shows a larger part of the interview - and especially the last two minutes about Israel are incredibly shocking. That woman is not only blessed with the rhetoric skills of a walnut, she also lives in her own naive world and seems to have no idea what is going on around her.

Thanks for linking to that Newsweek column, I wholeheartedly concur.

Posted by: Barbara | Sep 30, 2008 10:10:31 AM

When a piercing parody results from repeating the "actual" words a person says, the situation is grave indeed.

Tasnim, why would you want McCain to drop her from the ticket? Doesn't it help the Dems if she stays on and continues to expose herself as the dangerous ignoramus that she truly is?

But I am still worried about Thursday's debate (I am always worried about the fate of the luckless Democrats). As I said on my own blog:

Senator Biden, knowledgeable though he is, is also a first class windbag who doesn't listen well to others. I am afraid that he may get caught up in the magic of his own garrulity and start speechifying. He could also fall victim to a misplaced sense of chivalry and let Palin off easy. Palin on the other hand, could get away by mouthing inane sound bites and the occasional below-the-belt punch line without answering a single question seriously. The McCain campaign has negotiated a debate format where this may come to pass. Will Biden have the gumption or the presence of mind to challenge her? I hope so but am not too sure. The bar is now so low for Palin that she will get points for just showing up. On the other hand, Biden, a veteran debater on the senate floor, may stray into a rambling, pedantic trajectory and thereby fail to pluck the "low hanging fruit" that Sarah Palin is as a political adversary.

Biden will do well to put a zipper on his own mouth and let Palin talk, talk... and talk.

Posted by: Ruchira | Sep 30, 2008 11:53:40 AM

Well, she sounds kinda smart to me...

G.W.

Posted by: Jared | Sep 30, 2008 12:04:12 PM

I'm wondering whether this isn't the obverse of Poe's Law (http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Poe's_Law).
Although originally posited about religious fundamentalists, I think it might well cover all conservatives.
In short, Poe's law holds that it's impossible to parody some fundamentalist positions because the original position is so strange many people will not be able to distinguish between the original and the parody.
In this case the original is the parody.

Posted by: Arrowsmith | Sep 30, 2008 2:37:27 PM

You see, Sarah is saving us all a lot of work by parodying herself. It is all the more effective for being unconscious. The debate should resemble a Monty Python sketch and will be well worth watching, though not as good, of course, as American Dad.

Posted by: Jared | Sep 30, 2008 2:47:59 PM

Ruchira, I agree with what you wrote on your own blog. As for why I would want McCaine to drop Sara is simply because I still would like to put country first ahead of politics, and even by an outside chance if McCaine-Palin ticket wins, it will be an unmitigated disaster for the country.
Secondly, I am still concerned that when Americans go inside that voting booth, some may still not be able to vote for a black candidate, and if such happens at least we won't have to suffer the indignity of having Sara Palin as our VP.
Thank you for taking interest in my comments.

Posted by: Tasnim | Sep 30, 2008 5:17:36 PM

Tasnim, you are right. In this close election, there definitely is a chance that a certain number of voters (many Asians among them) who would rather vote for a dumb and dangerous duo than vote for a black man, may help elect John McCain and Sarah Palin. I hope fervently that it won't come to pass. But a McCain-Palin term, if that does happen, will hopefully last for four years, not eight. McCain will be 76 by the time the next presidential election comes around and Sarah Palin will have thoroughly embarrassed the country by then. Perhaps things need to get absolutely horrible before people recognize the consequences of voting against their own interests and electing leaders based on prejudice and a false sense of patriotism and security.

But who knows? Some people never learn. I thought the same thing in 2004 and things were quite horrible even then.

Posted by: Ruchira | Sep 30, 2008 7:24:34 PM

My apologies to Katie for my first comment, I was thinking of someone else. (I don't get a lot of American live news down here!)

Posted by: MattInOz | Sep 30, 2008 8:42:36 PM

Tasnim, you are a true patriot -- you would rather see a less disastrous Republican ticket than assume Palin will reduce McCain's chances of victory, knowing that no matter how ridiculous it is, she bids fair to become president if he wins and dies inside 4 years. Which he looks capable of doing -- as he must not know. As a horrifying woman who could never have been anticipated by the most ravening satirist, as a self-parodist nonpareil, Palin is grim fun to laugh at by way of masking one's dread of all she represents, but the impulse to criticize her has no lift; it is John McCain who deserves criticism for choosing her. She is his first presidential call, and, while she is merely unbelievable, he is deeply disgusting on her account. An over-confident dim bulb with a religion crazier than most is a less horrible sight than a once-respectable old man hurrying madly to make himself unworthy, never ceasing in that task for a moment, giving pain, I should think, even to his 96-year old mother, risking every single American life, and the lives of countless non-Americans as well.

Posted by: Elatia Harris | Oct 1, 2008 12:32:24 AM

Post a comment






Subscribe to this blog's feed  

PayAnywhere with iphone credit card swiper

Android Tablet

Bluetooth Headset

2013 New Style Dresses

Compare Car Rental Prices

DHgate.com Wholesale

3QD on Facebook

3QD on Kindle

3QD by Daily Email

Receive all blogposts at the same time every day.

Enter your Email:


Preview 3QD Email

3QD on Twitter

Miscellany

Lijit Search

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Add to Google

Recent Comments

Elatia Harris on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

Abbas Raza on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

Jonathan on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

Bill on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

Louise Gordon on The need for critical science journalism

omar on Mohsin Hamid: 'Islam is not a monolith'

Jonathan on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

Bill on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

jo smith on Mohsin Hamid: 'Islam is not a monolith'

carlos on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

freddie on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

Eli on "Everybody Hurts" by Sachal Studios, Lahore, Pakistan

Jalees Rehman on The need for critical science journalism

Dredd on Why Rational People Buy Into Conspiracy Theories

Dredd on Why Rational People Buy Into Conspiracy Theories

Scrutineer on Why race as a biological construct matters

prasad on the culture animal

Mitt Romney's Dog on Why race as a biological construct matters

Elatia Harris on The Moral Status of Rocks

prasad on The Moral Status of Rocks

Raza Husain on The Moral Status of Rocks

Fred on Unknown Mathematician Proves Elusive Property of Prime Numbers

Joel Grant on Why Rational People Buy Into Conspiracy Theories

Tomboktu on Why is Europe so Messed Up? An Illuminating History

Joe on Why Rational People Buy Into Conspiracy Theories

Acclaim For 3QD


"I couldn't tear myself away from 3 Quarks Daily, to the point of neglecting my work. Congratulations on this superb site."—Steven Pinker, Johnstone Professor of Psychology, Harvard University.

"I have placed 3 Quarks Daily at the head of my list of web bookmarks."—Richard Dawkins, Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University.

"Just wanted you to know I’m one of many who reads and enjoys 3 Quarks....almost daily."—David Byrne, musician, former lead-singer of the Talking Heads, artist, intellectual.

Read more here.

The 3QD Prizes

Subscribe to this blog's feed