Fox reports that Palin didn't know Africa is a continent

You were saying?

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/bq-eeWow_WU&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/bq-eeWow_WU&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

 

Where is the story attributed to anyone?

 

I think we will see someone as hyper-partisan as her on the ticket again, so I don't agree with that point. Otherwise, I think you're right.

The Republican Powers That Be will likely have in the back of their heads what I call "The George Will Sneer Test." George Will sneers at everybody, but if you are considering a Republican candidate he will sneer at more than the Democratic candidate, find somebody else.

There are lots of charismatic, female partisan Republicans out there. Find one that's clearly smart too. The anti-intellectualism of the Joe-The-Plumber/Dubya/Palin wing has got to go. It's fun making fun of Ivy Leaguers, but in the back of our heads we all know we don't want somebody who took 6 years to get a BA from the University of Idaho running our country.

 

Quayle was and remains infinitely more qualified than Sarah Palin to hold public office. He was more reasonable, and not the mental midget everyone thought he was, whereas she is actually dumber and pettier than we thought.

 

He headed the campaign, campaign sources are blaming Palin, and Davis is silent. He's at least culpable in not standing behind his pick. I'm not saying he is the anonymous source, but by his silence and own refusal to admit he sucked I will affix blame to him as well.

 

Yes, Biden is known for gaffes. He also seems to have problems thinking on his feet. But less so than Palin. Biden makes to ocassional silly comment, while Palin seemed to embarrass herself in basically every interview.

 

It was the combination, not that each alone would disqualify her. Not only does she have intellectual credibility problems, she appeals to a narrow band of the electorate. Bush had intellectual credibility problems, but knew how to appeal to a broader segment of the nation.

 

Yes, just a "gaffe". The best part is how he prefaces this idiocy by stating that a leader should know what they are talking about.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/6AwjNvA-vUw&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/6AwjNvA-vUw&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

 

What would you call it? Personally, I think Biden knows how to count, he simply confused himself by saying the plural when he was thinking about the singular.

To me, that's a gaffe. Not an indicator that he doesn't understand something fundamental.

 

Fundamental understanding such as knowing the FDR wasn't the President when the market crashed, or fundamental in knowing that there was no TV in those days?

 

Are those fundamental misunderstandings? Or screwing up details? If you feel they are fundamental, what specific policy issues do you think it would cause him to make mistakes in?

 

Ah, Minstrel, the election's over. The Democrats won big time. It's okay now to admit that Democrats aren't perfect all the time. Obama suggested in his initial response to Russia sending troops into Georgia that he thought that the issue should be brought before the UN to get a resolution asking the Russians to withdraw. Apparently, he was forgetting that Russia holds a veto right and that such an approach was a non-starter. I suspect that as President, his cabinet and staff will help him avoid such booboos.

 

I think you're confused; I've never suggested that any Democrats are perfect. In fact, I've often had a great contempt for the party over the past decade or so. Saying that Biden's misspeaks were "gaffes" and not "fundamental misunderstandings" seems pretty reasonable and far from claiming he's perfect (and, again, I didn't even want Biden as VP).

Both he and McCain said that the issue should be brought before the UN, seeking a resolution, actually. Neither suggested a resolution could actually get through. Both were making generic "we should handle this with the international community" comments.

 

I'm perfectly willing to admit that I'm often confused.

I'd agree that Biden's foot-in-mouth disease does not indicate a lack of knowledge. I think he just doesn't always get his brain fully engaged before talking.

I also don't think that Palin is anywhere near as dumb as many in the media have made her out to be. I think she's not ready for prime time and woefully ignorant about many important issues. I think she was an awful choice by McCain (and I suspect that if you could get him alone, he'd admit that himself at this point). Still, she has her supporters and, if she spends the next four years educating herself on international issues and schmoozing with supporters, I suppose she could mount a viable campaign. In my opinion, she's the wrong direction for the Republican Party to go and I hope they come to that realization. I suspect they will.

I don't recall McCain saying that, but I could be wrong. My recollection is that he used this as an example of Obama's inexperience on the foreign policy front. At this point, I don't care enough to go digging around the web to find out.

 

I also don't. I just think she showed an inability to think on her feet and, as barfo mentioned, a general ignorance. The second can definitely be addressed, given more preparation time before running. The first, I have no idea. Maybe.

That's my opinion, too, though I hope they don't realize that.

Well, the reason I know it is because I had a long-ish debate about it on this forum. I could dig it up, but I can't bring myself to care. It basically boiled down to a semantic argument, about who's words conveyed more belief that it could pass.

 

Here's what Republicans think of your mealy-mouthed Palin-bashing:

 

Spread blame whichever way you like. It doesn't matter who was campaigning for him, the better candidate won as they generally do.