Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - April 15th

flere-imsaho · 02-09-2010, 10:37 AM

I'm sorry, I still don't buy the idea of Palin quickly doing some mental calculus during the Couric interview about which periodicals she reads.

Given everything we know about her now, plus knowing that at the time the McCain campaign was trying to coach her, it really seems to me that the most likely scenario is that she froze because:

1. She doesn't actually read anything regularly (news-periodical-wise), getting her news from the TV instead

2. She felt (remember, this was before she rejected her "coaching") that it wouldn't be a great answer to say "none"

3. She wasn't quick on her feet enough to come up with a milquetoast answer, which is what these interviews are all about, after all.

Here's the interesting part, though: I'll bet that her most ardent supporters already suspected that she wouldn't do anything such as regularly read national news periodicals and that's one of the things they like about her. So why not just say that? Well, as I said, I think she was still suffering under some terrible coaching from the McCain campaign and felt she couldn't say that. Maybe she'd say something different now.

Or would she? Note her response to a more recent softball from friendly interviewer Glenn Beck: Beck Calls 'Bullcrap' On Palin's Non-Answer About Favorite Founding Father (VIDEO) | TPM LiveWire

Sarah Palin is a person with strident views, an incurious intellect and is a poor student of, well, everything. But this is exactly why her supporters like her. She believes in things and is willing (or gives the impression she is willing) to fight hard for them, even if the "facts" show that she's wrong.

Which illustrates the converse. The problem with educated people, to Palin's supporters and the Tea Partiers, is that they let "facts" have an inordinate amount of importance in their decision-making, as opposed to just belief.

I don't think this should be a new concept to anyone. Arguably most of the major decisions of the Bush presidency were based at least as much on belief as facts and data. Palin's just taking it a step further. This is also why it's not worth arguing with Tea Partiers. All your facts and logic and well-reasoned arguments mean nothing to their belief. You might as well be talking to a wall.

02-09-2010, 10:37 AM	#254
flere-imsaho Coordinator Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Chicagoland	I'm sorry, I still don't buy the idea of Palin quickly doing some mental calculus during the Couric interview about which periodicals she reads. Given everything we know about her now, plus knowing that at the time the McCain campaign was trying to coach her, it really seems to me that the most likely scenario is that she froze because: 1. She doesn't actually read anything regularly (news-periodical-wise), getting her news from the TV instead 2. She felt (remember, this was before she rejected her "coaching") that it wouldn't be a great answer to say "none" 3. She wasn't quick on her feet enough to come up with a milquetoast answer, which is what these interviews are all about, after all. Here's the interesting part, though: I'll bet that her most ardent supporters already suspected that she wouldn't do anything such as regularly read national news periodicals and that's one of the things they like about her. So why not just say that? Well, as I said, I think she was still suffering under some terrible coaching from the McCain campaign and felt she couldn't say that. Maybe she'd say something different now. Or would she? Note her response to a more recent softball from friendly interviewer Glenn Beck: Beck Calls 'Bullcrap' On Palin's Non-Answer About Favorite Founding Father (VIDEO) \| TPM LiveWire Sarah Palin is a person with strident views, an incurious intellect and is a poor student of, well, everything. But this is exactly why her supporters like her. She believes in things and is willing (or gives the impression she is willing) to fight hard for them, even if the "facts" show that she's wrong. Which illustrates the converse. The problem with educated people, to Palin's supporters and the Tea Partiers, is that they let "facts" have an inordinate amount of importance in their decision-making, as opposed to just belief. I don't think this should be a new concept to anyone. Arguably most of the major decisions of the Bush presidency were based at least as much on belief as facts and data. Palin's just taking it a step further. This is also why it's not worth arguing with Tea Partiers. All your facts and logic and well-reasoned arguments mean nothing to their belief. You might as well be talking to a wall.