Sarah Palin... Again...

[Blue Meanie]

She really doesn't seem bright. Amazed how out of depth she seems to be. The second video is...well... Almost spoof-like.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=XbQwAFobQxQ

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=nokTjEdaUGg

Edited by Blue Meanie on Saturday 27th September 06:12

[vehiclesystems]

Yeah but she is a MILF and i would - that's the most important thing isn't it?

[eccles]

Comes across as seriously out of her depth!

[ALawson]

The worrying thing is when McCain kicks the bucket if he gets in she would take over as his No2, no?

[Teppic]

ALawson said:

The worrying thing is when McCain kicks the bucket if he gets in she would take over as his No2, no?

A US President who's out of their depth? Impossible! It'll never be allowed to happen.

Oh, hang on...

Edited by Teppic on Saturday 27th September 08:43

[ALawson]

There is out of their depth and then being at the bottom of the Mariana Trench!

[turbobloke]

Some parallel with the wannane president televised debate, and another parallel with interviews for jobs. Interviews - do we want people who are good at the job or who are good at interveiws and presentations, and are these two the same thing? Not unless the job is professional interviewee. If somebody had put up an interview of Obama sounding like a total cretin, and a times I think he sounds like one anyway due to political differences, I'd have to acknowledge that he probably isn't. In Palin's case her nomination event speech was far from out-of-depth.

[ALawson]

Haven't seen it but if so was it scripted?

[amare32]

We know what she is only good for and it is not politics...

[ian in lancs]

turbobloke said:

In Palin's case her nomination event speech was far from out-of-depth.

I'm no expert in politics but aren't speeches written for them to create just that reaction. IE polished marketing. The true mark of a leader is the ability to deal with a huge range of difficult problems from a base of extreme intellect and experience. Palin doesn't appear to have either. Whether you liked Thatcher's politics or not one has to accept she had both and was the best post war leader we've had. Palin in contrast appears to be a shallow marketing exercise, oui, non?

[steve996]

turbobloke said:

Some parallel with the wannane president televised debate, and another parallel with interviews for jobs. Interviews - do we want people who are good at the job or who are good at interveiws and presentations, and are these two the same thing? Not unless the job is professional interviewee. If somebody had put up an interview of Obama sounding like a total cretin, and a times I think he sounds like one anyway due to political differences, I'd have to acknowledge that he probably isn't. In Palin's case her nomination event speech was far from out-of-depth.

TB I am right behind you on the MMGW - sorry climate change - issue but got to admit I stop short of supporting your endorsement of this daft moose hunting MILF. She's way out of her depth and I think this will turn out to be a mistake by McCain - she maybe carried off her speach at the nomination event but has been found wanting in just about all other public outing since. Her being president if the old yin pops his clogs is even scarier than the bush baby being in "command".....

[turbobloke]

ian in lancs said:

turbobloke said:

In Palin's case her nomination event speech was far from out-of-depth.

I'm no expert in politics but aren't speeches written for them to create just that reaction. IE polished marketing. The true mark of a leader is the ability to deal with a huge range of difficult problems from a base of extreme intellect and experience. Palin doesn't appear to have either. Whether you liked Thatcher's politics or not one has to accept she had both and was the best post war leader we've had. Palin in contrast appears to be a shallow marketing exercise, oui, non?

You'd expect all her interviews to be well prepped by backroom people and speechwriters - expecting any politician, even those whose politics are different to your own, to do well in every situation is unrealistic, they can't be experts in everything and their prep people will sometimes not hit the spot. The interview ability point remains, any one interview is just a small sample of evidence in isolation for one thing, and judgements on it are as more to do with interview skills as job skills.

If Palin had a bad interview, then she had a bad interview. That's as far as I'd go with any politician and if anything the snake oil sellers are worse leaders. BLiar for one was a disaster yet he was able to charm people and interviewed well mostly.

In the UK one of the most damaging ideas is that senior politicians can move around top jobs. To do that kind of role really well requires first-hand and in-depth knowledge, and if somebody acquires that position just in time to be moved on it can't be good. When these jokers are interviewed, if they sound good, how can that be?

Edited by turbobloke on Saturday 27th September 09:31

[turbobloke]

steve996 said:

I stop short of supporting your endorsement of this daft moose hunting MILF.

Fair enough. But -

I already pointed out that bad interviewing isn't necessarily bad leading, no? Do you agree or disagree with that idea? She'll have good interviews and bad interviews, like all the rest. People are appointed to good jobs on an interview who turn out to be absolutely hopeless, at which point the employer usually realises there are severe limitations to the validity of evidence that can be obtained from an iterview. And I'd be defending Obama in the same situation, though he's a silver-tongued snake oil seller like BLiar so probably wouldn't arise.

[steve996]

turbobloke said:

steve996 said:

I stop short of supporting your endorsement of this daft moose hunting MILF.

Fair enough. But -

I already pointed out that bad interviewing isn't necessarily bad leading, no? Do you agree or disagree with that idea? She'll have good interviews and bad interviews, like all the rest. People are appointed to good jobs on an interview who turn out to be absolutely hopeless, at which point the employer usually realises there are severe limitations to the validity of evidence that can be obtained from an iterview. And I'd be defending Obama in the same situation, though he's a silver-tongued snake oil seller like BLiar so probably wouldn't arise.

That argument would be fair enough if we were talking about someone of experience and substance who occasionally didn't come across well in interviews but I think what is coming across with this one is someone who lacks any real substance or depth of knowledge i.e. what you see is what you are getting! IMO she is a pretty local politician who has been propelled way out of her depth in quite a calculated attempt to mobilise the female vote in the republicans favour.

[turbobloke]

steve996 said:

That argument would be fair enough if we were talking about someone of experience and substance who occasionally didn't come across well in interviews but I think what is coming across with this one is someone who lacks any real substance or depth of knowledge i.e. what you see is what you are getting! IMO she is a pretty local politician who has been propelled way out of her depth in quite a calculated attempt to mobilise the female vote in the republicans favour.

My line of reasoning has some basis to it all the same, but I take your point. However I hope the pretty MILF ticket works as it's the general politics of Republicans I would endorse over the Democrats. Not so much endorsing Palin as hoping to hell that tax and spend doesn't get another chance across the pond. With a forthcoming hike in debt from the Wall St package their wealth creators need a stimulus not bleeding dry to fund welfare. A good looking shapely running mate with two X chromosomes may turn out to be an inspired choice, regardless of her interview score

In any case, while Obama may talk the talk, is his reported concern over terrorist yuman royts better foreign policy if expressed skilfully at interview?

[turbobloke]

I'd choose it too LA but others have a say in our 'choices'.

It's the time-old conundrum of herbivores passing resolutions for vegetarianism when there are still lots of carnivores around with a taste for meat.

[King Herald]

Blue Meanie said:

She really doesn't seem bright. Amazed how out of depth she seems to be. The second video is...well... Almost spoof-like.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=XbQwAFobQxQ

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=nokTjEdaUGg

Just another side show in the circus that is the American elections. Utterly, utterly pitiful, the lengths those guys go to to back stab and dig dirt on each other.

For a long while I thought Obama and Clinton were actually on opposite sides, fighting to be the president, going by the vitriol and shyte they threw about each other.

[turbobloke]

Los Angeles said:

I choose the path of peace even as a sceptic, and an occasional cynic. The other way is strewn with rotting bodies.

As I said already, I'd agree if the choice was ours alone, but an absence of expansionism linked to aggression isn't in our gift to decide for the rest of the world. I was prepared to sign up a few years ago partly for that reason.

[Fort Jefferson]

ALawson said:

The worrying thing is when McCain kicks the bucket if he gets in she would take over as his No2, no?

Thing is though, the US president is only a puppet, who is controled by the back room boys, and is wheeled out to make speech's now and again. Remember Reagan?

[photo_ed]

Second vid:

"our nextdoor neigbours are foreign countries"

No st! Really....



The woman is a twonk of the first order.