John Updike described Sarah as a "bird-brain," which seems about right, although perhaps a little unfair to some birds.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > Judy, > > > > > I'm referring (as I suspect you're well aware) to > > > crap like calling her a "bimbo" and worse, and > > > pretending she's stupid, and ccusing her of being > > > a "thief" because of the clothing purchases, and a > > > "religious fanatic," when she's obviously none of > > > the above. > > > > "stupid" may not be a useful term in discussion her > > cognitive abilities but neither is "smart." > > Oh, I think you could certainly call her "smart," in > the sense of having above-average intelligence. > > Most of her criticism was about how > > informed she was and her tortured language. It's fine to > > say that she thinks better than she talks, but having seen > > the same thing from Bush, I'm not ready to jump to that > > conclusion. Bush's language seemed to mirror his sloganeering > > style of thinking and it hurt us badly. > > Sure, and hers might well too. But Bush is also of > above-average intelligence (I don't think he's quite > as amart as Palin, FWIW, and I get the very distinct > impression that her style of thinking isn't anywhere > near as "sloganeering" as his; she's much more open- > minded and willing to entertain a range of ideas). > > > All we know about her religiousness is that it is sufficient > > for her to want to deny abortions in the case of incest and > > rape for religious reasons, which is an extreme position from > > the playbook of religious fanatics. > > I went over this with you before. In fact, from the > standpoint of those who genuinely believe a fetus is > a human being and should have all the rights of a > human being, it's the only position with any > integrity. Anybody who holds that belief, for > religious (or any other) reasons, who thinks abortion > is OK in the case of incest or rape is being > inconsistent (and inspires suspicion that what they > are really against is women having sex for pleasure). > > So while I could not disagree with her more strongly > about the status and rights of a fetus, I have to > respect that she isn't willing to compromise her > stand. > > The fact that she didn't try to push this agenda with her > > independent Alaskan constituents just means she is willing > > to pursue her ambitions over her ideals. > > As every politician has to do, one way or another. > > Obama gets all kinds of kudos for being willing to > work with those of opposing viewpoints to reach > viable solutions. That's what Palin says she wants > to do as well. > > Did you hear her say that pro-life and pro-choice > people should be able to work together to reduce > (as opposed to "deny") abortions by promoting > preventive measures? She means birth control and > sex education, not banning abortion, obviously > (since pro-choice people wouldn't stand for a ban). > > That is not the approach of a religious fanatic > (and in fact will likely outrage religious fanatics). > > For that matter, believing that human life with > all the rights and privileges thereunto > appertaining begins at conception is not a view > that people hold only for religious reasons. > There are nonreligious people who believe this as > well. >
