Cats and dogs... living together! (Palin again).

[Kitalrez]

I saw this today on Yahoo! and since no one else commented on it:

Sarah Palin believes media is going easy on Caroline Kennedy because of social class.

*Looks up at sky, opens umbrella, and proceeds to run around screaming*

For those of you needing an explanation, Sarah Palin just acknowledged that "social class" exists in America. This is significant because if you're a true, dyed in the wool, Reagan-style conservative, (as Palin and a lot of Neo-Conservative supporters claimed in the campaign), you believe that America is a classless society. That's the point behind the "American Dream" mythos. Anyone can work up from a mailroom into the CEO's office. When you acknowledge class, then you point out it's a hell of a lot easier for certain parts of society to advance than others. Necessarily, some parts may not be able to advance at all.

This is big. Kind of like if a Muslim Fundamentalist said: "You know, those Jews aren't such bad people..."

Watch what happens after this story. Take a close look if Cheney or other Neo-Cons support Palin's statement. Because if she draws a following, then we may have just watched the death of the whole Neo-Con philosophy. This may be the point where the Right in America starts to rebuild itself. "Objectivism" may be headed for the ropes.

[Clever Ninja]

Re: Cats and dogs... living together! (Palin again).

As awesome as that would be, they aren't really gonna let that happen. Most common scenario is that Palin's comment will either be ignored, or if more people like yourself catch it and bring it up, then people might just not side with what she said.

If this were anyone else, I'd probably agree with you. But I seriously doubt that something that could literally reshape the class system in America would ever come out of Sarah Palin's mouth.

[Feba]

Re: Cats and dogs... living together! (Palin again).

Yes, I'm sure the Society of Old Rich White Men is going to acknowledge that some people are better off than others.

Also, the next person who mentions "Palin" without "Micheal" immediately preceding it is getting their ass kicked.

[Malacite]

Re: Cats and dogs... living together! (Palin again).

The fail of this woman never ceases to amaze me.

[TheGrandMom]

Re: Cats and dogs... living together! (Palin again).

She's old news. She failed and failed miserably. No one will take her side of anything because she's a proven idiot and that would just drag them down to her level.

[Szkol]

Re: Cats and dogs... living together! (Palin again).

For those of you needing an explanation, Sarah Palin just acknowledged that "social class" exists in America. This is significant because if you're a true, dyed in the wool, Reagan-style conservative, (as Palin and a lot of Neo-Conservative supporters claimed in the campaign), you believe that America is a classless society.

Social class, as it is defined, does not exist in America. Unfortunately, in our consumer-society the lines between economic class and social class are horribly obscure.

I hate for it to be Sarah Palin, but the right (and the left) both need this movement to happen. The need to acknowledge that there is some truth to the arguments of the other side, and also that the world is nowhere close to being black and white.

The problem with our politicians and our parties is that they think they have to present their party with extreme conservative or liberal views- b/c politics in America isn;t about making a difference anymore, it's about beating the other guy- and this applies to both sides.

Think long and hard about the last time you heard a debate or political discussion on TV or radio that contained anything other than standard left vs. right rhetoric.

I still think Sarah Palin is too far to the right to make any real difference, but if she can start a movement of mainstream conservatives (read: moderate conservatives or fiscal conservatives) then I'll gladly support her. If someone on the left can do that first, then I'll probably support them. Both sides need to grow up and meet in the middle.

[Feba]

Re: Cats and dogs... living together! (Palin again).

She's old news. She failed and failed miserably. No one will take her side of anything because she's a proven idiot and that would just drag them down to her level.

except for the, what, 47%? of America that voted for her.


I mean, she's clearly an idiot, but that's never stopped us before, amirite.



Personally, I'd love to see the GOP throw Palin under the bus in 2012.

[Neverslip]

Re: Cats and dogs... living together! (Palin again).

So sorry... everytime that lady opens her mouth all I get it "white-noise"

... something may be wrong with my ears.

[TheGrandMom]

Re: Cats and dogs... living together! (Palin again).

except for the, what, 47%? of America that voted for her.

..or voted for her running mate? I know I base my decision when I vote on the Presidential candidate and not the VP.

[Feba]

Re: Cats and dogs... living together! (Palin again).

Perhaps, but sane people don't vote for a man in his 70s, who has had health problems, without considering who he would have replace him should anything happen.

The President is more important than the Vice President, of course, but not considering the VP at all is incredibly stupid.

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: Cats and dogs... living together! (Palin again).

Perhaps, but sane people don't vote for a man in his 70s, who has had health problems, without considering who he would have replace him should anything happen.

Many of our presidents have been old, many have and health problems and plenty gave no consideration toward who would really be replacing them.

It should be noted that Dan Quayle was a heartbeat away from the presidency for a time and also that Al Gore found a personality and charisma after he was no longer in office. All the previous presidents have had health problems in some form or another, didn't help Clinton that he made stops at Micky D's after jogging.

Most of them, by the standards of many would be considered "old." Dukakis was just considered ugly and Kerry rather inconsistent (and ugly).

And people do vote on the basis of ugly. Its not any more intelligent than your voting based on age. We've had older than McCain in the Presidency and most that have not been removed from office via bullet died after their term in office.

The President is more important than the Vice President, of course, but not considering the VP at all is incredibly stupid.

Again, I'll point to Dan Quayle.

[Feba]

Re: Cats and dogs... living together! (Palin again).

And to prove my point, I'll point to Dan Quayle.

And I'm not saying McCain should've been disqualified based on his age, just that when someone has reached that age and had serious health complications, the VP is a far more serious consideration. Although our oldest president, Reagan, was not exactly a shining symbol of being old and capable. Yes, voting on age is stupid. I wasn't suggesting that, however.