01/14/2011

Random thoughts 6/23/11...

I'm back I guess. I've been thinking and posting comments over at VA's blog, and finally decided to dust this sucker off and start posting again.

Most of my reading lately has been there and at Vox Populi and this post over there caught my eye: Mailvox: in defense of Ann Coulter. I'm no fan of Coulter, to me she comes off as the 'right-wing' version of Howard Stern: Tacky and tends to go mainly for shock value. And to me she looks like a hooker that isn't aging well (as if any hooker does).
The email Vox posted (yes, I know his real name. I prefer to use his pseudonym - it's shorter) was in 'response' to his latest WND column: In defense of libertarians
His point, in a nutshell, is 'marriage' however you define it has been under the purview of government only recently in history, and the issue was settled in churches long before 1853, when Virginia passed a law requiring county clerks to issue marriage licenses and keep marriage registers.
However the takeaway I got from that post was this:
In any event, the column sufficiently demonstrated that Coulter is very poorly situated to be labeling anyone, let alone libertarians, as "cowardly frauds". As Paul Gottfried noted in "The Mainstreaming of Michelle Malkin", it's only a matter of time before a fame-driven media whore learns to dance to the crack of the party establishment's whip. No doubt Dana Loesch will be the next to look beautiful in chains.
As an aside; the inability to 'blockquote' via the editor here sucks. Good thing I learned HTML, I can insert those tags manually, but I shouldn't have to.
In the linked article above Paul Gottfried summed up the main reason I tend to be 'anti-Palin':
Doesn’t Michelle (Malkin) notice that what she’s saying is at most only partly true? The former Alaska governor is an intellectually lazy person who runs at the mouth. Her inability to cite any national newspaper she read during her embarrassing interview with Katie Couric suggests something depressing about her knowledge of the world. I’m still trying to extract from Palin’s run-on sentences what she would do with Social Security. I won’t even touch immigration, an issue on which she seems to depend on leftover sound bites from the McCain campaign.Her gaffes are beginning to approximate the silliness of such notorious verbal blunderers as W and Joe Biden. While visiting Boston, Palin explained that Paul Revere rode to "warn the British.” I learned the true story about Revere in the second grade.
I remember years ago listening to talk radio how [insert host here] would actually praise Bush Jr. for what became known as his 'Bushisms' (such as
"I know how hard it is for you to put food on your family.") as actual proof of his 'genius'! My take was (and is) ''No, if anything, it's proof of his basic mindlessness''. If she were to become Prez, those 'Palinisms' would demonstrate her mindlessness as well.
IOW, she would be little more than 'Bush in drag' and the tsunami after the Bush family 9.0 earthquake (if anything I compare the mistake in the White House to the nuke plant trouble in Japan, neither as bad nor as good as it's being made out to be by various reports).
The other thing that has bothered me about (male) Palin fans is the ''I love her, she's a MILF!!!'' meme I've seen quite often. My take is ''Fine, I get it, she's a MILF, and you're thinking with the wrong part of your body. And you have no chance of doing her anyway, so take a cold shower''.

Posted by: YIH at 01:42 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 610 words, total size 5 kb.

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
14kb generated in CPU 0.0096, elapsed 0.0588 seconds.
33 queries taking 0.0527 seconds, 56 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.