Sarah Palin emerges as leader of Republican Party
Charlottesville, Va.—This week Alaska Governor Sarah Palin emerged as de facto leader of the national Republican Party. There was a media feeding frenzy of gossip and rumors from anonymous John McCain campaign staffers after last week’s election loss. It wasn’t until Thursday night that McCain defended Palin on Jay Leno’s Tonight Show. Possibly McCain didn’t throw her under the bus. But he didn’t reach out a helping hand until the bus had run over her a few times.
So-called journalists defended using the anonymous reports by saying the leakers were primary sources. But because the accounts were false and ridiculous, the sources want their identities withheld. So the media lost even more credibility (if that’s possible) by knowingly spreading unaccountable opinions of fictitious people. As if we don’t have a Constitutional amendment making it a felony to use anonymous accusations to destroy people. But alas, the media are held to a lower standard in the court of public opinion.
Sarah Palin Oct 13 at Richmond International Raceway
(Nov. 6, 2008 Neal Boortz show on WINA)
I'd like to point out the logic behind [co-host] Royal's assertion that Sarah Palin is less smart than Barack Obama because Obama has a law degree from Harvard. Royal further said Palin started out in junior college and took seven years to earn a degree. Of course it took Obama eight years for his law degree (4 years undergrad, 4 years law school).
1. College degree means you're smart.
2. Obama has a college degree.
3. Therefore Obama is smart.
Corollary: The more college degrees, the smarter you are.
Logic template:
1. If A=B
2. and B=C
3. Therefore A=C
If (1) or (2) is false, then the conclusion is invalid. To disprove Royal's conclusion, I need only find one counter-example, or one dumb person who has a college degree. Living in a college town (University of Virginia), there's no shortage of dumb people with college degrees. Neal should be able to testify also that there exist college graduates who are idiots.
I wouldn't hire Obama because of his 2001 statement of his disappointment that the Bill of Rights doesn't allow "redistributive justice" in addition to legal justice, a fundamental misunderstanding (perversion) of the Constitution. Here in Charlottesville in 2005, we had a well-known attorney (college graduate) say in writing that the Fifth Amendment states "public purpose" when that phrase does not appear in the amendment.
Shame on you, Royal. In this campaign, I've seen every kind of mud thrown at Sarah Palin.
Remember the night of her convention speech how the media kept saying Palin has no experience? And Newt Gingrich asked why they kept saying it when she has more leadership experience than Obama? That's why they were saying it...not because it was true, but because it was not true. They were using repetition to make the lie appear true.
There was religious bigotry when people badmouthed Palin for being a Christian who wanted to inject religion into politics. But it was Obama who used relgious terminology the night before election in a political speech ("Am I my brother's keeper?").
Of course there was a frenzy of discrimination based on creed. Creed is political viewpoint such as Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Communist, Green Party, etc. How many companies and organizations claim they don't discriminate on the basis of "religion, race, creed", etc. Why would they make these claims? Because it's Orwellian. These are the biggest lies they have so they repeat them often.
What about discrimination based on education? Do you want the smartest person or the person who can get the job done? Do you think Joe the Plumber would hire a Ph.D. to fix pipes? Jimmy Carter was a nuclear engineer. He was an expert in mathematics with letters (algebra). But we need someone who can add and subtract actual numbers.
Royal, do you really think booklearning is more important than ability and experience? Do you think absent-minded Albert Einstein, the smartest man in the world, would have made the best president?
Blair's Blog
http://super-blair.blogspot.com/
So-called journalists defended using the anonymous reports by saying the leakers were primary sources. But because the accounts were false and ridiculous, the sources want their identities withheld. So the media lost even more credibility (if that’s possible) by knowingly spreading unaccountable opinions of fictitious people. As if we don’t have a Constitutional amendment making it a felony to use anonymous accusations to destroy people. But alas, the media are held to a lower standard in the court of public opinion.
Sarah Palin Oct 13 at Richmond International Raceway(Nov. 6, 2008 Neal Boortz show on WINA)
I'd like to point out the logic behind [co-host] Royal's assertion that Sarah Palin is less smart than Barack Obama because Obama has a law degree from Harvard. Royal further said Palin started out in junior college and took seven years to earn a degree. Of course it took Obama eight years for his law degree (4 years undergrad, 4 years law school).
1. College degree means you're smart.
2. Obama has a college degree.
3. Therefore Obama is smart.
Corollary: The more college degrees, the smarter you are.
Logic template:
1. If A=B
2. and B=C
3. Therefore A=C
If (1) or (2) is false, then the conclusion is invalid. To disprove Royal's conclusion, I need only find one counter-example, or one dumb person who has a college degree. Living in a college town (University of Virginia), there's no shortage of dumb people with college degrees. Neal should be able to testify also that there exist college graduates who are idiots.
I wouldn't hire Obama because of his 2001 statement of his disappointment that the Bill of Rights doesn't allow "redistributive justice" in addition to legal justice, a fundamental misunderstanding (perversion) of the Constitution. Here in Charlottesville in 2005, we had a well-known attorney (college graduate) say in writing that the Fifth Amendment states "public purpose" when that phrase does not appear in the amendment.
Shame on you, Royal. In this campaign, I've seen every kind of mud thrown at Sarah Palin.
Remember the night of her convention speech how the media kept saying Palin has no experience? And Newt Gingrich asked why they kept saying it when she has more leadership experience than Obama? That's why they were saying it...not because it was true, but because it was not true. They were using repetition to make the lie appear true.
There was religious bigotry when people badmouthed Palin for being a Christian who wanted to inject religion into politics. But it was Obama who used relgious terminology the night before election in a political speech ("Am I my brother's keeper?").
Of course there was a frenzy of discrimination based on creed. Creed is political viewpoint such as Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Communist, Green Party, etc. How many companies and organizations claim they don't discriminate on the basis of "religion, race, creed", etc. Why would they make these claims? Because it's Orwellian. These are the biggest lies they have so they repeat them often.
What about discrimination based on education? Do you want the smartest person or the person who can get the job done? Do you think Joe the Plumber would hire a Ph.D. to fix pipes? Jimmy Carter was a nuclear engineer. He was an expert in mathematics with letters (algebra). But we need someone who can add and subtract actual numbers.
Royal, do you really think booklearning is more important than ability and experience? Do you think absent-minded Albert Einstein, the smartest man in the world, would have made the best president?
Blair's Blog
http://super-blair.blogspot.com/
posted by Blair at 11/15/2008 09:49:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home