[[email protected]]

The other day I was watching Fox News (it's available on Sky TV here
in the UK), and the conservative host Sean Hannity was defending Sarah
Palin's credentials.

He stuck to the usual line about 'executive experience' as mayor of
Wasilla and governor of Alaska, and how she can relate to 'ordinary'
Americans. However, he followed this up with one comment that I found
very surprising.

He said that regarding policy issues - economic, defence, judicial,
foreign policy - she can 'learn' on the job. I'm not sure that any
intelligent person, regardless of political affiliation, would concur
with the assessment that this is a time in history for on-the-job
training for a potential president.

On a related matter, why are some Americans so hung up on the idea
that their presidents have to be 'ordinary'? The job is extraordinary
by definition, so why not require an extraordinary person for it?

If memory serves correctly, Tony Blair was much admired in the US (as
he was initially in the UK) for his eloquence and ability to
communicate.

Why then is the badge of education (presumably something every
American parent wants to give their child) treated with such disdain
by some political commentators? Isn't an education something to be
proud of?

Regards.

[Clyde Slick]

On 7 Oct, 06:16, wrote:
The other day I was watching Fox News (it's available on Sky TV here
in the UK), and the conservative host Sean Hannity was defending Sarah
Palin's credentials.

He stuck to the usual line about 'executive experience' as mayor of
Wasilla and governor of Alaska, and how she can relate to 'ordinary'
Americans. However, he followed this up with one comment that I found
very surprising.

He said that regarding policy issues - economic, defence, judicial,
foreign policy - she can 'learn' on the job. I'm not sure that any
intelligent person, regardless of political affiliation, would concur
with the assessment that this is a time in history for on-the-job
training for a potential president.

On a related matter, why are some Americans so hung up on the idea
that their presidents have to be 'ordinary'? The job is extraordinary
by definition, so why not require an extraordinary person for it?

If memory serves correctly, Tony Blair was much admired in the US (as
he was initially in the UK) for his eloquence and ability to
communicate.

Why then is the badge of education (presumably something every
American parent wants to give their child) treated with such disdain
by some political commentators? Isn't an education something to be
proud of?

Regards.

http://www.irwincorey.org/

[MiNe 109]

In article
,
wrote:

The other day I was watching Fox News (it's available on Sky TV here
in the UK), and the conservative host Sean Hannity was defending Sarah
Palin's credentials.

He stuck to the usual line about 'executive experience' as mayor of
Wasilla and governor of Alaska, and how she can relate to 'ordinary'
Americans. However, he followed this up with one comment that I found
very surprising.

He said that regarding policy issues - economic, defence, judicial,
foreign policy - she can 'learn' on the job. I'm not sure that any
intelligent person, regardless of political affiliation, would concur
with the assessment that this is a time in history for on-the-job
training for a potential president.

On a related matter, why are some Americans so hung up on the idea
that their presidents have to be 'ordinary'? The job is extraordinary
by definition, so why not require an extraordinary person for it?

If memory serves correctly, Tony Blair was much admired in the US (as
he was initially in the UK) for his eloquence and ability to
communicate.

Why then is the badge of education (presumably something every
American parent wants to give their child) treated with such disdain
by some political commentators? Isn't an education something to be
proud of?

The tactic worked for the Republicans in the 1950s and has remained in
the repertoire ever since. Google "Adlai Stevenson" and "pointy-headed"
for more.

Stephen

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 7, 5:16*am, wrote:
The other day I was watching Fox News (it's available on Sky TV here
in the UK), and the conservative host Sean Hannity was defending Sarah
Palin's credentials.

He stuck to the usual line about 'executive experience' as mayor of
Wasilla and governor of Alaska, and how she can relate to 'ordinary'
Americans. However, he followed this up with one comment that I found
very surprising.

He said that regarding policy issues - economic, defence, judicial,
foreign policy - she can 'learn' on the job. I'm not sure that any
intelligent person, regardless of political affiliation, would concur
with the assessment that this is a time in history for on-the-job
training for a potential president.

Especially given that McCain early on made such a big deal about his
experience. When thet message didn't resonate, he tried to steal
Obama's message of change.

There are people here who pass themselves off as journalists who are
puppets of the right wing in general, and therefore the republicans in
particular. Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Hugh Hewitt, and many others,
fall in this category. They preach the gospel to the adherents of that
philosophy ("the echo chamber"). The rest of us laugh at them.

On a related matter, why are some Americans so hung up on the idea
that their presidents have to be 'ordinary'? The job is extraordinary
by definition, so why not require an extraordinary person for it?

You'll note how the republicans, long known for their ties to the
wealthy and big business, are now talking about "hockey moms" and "joe
six-pack". There is nothing worse than being 'elitist'. Palin
dismissed the entire east coast of the US in her debate.

Trevor in Oz should note the demeanor of one of those religious
whackos who are against abortion in Palin. They seem to confuse him
and now he gets to see one up close.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

said:

[snip]
Why then is the badge of education (presumably something every[sic]
American parent wants to give their child) treated with such disdain
by some political commentators? Isn't an education something to be
proud of?

You Brits have had millennia to get used to your class system. I've heard
it said that in England especially, being "royal" is the stuff of dreams.
In America, the word has rather different connotations, mostly tending
toward snarkiness, if not downright snideness.

Anyhoo, politicians here have been exploiting class differences (as well
as racial ones) for generations. You know, of course, what makes a good
breeding ground for prejudice -- ignorance. And the best fertilizer to let
prejudice grow is isolation. Both are deeply entrenched in our history and
our national psyche. We even had a national political party once called
the Know-Nothings.

One last point: Your country has its share of ignoramuses and hooligans.
They get to vote in elections alongside the educated people. How do your
politicians reach the lower classes and persuade them to vote for their
candidates?

[[email protected]]

A good many of us here in the states are wondering the same thing.
If you figure it out, let us know. But you're right, I'm embarrassed to
agree that a lot of Americans wear their ignorance like a badge of honor.
I can only imagine what we look like right now to the rest of the world,
with Iraq, the economic crash, and Palin actually being seriously considered
for the Vice Presidency. We must look like absolute ignoramuses, and I'd
be hard-pressed to disagree.

wrote:
: Why then is the badge of education (presumably something every
: American parent wants to give their child) treated with such disdain
: by some political commentators? Isn't an education something to be
: proud of?

[Trevor Wilson[_2_]]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
...
On Oct 7, 5:16 am, wrote:


Trevor in Oz should note the demeanor of one of those religious
whackos who are against abortion in Palin. They seem to confuse him
and now he gets to see one up close.

**Huh?


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

[Clyde Slick]

On 7 Oct, 12:10, George M. Middius wrote:


One last point: Your country has its share of ignoramuses and hooligans.
They get to vote in elections alongside the educated people. How do your
politicians reach the lower classes and persuade them to vote for their
candidates?

http://tenthousanddays.blogspot.com/...er-in-jug.html

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 7, 4:43*pm, "Trevor Wilson"
wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in ...
On Oct 7, 5:16 am, wrote:

Trevor in Oz should note the demeanor of one of those religious
whackos who are against abortion in Palin. They seem to confuse him
and now he gets to see one up close.

**Huh?

You always seem to be asking about those who believe in creationism,
who oppose abortion, and so on.

Now you get to see one of them. Sarah Palin was chosen because she
appeals to those types.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Shhhh! said:

You always seem to be asking about those who believe in creationism,
who oppose abortion, and so on.
Now you get to see one of them. Sarah Palin was chosen because she
appeals to those types.

You betcha, goshdarnit!

[MiNe 109]

In article ,
MiNe 109 wrote:

Why then is the badge of education (presumably something every
American parent wants to give their child) treated with such disdain
by some political commentators? Isn't an education something to be
proud of?

If the OP is still out there, there's a book:

Richard Hofstadter, "Anti-Intellectualism in American Life" (1963)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-in..._American_Life

Stephen

[Annika1980]

On Oct 7, 6:16*am, wrote:

If memory serves correctly, Tony Blair was much admired in the US (as
he was initially in the UK) for his eloquence and ability to
communicate.

That's true, but then you gotta consider what we've been used to.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Annika1980 said:

That's true, but then you gotta consider what we've been used to.

Pay no attention to "Butch" here. He/she is on the Candie Cayne for
Presidentess committee.