Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
Good we can agree that Palin has said some shockingly ignorant things...but I don't see Obama's remark on the "I can see Russia from my house" level or what ever she said.
The reality is that his remark was incomplete. It was not a policy position, it was a response to a question. To place it in a box is a deconstructive response not intended to further the debate.
The constructive action would be to ask what he really meant, which another reporter did and what I've posted above as Obama's response.
That's what you should be reacting to no?
-spence (super cool non-inflammatory poster here)
|
"The reality is that his remark was incomplete"
OK, so was Palin's comment about seeing Russia...she should have ended her comment with "if I'm looking thriough the Hubble telescope". Therefore, since it wasn't stupid but incomplete, you cannot use it against her. Sound reasonable?
His remark was not imcomplete. It was demonstrably false, it was erroneous, not incomplete.
"it was a response to a question"
So what? So was Dan Quayle when he mis-spelled potato or whatever mistake he made, and people held that against him. Spence, where is it written that you caan only judge Obama's intelligence by his ability to read things off his teleprompter, things that others wrote for him? Was Palin's comment about seeing Russia a response to a question? If so, you're saying that you won't use it against her?
If anything, his unscripted responses are much more revealing than his regurgitation of someone else's words, right?
"The constructive action would be to ask what he really meant" Hold on. You didn't ask Palin what she meant, you called her stupid for saying a stupid thing. Why can't you hold Obama to the same standard as Palin? Why can't Obama handle the same scrutiny? Why must we give Obama time to re-group, and then come back and tell us what he "meant to say"?
You're being very selective here, Spence. When Palin says something stupid, you take it to mean she's stupid. Fair enough. But when Obama says something equally stupid, you dismiss it, and instead give him a pass, because you'rs sure he really meant to say something eloquent and brilliant.
Do I have that right? IS that about right? You see nothing unfair in your system?