|Baldr - 2010-11-25 |
This one isn't that bad. It's obvious from the context of her previous sentence that she at least knows which one is which.
I don't think that the previous sentence suggests that she knows the difference. If anything it suggests just the opposite.
"Well north Korea... this is stemming from a greater problem when we're all sitting around asking oh no what are we going to do and we're not having a lot of faith that the white house is going to come out with a strong enough policy to um sanction what it is that north Korea is gonna do, this speaks to a bigger picture here that it certainly scares me in terms of our national security policies but obviously we've got to stand with our north Korean allies..."
then she is corrected. then she corrects herself. she made the mistake twice, not once. perhaps she does know the difference, but that is not demonstrated in this clip.
She's talking about sanctioning North Korea, which pretty well indicates that the second part was a misplaced word and not a cognitive failure. This isn't any worse than when Barack Obama misspoke and said he'd visited fifty-seven states instead of forty-seven. Remember how retarded it was when conservative wingnuts said it was an obvious indicator that he didn't know how many states there were?
Sarah Palin obviously doesn't have what it takes to be president, but when you turn a misplaced word into an accusation of gross incompetence, you're playing into the tea party narrative where liberals try to catch her on every slip of the tongue and turn it into something it's not. This directs attention away from the actual retarded shit she has said and done.
No she isn't talking about sanctioning N. Korea. She is parroting talking points. She also fucked this up. nt
I think the trouble is that word sanction has two almost contradictory meanings.
Given the sentence, I'm inclined to think she meant approve/support as opposed to penalize, because she's talking about what they're gonna do.At best I think the sentence is ambiguous.
As for your second argument, I don't think I disagree with you in any way; I'm just poking fun at the lady because it tickles me to do so. Happy Thanksgiving.
You raise a good point, Tameriaen; I hadn't thought of it that way.
|Konversekid - 2010-11-25 |
She can`t even put together a string of conservative talking points and incredibly underdeveloped answers correctly.
|Comeuppance - 2010-11-25 |
These stars are for her ability to say so many words without actually saying anything.
|delicatessen - 2010-11-25 |
But what of West Korea, Governor Palin?????
|StanleyPain - 2010-11-25 |
Which Korea is your favorite?
ALL OF THEM!
Testicles of Doom
"Just name one, just name a Korea you like."
"I.... like... all of them, all the koreas, yeah."
|Old_Zircon - 2010-11-25 |
N.B. at the very end she calls it "North KORINA"
|TimidAres - 2010-11-25 |
Ladies and gentlemen, the next president of the United States, GOP Puppet.
|roscar - 2010-11-26 |
The word slip up is the least stupid part of that whole conversation.
If you're going to attack her, their is plenty of real things to do it with.
|Nyms Lives! - 2010-11-26 |
I came in ready to believe it was a slip of the tongue, but I agree with Tameriaen here. Whenever I've heard "sanction X's actions" it's always been in context of approval of. Whenever I've heard the word used in a negative way, it's been "sanctionS AGAINST"
But this is Sarah Palin. I wouldn't put it past her to use "sanction" that way. She expressed concern that the sanction wouldn't be "strong enough", which is language you'd use in terms of sanctions AGAINST. It really could go either way.
Trying to find sense in what Sarah Palin says is like trying to see the illusion in a magic eye puzzle that's actually just a piece of wallpaper.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|