Sarah Palin compares herself to Shakespeare

[Skybird]

Okay AVG, you convinced us: Palin is a brilliant intellectual, she is well in knowledge, wise, and truly educated. By being that, she truly attracts a huge crowd of people who are seeking right these qualities, and think she speaks their minds. That's what makes her a perfect representative of that crowd.

And that's why I avoid all that crowd alltogether. I just can't stand to be outsmarted by so many brilliant, shining people.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Okay AVG, you convinced us: Palin is a brilliant intellectual, she is well in knowledge, wise, and truly educated.

Next topic please.

No where did I say she was brilliant nor did I say she was well in knowlege, wise or truly educated. Please find that where I stated this. I simply stated she is on demand. No one here including yourself can provide a legitimate answer as to why. For the most part all we have thus far is she is a clown. For such a clown she is in the lime light all the time. Can anyone explain why? So please finish the topic before we move on.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

No where did I say she was brilliant nor did I say she was well in knowlege, wise or truly educated. Please find that where I stated this. I simply stated she is on demand. No one here including yourself can provide a legitimate answer as to why. For the most part all we have thus far is she is a clown. For such a clown she is in the lime light all the time. Can anyone explain why? So please finish the topic before we move on.

Why she is in demand, is very simple to anser: smple solutions for simple minds. The baudi8ence attracted by her is a mirror of her "qualities".

Lance said mookiemookie were a cynic in his comment. Lance is wrong here. mookiemookie brought it to the point. A comparable comment like his was on my lips - but I bit them.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Why she is in demand, is very simple to anser: smple solutions for simple minds. The baudi8ence attracted by her is a mirror of her "qualities".

Lance said mookiemookie were a cynic in his comment. Lance is wrong here. mookiemookie brought it to the point. A comparable comment like his was on my lips - but I bit them.

So now we are saying the people who gaither for these events that have Palin as a keynote speaker are simple? Or is it her qualities are the reason for the audience to attend? What might these qualities be? That she is a simple minded funny person and that is what America likes to see as Mookie would have it? All Mookie has done is side step the real reason people show up to hear Palin speak. It is not for a comedy show or a good laugh to be sure. It is people of like minds who apparently are simple minded that know no better according to you. In short, we are still in the mist as to why people show up. You say simple people. Mookie says it is a comedy of errors. Is it really?

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

So now we are saying the people who gaither for these events that have Palin as a keynote speaker are simple? Or is it her qualities are the reason for the audience to attend? What might these qualities be? That she is a simple minded funny person and that is what America likes to see as Mookie would have it? All Mookie has done is side step the real reason people show up to hear Palin speak. It is not for a comedy show or a good laugh to be sure. It is people of like minds who apparently are simple minded that know no better according to you. In short, we are still in the mist as to why people show up. You say simple people. Mookie says it is a comedy of errors. Is it really?

You get judged by the company you seek. If you seek the company of wolves, that probably is because you're wolf. If you seek the company of an idiot, it helps if you are an idiot yourself. If it walks like a duck, squawks like a duck and looks like a duck - it probably is a duck.

As you say so nicely in English: birds of same feather flock together. We have an eqivalent to that in German, but yours has the advantage of ryhmes.

A week ago, there was an essay in a German paper about the way those ten Russian spies hid in America by blending into it' s background, copying it's idols, using it's habits and adorable goals of it'S way of living for mimikry. That many of the characteristics of those spies - for example that good-looking woman who even took almost nude shots and behaved like a starlet or a glamour girl in order to blend into the cultural background of contemporary America - just served like a mirror in which America was to gaze at itself, was something that american media, as far as I have moinitored their coverage of the story, just missed completely.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Skybird

You get judged by the company you seek. If you seek the company of wolves, that probably is because you're wolf. If you seek the company of an idiot, it helps if you are an idiot yourself. If it walks like a duck, squawks like a duck and looks like a duck - it probably is a duck.

As you say so nicely in English: birds of same feather flock together. We have an eqivalent to that in German, but yours has the advantage of ryhmes.

Good point! However, being human nature as it is the focal point is always on blunders or acts of stupidity. This goes for all people in the media's eye. And that my friend is what sells good TV and newspapers.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Good point! However, being human nature as it is the focal point is always on blunders or acts of stupidity. This goes for all people in the media's eye. And that my friend is what sells good TV and newspapers.

Stupidity to me is a sociological, not a psychological symptom.

Three years ago, in a different context, I quoted this text by Bonhoeffer, a German resisting to the Nazis. His precise observation and conclusion is stunning, I agree with this text 100%, and always did.

Originally Posted by Skybird, August 2007

Bonhoeffer was an evangelic theologist participating in the resistance against Hitler. For his convictions he was arrested in 1943, and murdered in 1945. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dietrich_Bonhoeffer


Quote:
Dummheit ist ein gefährlicherer Feind des Guten als Bosheit. Gegen das Böse läßt sich protestieren, es läßt sich bloßstellen, es läßt sich notfalls mit Gewalt verhindern, das Böse trägt immer den Keim der Selbstzerstörung in sich, indem es mindestens ein Unbehagen im Menschen zurückläßt. Gegen die Dummheit sind wir wehrlos. Weder mit Protesten noch mit Gewalt läßt sich hier etwas ausrichten; Gründe verfangen nicht; Tatsachen, die dem eigenen Vorurteil widersprechen, brauchen einfach nicht geglaubt zu werden – in solchen Fällen wird der Dumme sogar kritisch -, und wenn sie unausweichlich sind, können sie einfach als nichtssagende Einzelfälle beiseite geschoben werden. Dabei ist der Dumme im Unterschied zum Bösen restlos mit sich selbst zufrieden; ja, er wird sogar gefährlich, indem er leicht gereizt zum Angriff übergeht. Daher ist dem Dummen gegenüber mehr Vorsicht geboten als gegenüber dem Bösen. Niemals werden wir mehr versuchen, den Dummen durch Gründe zu überzeugen; es ist sinnlos und gefährlich.
Um zu wissen, wie wir der Dummheit beikommen können, müssen wir ihr Wesen zu verstehen versuchen. Soviel ist sicher, daß sie nicht wesentlich ein intellektueller, sondern ein menschlicher Defekt ist. Es gibt intellektuell außerordentlich bewegliche Menschen, die dumm sind, und intellektuell sehr schwerfällige, die alles andere als dumm sind. Diese Entdeckung machen wir zu unserer Überraschung anläßlich bestimmter Situationen. Dabei gewinnt man weniger den Eindruck, daß die Dummheit ein angeborener Defekt ist, als daß unter bestimmten Umständen die Menschen dumm gemacht werden, bzw. sich dumm machen lassen. Wir beobachten weiterhin, daß abgeschlossen und einsam lebende Menschen diesen Defekt seltener zeigen als zur Gesellung neigende oder verurteilte Menschen und Menschengruppen.So scheint die Dummheit vielleicht weniger ein psychologisches als ein soziologisches Problem zu sein. Sie ist eine besondere Form der Einwirkung geschichtlicher Umstände auf den Menschen, eine psychologische Begleiterscheinung bestimmter äußerer Verhältnisse.
Bei genauem Hinsehen zeigt sich, daß jede starke, äußere Machtentfaltung, sei sie politischer oder religiöser Art, einen großen Teil der Menschen mit Dummheit schlägt. Ja, es hat den Anschein, als sei dies geradezu ein soziologisch-psychologisches Gesetz. Die Macht der einen braucht die Dummheit der anderen. Der Vorgang ist dabei nicht der, daß bestimmte – also etwa intellektuelle – Anlagen des Menschen plötzlich verkümmern oder ausfallen, sondern daß unter dem überwältigenden Eindruck der Machtentfaltung dem Menschen seine innere Selbstständigkeit geraubt wird und daß dieser nun – mehr oder weniger unbewußt – darauf verzichtet, zu den sich ergebenden Lebenslagen ein eigenes Verhalten zu finden. Daß der Dumme oft bockig ist, darf nicht darüber hinweg täuschen, daß er nicht selbstständig ist. Man spürt es geradezu im Gespräch mit ihm, daß man es gar nicht mit ihm selbst, mit ihm persönlich, sondern mit über ihn mächtig gewordenen Schlagworten, Parolen etc. zu tun hat. Er ist in einem Banne, er ist verblendet, er ist in seinem eigenen Wesen mißbraucht, mißhandelt. So zum willenlosen Instrument geworden, wir der Dumme auch zu allem Bösen fähig sein und zugleich unfähig, dies als Böses zu erkennen. Dadurch werden Menschen für immer zugrunde gerichtet werden können.
Dummheit ist ein gefährlicherer Feind des Guten als Bosheit. Gegen das Böse läßt sich protestieren, es läßt sich bloßstellen, es läßt sich notfalls mit Gewalt verhindern, das Böse trägt immer den Keim der Selbstzerstörung in sich, indem es mindestens ein Unbehagen im Menschen zurückläßt. Gegen die Dummheit sind wir wehrlos. Weder mit Protesten noch mit Gewalt läßt sich hier etwas ausrichten; Gründe verfangen nicht; Tatsachen, die dem eigenen Vorurteil widersprechen, brauchen einfach nicht geglaubt zu werden – in solchen Fällen wird der Dumme sogar kritisch -, und wenn sie unausweichlich sind, können sie einfach als nichtssagende Einzelfälle beiseite geschoben werden. Dabei ist der Dumme im Unterschied zum Bösen restlos mit sich selbst zufrieden; ja, er wird sogar gefährlich, indem er leicht gereizt zum Angriff übergeht. Daher ist dem Dummen gegenüber mehr Vorsicht geboten als gegenüber dem Bösen. Niemals werden wir mehr versuchen, den Dummen durch Gründe zu überzeugen; es ist sinnlos und gefährlich.
Um zu wissen, wie wir der Dummheit beikommen können, müssen wir ihr Wesen zu verstehen versuchen. Soviel ist sicher, daß sie nicht wesentlich ein intellektueller, sondern ein menschlicher Defekt ist. Es gibt intellektuell außerordentlich bewegliche Menschen, die dumm sind, und intellektuell sehr schwerfällige, die alles andere als dumm sind. Diese Entdeckung machen wir zu unserer Überraschung anläßlich bestimmter Situationen. Dabei gewinnt man weniger den Eindruck, daß die Dummheit ein angeborener Defekt ist, als daß unter bestimmten Umständen die Menschen dumm gemacht werden, bzw. sich dumm machen lassen. Wir beobachten weiterhin, daß abgeschlossen und einsam lebende Menschen diesen Defekt seltener zeigen als zur Gesellung neigende oder verurteilte Menschen und Menschengruppen.So scheint die Dummheit vielleicht weniger ein psychologisches als ein soziologisches Problem zu sein. Sie ist eine besondere Form der Einwirkung geschichtlicher Umstände auf den Menschen, eine psychologische Begleiterscheinung bestimmter äußerer Verhältnisse.
Bei genauem Hinsehen zeigt sich, daß jede starke, äußere Machtentfaltung, sei sie politischer oder religiöser Art, einen großen Teil der Menschen mit Dummheit schlägt. Ja, es hat den Anschein, als sei dies geradezu ein soziologisch-psychologisches Gesetz. Die Macht der einen braucht die Dummheit der anderen. Der Vorgang ist dabei nicht der, daß bestimmte – also etwa intellektuelle – Anlagen des Menschen plötzlich verkümmern oder ausfallen, sondern daß unter dem überwältigenden Eindruck der Machtentfaltung dem Menschen seine innere Selbstständigkeit geraubt wird und daß dieser nun – mehr oder weniger unbewußt – darauf verzichtet, zu den sich ergebenden Lebenslagen ein eigenes Verhalten zu finden. Daß der Dumme oft bockig ist, darf nicht darüber hinweg täuschen, daß er nicht selbstständig ist. Man spürt es geradezu im Gespräch mit ihm, daß man es gar nicht mit ihm selbst, mit ihm persönlich, sondern mit über ihn mächtig gewordenen Schlagworten, Parolen etc. zu tun hat. Er ist in einem Banne, er ist verblendet, er ist in seinem eigenen Wesen mißbraucht, mißhandelt. So zum willenlosen Instrument geworden, wir der Dumme auch zu allem Bösen fähig sein und zugleich unfähig, dies als Böses zu erkennen. Dadurch werden Menschen für immer zugrunde gerichtet werden können.


Translation:

Stupidity is a more dangerous enemy to the good than is evil. Against evil one can protest, it can be exposed, if necessary it can be prevented by the use of force, the evil always carries the seed of it's own self-destruction inside itself, in the way that it always, at least, leaves a certain uneasiness in man. But against stupidity we are defenseless. Neither protest nor violence can achieve something; reasons and arguments don't get thought about, facts that are contradicting one's own prejudice simply must not be believed - in such cases the stupid even becomes critical -, and if it cannot be avoided to accept them nevertheless, they get cleaned off the table as unimportant exceptions/isolated cases. At the same time the stupid, different to the evil one, is completely satisfied with himself; he even becomes dangerous by going on the attack when being irritated. Therefore, when dealing with the stupid, more caution is needed than when dealing the evil one. Never again we will try to convince the stupid by reasons and arguments, it is in vain, and dangerous.
In order to know how we could deal with stupidity, we need to understand it's essential nature. So much is sure: that it is not so much an intellectual deficit, but a human defect. There are very intellectual people, who are stupid, and there are people who intellectually are a bit slow, but in no way are stupid. to our surprise, we make this discovery on the occasion of certain situations, where we get the impression that stupidity is not so much an innate defect, but that under certain conditions humans are being made stupid, or rather allow to be turned into stupids. Further we observe that that isolated and lonely living people tend less often towards this defect, than people that tend to live or are forced to live in a more social and group-oriented manner. So, stupidity seems to be less a psychological and more a sociological problem. It is a special form of influence of historical conditions that affects man, a psychological inner concomitant of certain outer conditions. Looking closer at it, it becomes clear that every kind of outer display of power, wether it be of political or religious nature, makes a huge part of the people to be dumb , even more, it almost seems to be a sociological-psychological law. the power of the one - needs the stupidity of the other. the process is not that certain inherent predispositions suddenly get stunted, or fail completely, but that by the overwhelming impression of the display of power man gets stripped of his inner independence, so that from now on he - more or less subconsciously - declines to find his own behavior towards the emerging different challenges and situations of his daily life. That the stupid often is stubborn cannot hide the fact that he is lacking in independence. One almost feels it when talking with him, that one is not dealing with himself, but with catch-phrases and slogans. He is under a spell, he is blinded, in his own nature he is abused and mistreated. Being turned into a tool without will, the stupid is able to do all evil things, at the same time being unable to realise the evil in his deeds. In this way, man can be destroyed forever.

[Biggles]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

No where did I say she was brilliant nor did I say she was well in knowlege, wise or truly educated. Please find that where I stated this. I simply stated she is on demand. No one here including yourself can provide a legitimate answer as to why. For the most part all we have thus far is she is a clown. For such a clown she is in the lime light all the time. Can anyone explain why? So please finish the topic before we move on.

Maybe noone can give us an answer. I for one cannot see how she could draw so much attention, just like I still wonder to this day why the world decided that I had to know who Paris Hilton is...

Regarding the actual topic here....If Palin did compare herself to Shakespeare (I'm thoroughly confused by everything I've read of that link and in this thread) then I'd say that if she isn't stupid (which ofcourse is relative) then she is at the very least cocky. Anyone here read her book? If yes, do you think that it's of such quality that schoolchildren around the world will read, analyze and perform plays based on it 400 years from now? I very much doubt it to be honest.

No matter what you think of Palin, or what you think she is capable of, comparing her to Shakespeare is just...silly. Utterly silly. Not even Monty Python could make that up...

[Moeceefus]

Originally Posted by Biggles

No matter what you think of Palin, or what you think she is capable of, comparing her to Shakespeare is just...silly. Utterly silly. Not even Monty Python could make that up...

Who cares? Shakespeare is highly overrated anyways.

[Biggles]

Originally Posted by Moeceefus

Who cares? Shakespeare is highly overrated anyways.

Oh I agree! Those sonnets nearly became the end of me in English class last year...oooh the horror...but his influence cannot be ignored, nor the fact that we still read his work after several hundred years!

[Moeceefus]

Originally Posted by Biggles

Oh I agree! Those sonnets nearly became the end of me in English class last year...oooh the horror...but his influence cannot be ignored, nor the fact that we still read his work after several hundred years!

Who writes that doesn't have a Shakespearian like comparison in thier head afterwards? I'd say its the norm. Just like watching a kung fu movie and feeling like Bruce Lee afterwards.

[AVGWarhawk]

Maybe noone can give us an answer. I for one cannot see how she could draw so much attention, just like I still wonder to this day why the world decided that I had to know who Paris Hilton is...

Good point. However, sex sells and Hilton got the sex tapes and the suggestive commercials. She has the Hilton fortune to back her tomfoolery.

What is Palin selling?

[Biggles]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Good point. However, sex sells and Hilton got the sex tapes and the suggestive commercials. She has the Hilton fortune to back her tomfoolery.

What is Palin selling?

Well...as I think someone mentioned earlier, Palin has been regarded as good looking by the press a number of times (I for one cannot see why, but that's me). And well, she does get attention and headlines, thus organizations and companies that crave attention might be interested in her. Now the real problem is to explain why she gets attention...well I know I sure as hell raised an interested (and disbelieved) eyebrow when I heard her talking about how close she lived to Russia and that she could actually see it from her home...

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Biggles

Well...as I think someone mentioned earlier, Palin has been regarded as good looking by the press a number of times (I for one cannot see why, but that's me).

Oh I certainly think that she is attractive. I also happen to think that she is an idiot.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Who the hell is Paris Hilton?