Sorry. That decision was made some time ago. As for Palin -- and you, apparently -- I'm guessing you didn't think to write your talking points on your hand. Also, these were apparently not talking points, but rather the areas to be covered in the fake Q & A that followed the speech. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

And just to be clear, given everything we know about Palin to date -- her answers to various questions, her statements on the issues of the day -- would you be so kind as to give us the benefit of your opinion regarding her intellectual capabilities? Frankly, I'm curious, again, given the available evidence, what kind of assessment you would make.

This should be fun.

“Two clichés make us laugh but a hundred clichés move us, because we sense dimly that the clichés are talking among themselves, celebrating a reunion." - Umberto Eco

The problem isn't "jotting down talking points."

So, remember when we had that whole "Obama = teleprompter" thing? That was really stupid, right? Because politicians run themselves ragged every day, and it's more than reasonable for them to need memory support to keep on message and articulate. Separate from that, there was never any sense that Obama didn't know the stuff. His teleprompter usage, which was kind of amusing in its ubiquity, was obviously a mnemonic.

The thing with Palin is funny because it has so many layers of stupid in it. Firstly, Palin is extremely stupid and doesn't know what she's talking about in general. So anything that feeds into that is going to be funny. Secondly, she's in front of thousands of people and national cameras. Maybe she could break out the somewhat more impressive "index card" technology? Third, she had three talking points, and the "Budget tax cuts" line was so gloriously Conservative Stupid* that it was just hilarious.

At some point, you gotta laugh rather than cry. Because the implication is that conservatism actually was this deeply based around being moronic the whole time. Of course, that's true -- McCarthy was no genius, nor was Dear Leader -- but it's something which has been impolite to discuss. So there's a lot of tribal catharsis going on in the liberal tribe. We're finally allowed to say what's been true the whole time, because it's finally so obvious that it can't be denied.

*Because budgeting is hard, but saying tax cuts? That's easy, right?

somehow other politicians manage to do this. Seems to be part of the basics of the job.

'Keeping track of a few talking pts.' is a bit of a euphemism for writing them on your hand, crossing one of them out, and peaking at them on CNN when getting asked pre-arranged questions.

But there's not much more to say on the matter, so I'll leave it.

but it's not like she said anything coherent on any of those topics at any time.

This wasn't an index card with a list of topics she wanted to be sure to hit. This was three topics, and one of them was "Budget Tax Cuts" I mean, good Lord. Can you find a more full encapsulation of how stupid conservatism is in this country than a woman who can't remember that she isn't supposed to mention the budget during a big deficit year, but supposed to stick to Tax Cuts? A stupid person who can't remember a stupid talking point which supports a stupid policy. It's just so . . . conservative. Palin. Conservative.

I can easily see how someone would be put off by her policy stances, but this particular episode seems a bit trivial.

"We should not tie the hands of law enforcement in the effort to bring these terrorists to justice"- Leon E. Panetta

How far does your arrogance go?

If you can't answer simple, prepared, questions on TV w/out staring at your hand, then you probably shouldn't go into national politics.

I don't expect to run for office and not be able to answer simple Qs I've seen in advance w/out peeking at my hand.

Ever seen that move by any other politician ever? I haven't and I'm thinking there's a reason.

This is a case where you're being so open-minded your brain's slipping out.

You are misunderstanding me.

If I had to commit to two "prognostications" for this country's coming decade --bearing in mind I was certain the Colts would win last night--it is for more of the same; ever-more amateurish inexperienced presidents, ever-worse joblessness and economic stagnation, coupled with our somehow managing to blunder through it all anyway.

What I will repeat, once again, is that by constantly attacking Palin--especially for things her base finds human and identifies with--the media and the lefty blogs are helping to elect her. Ignoring her would have been a far better strategy from the start. Instead, they (since apparently this does not include you) may have to live for some time to come with the cartoon they've helped create. Just as they did with Reagan. And by extension, Bush.

You are attacking me for simply pointing to an historical parallel--a recent one. I'd hate to think it's personal, since you're one of my favorite people here.

but "still making" is explicitly directed at a commenter, and this "masked profanity" business is Palinesque.

I appreciate the link. Thanks, Mr. Bird.

Not only was he beaten to the punch by a lefty, but BD had to cite a liberal site.

I didn't realize I was being controversial. If you ask for a cite, you will get one of three things:

1) Incomprehension for the request,
2) A citation which clearly proves the conservative poster to be completely in the wrong, or
3) A link to an obviously mendacious website.

I suppose we can include (1A), which is "a link to a liberal website after a liberal has already taken care of it for you."

That's because conservatives and liberals, as cultures, have vastly different ideas of what constitutes "facts," "arguments," and "support." As BD shows above with regard to the PRs, all of these things mean "something we do until a conservative gets angry."