Organizing for America | Scholars for Obama: LOW INFORMATION CANDIDATE

LOW INFORMATION CANDIDATE

By Adoyo - Sep 12th, 2008 at 11:00 am EDT

Also listed in: 10 groups

Comments | Mail to a Friend | Report Objectionable Content

Tags: ABC Interview, bullshit, palin, responsibility

A little while ago, I claimed to be a LIV (low information voter) because, although I have followed the campaign and familiarized myself with the positions of the candidates, I make no claims to policy expertise or strategic experience. If you will recall, I said I chose my candidate primarily on ethical grounds: how concerned is he about the wellbeing of the citizenry and how respectful is he of its agency? I elected to leave the details of policy and governing (his natural purview) to him.

Then I saw this today: Charlie Gibson's interview with Sarah Palin. It forced me to revise my previous self assesment and focus on a different, less talked about player in the political arena:

THE LOW INFORMATION CANDIDATE

Exhibit A:

Palin's ABC Interview: Stumped On Bush Doctrine, Seems To Contradict McCain On Pakistan (VIDEO)

Unlike many academics, I don't believe that intelligence is equivalent to having facts on the tip of your tongue. I believe that intelligence is manifest in what you do with the information you have. In any case, you have to have the information to begin with and I believe that only the irresponsible or the arrogant don't bother with that basic step. And I don't think it matters how clever a person thinks they are, or how smart other people believe them to be - irresponsible arrogance only spells disaster.

You spend enough time with high school students, zealous undergrads and overwrought grad students and your BeeEss detector gets very finely calibrated. I had to go into emergency shutdown because of a systems overload while watching the tortured non-responses Gov. Palin rained down on the mercifully understated Mr. Gibson during the interview. I stll see O.M.G. flashing when I close my eyes.

Huff Po has some other editorials on the incident:

Sarah Palin's Charlie Gibson ABC Interview: Video And Transcript

Sarah Palin, The Bush Doctrine, and Why It's Smart To Be Dumb

I also recommend Harry Frankfurter's "On Bullshit", a compact essay on the nature of BeeEss. Here's an excerpt:

"It is impossible for someone to lie unless her thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true, and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off [...] He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose."

Cheers all
-Adoyo

Reader Comments	Comments RSS
Comments are closed for this post.

Which Bush Doctrine? | Report to Admin

By Taube Sep 13th 2008 at 10:16 am EDT (Updated Sep 13th 2008 at 10:16 am EDT)

Two analyses of the variations of the 'Bush Doctrine' over time:

Link

"In Gibson interview, Gov. Palin was right: There is no single clear meaning for "the Bush Doctrine""

and Charles Krauthammer, who coined the term "Bush Doctrine" at:
Link

September 13, 2008
Charlie Gibson's Gaffe
By Charles Krauthammer

"Ms. Palin most visibly stumbled when she was asked by Mr. Gibson if she agreed with the Bush doctrine. Ms. Palin did not seem to know what he was talking about. Mr. Gibson, sounding like an impatient teacher, informed her that it meant the right of `anticipatory self-defense.'"
-- New York Times, Sept. 12

WASHINGTON -- Informed her? Rubbish.

The Times got it wrong. And Charlie Gibson got it wrong.

There is no single meaning of the Bush doctrine. In fact, there have been four distinct meanings, each one succeeding another over the eight years of this administration -- and the one Charlie Gibson cited is not the one in common usage today. ...

Adoyo's post seems to prove that people see and hear what they want to hear, which is what many pundits have been saying about Gibson's interview with Sarah Palin.

As for me, I love the design of her house in Wasilla, and look forward to more of this smart, confident, brown-haired, eyeglass-wearing, not a lawyer, woman (identity politics at last!)

Re: Which Bush Doctrine? | Report to Admin

By Adoyo Sep 13th 2008 at 10:37 pm EDT (Updated Sep 13th 2008 at 10:37 pm EDT)

Wow! You seriously believe that Gov. Palin was thinking about the multifaceted evolution of the Bush Doctrine when she said "In what respect, Charlie?"

If you do, then you prove your own assertion that people see and hear what they want to hear.

I can agree that Mr. Gibson may have overplayed his hand. But if Gov. Palin had known what she was talking about, why did she not clarify and correct him? That would not only have been impressive, it would have better informed the rest of us.

What I saw and heard was someone who, on a number of topics, did not seem to really know what she was talking about and it did nothing for my confidence in her as a responsible candidate.

Gov. Palin is blessed to be endowed with the attributes for which you admire her. But is she prepared to be the Comnander in Chief's second in command? She is applying for an icredibly important job in the country and the citizens who are supposed to be evaluating her for that job have been given precious little time and information to properly assess her credectials and suitability.

For many of us, identity politics and physical demeanor is incidental - we know people like to root for folks who in some way appeal to their personal identities and disposition. What we seek, instead, is someone who knows their way around the issues, big and small, regardless of whether they fit some prescibed demographic category.

If you enjoyed the interview and felt it informed your choice favorably, good for you. It had the opposite effect on me.

Re: Which Bush Doctrine? | Report to Admin

By Adoyo Sep 14th 2008 at 12:43 pm EDT (Updated Sep 14th 2008 at 12:43 pm EDT)

PS. If it helps to hear it from someone else. here's Bob Herberts assessment of what the interview revealed:

She's not ready: Link

EXCERPT:

"For those who haven’t noticed, we’re electing a president and vice president, not selecting a winner on “American Idol.”

Ms. Palin may be a perfectly competent and reasonably intelligent woman (however troubling her views on evolution and global warming may be), but she is not ready to be vice president.

With most candidates for high public office, the question is whether one agrees with them on the major issues of the day. With Ms. Palin, it’s not about agreeing or disagreeing. She doesn’t appear to understand some of the most important issues."

You may alos like to take a look at Frank Rich's Column where he talks in terms of identity politics:

The Palin-Whatshisname Ticket : Link

EXCERPT:

The racial component to this brand of politics was undisguised in St. Paul. Americans saw a virtually all-white audience yuk it up when Giuliani ridiculed Barack Obama’s “only in America” success as an affirmative-action fairy tale — and when he and Palin mocked Obama’s history as a community organizer in Chicago.
[...]
The ultimate hypocrisy is that these woebegone, frightened opponents of change, sworn enemies of race-based college-admission initiatives, are now demanding their own affirmative action program for white folks applying to the electoral college. They want the bar for admission to the White House to be placed so low that legitimate scrutiny and criticism of Palin’s qualifications, record and family values can all be placed off limits. Byron York of National Review, a rare conservative who acknowledges the double standard, captured it best: “If the Obamas had a 17-year-old daughter who was unmarried and pregnant by a tough-talking black kid, my guess is if they all appeared onstage at a Democratic convention and the delegates were cheering wildly, a number of conservatives might be discussing the issue of dysfunctional black families."

Content on blogs in My.BarackObama represents the opinions of community members and in no way should be interpreted as endorsed or approved by the campaign.