Tuesday, April 27, 2010


A little background first. Sarah Palin blew into Eugene last Friday to speak at a Republican fund raiser. Attendees were searched before entering to make sure they didn’t have cell phones, cameras or recording devices. The media were confined a separate room and weren’t allowed access to her speech. Any questions from those in attendance had to be submitted ahead of time for pre screening. Her reported take from the gate? A cool $75.000. It’s reported that the party, not Palin paid for first class plane tickets and first class accommodations during her stay.

Ever read a letter to the editor in the paper that leaves you wondering WTF? We’ve got one of these in the local paper today. And I quote in part:

…Why do so many “tolerant” liberals hate Sarah Palin, especially those of the female persuasion? Here’s a little test you can do to make this phenomenon quite easy to understand. Take a photograph, any photograph, of Sarah Palin and put it in front of you. Then take a photograph of a liberal woman, any liberal woman, and put it beside the first picture.

OK? Got it? I rest my case?

John Wilson/Veneta

I’m still trying to decide if this letter is really a joke in disguise. It’s not like liberals or conservatives have a big “L” or “C” tattooed on our foreheads to tell us apart.

So where to start? I haven’t met anyone who actually hates Sarah Palin. I do know there are many people, including me, who question her qualifications to hold any elective office. I suspect that cameras were banned to keep any more pictures of Sarah’s “handy” crib notes. And questions were probably prescreened to avoid any more founding fathers fiascos.

And what would a possible picture collection prove? That she has big hair and a big smile? That she’s younger than Hillary Clinton? I did some Googling and some collages. I don't know who put them together but the pictures of the liberals are tabloid type shots, fairly unattractive. The conservatives look like fairly professional shots. Nice makeup, good lighting etc. Nobody had a "C" or and "L" on their foreheads though. Some folks with too much time on their hands I suspect. And extra memory on their computers that they're willing to waste.

Honest, it really is a coincidence that Sarah is in red and Hillary is in blue. I was looking for shots that were about the same size, lighting and make up.


Lisa :-] said...

Oh...I SEE. the whole Sarah Palin phenomenon is about MEN thinking the best qualification for a woman (in ANY job, apparently) is how easy she is on the eyes.


Did I say "ICK?"

JACKIE said...

Yes, you said ICK! Too which I heartily agree. Along with a few other modifiers unsuitable for a semi family blog. LOL

alphawoman said...

I don't hate Sarah, I just dislike her intensly. And it may have a lot to do with her credentials resting on her looks. I just hate that this is how the world operaties. The pretty girl gets the job regardless of experience and talent. The younger girl is given the job on NBC and older Jane Pauley is tossed aside like yesterdays garbage...oh, I'm just rambling.

JACKIE said...

You may be rambling, but you're also right.

It also bugs me that the former governor of Alaska seems to have the curiosity of a rock. She seems to be happy with what she knows, or thinks she knows and shows no desire to expand on that.

That and the "death panel" thing. If she was mistaken, it's her responsibility to get the correct information. If she knows she's wrong on this subject (and any other) and keeps putting out wrong information; then she's a liar. And we have enough of those running things already.

Lisa :-] said...

"If she knows she's wrong...and keeps putting out wrong information"--she's perfect for Fox News. Evidently a perfect resume point for them, because they hired her...

Cynthia said...

I can't add anything here, so just let me ditto everything -- Everything -- y'all said.