I never saw an example of Sarah Palin thinking for herself. Give me examples, pleasee.

Now hold on a minute. How would you actually demonstrate that?

the true conservative:

How would you actually demonstrate that?

She could have answered a question in one of her news conferences personal appearances instead of insisting on "talking to the American people" by delivering her bumper sticker slogans. I won't ask for much. Just give me one example.

I was 20 feet away from her during a campaign appearance where I work. They had groups of "volunteers" practicing their chants while they were screening the locals who actually wanted to see her. Right before the candidate was escorted into the enclosure, the chanters were brought in to generate "spontaneous excitement" among the crowd.

She has an interesting and brilliant (in its own way) career. She got elected mayor and then governor by injecting emotional hot-button voter issues (abortion and gay marriage) into races which are usually decided on a much more collegial basis (discussing police coverage, street repair, and economic development). If she can learn the issues and learn to speak and learn to answer questions with at least the appearance of sincerity (I don't expect more than that from politicians of any type) she could be a formidable candidate. She was out of her depth as a candidate for VP.

This does not prove that she cannot think for herself - this only proves that, well, that you did not like her answers. Can YOU start thinking for yourself, and start distinguishing between "thinking for oneself" and agreeing with you?

The guy blindly repeats liberal talking points. Not a single original idea EVER comes from him. And the liberals fall all over him.

As you said, Obama represents the worst of this country.

Where does someone who gets up in the morning and pledges allegiance to Rush Limbaugh get the preposterous notion to accuse other people of not thinking for themselves?

A wink, a giggle, and a blank stare are answers? If that's the case, then hell no, I don't like them. Not a bit.

a man hardly read a book in his life, has no idea how many states there are in the US, never heard of economic theory -

Gringo, where the hell did you get that "information"?

When you say, "a man....," I guess you are referring to President Obama and are not being jocular or baiting people for some reason so I ask you this. How do you think the man became the Presidnet of Harvard Law Review, no less a Harvard graduated, bared lawyer wihtout reading a book or two?

cute

She could have answered a question in one of her news conferences personal appearances instead of insisting on "talking to the American people" by delivering her bumper sticker slogans. I won't ask for much. Just give me one example.

She did. Problem is, she was edited to be made to look clueless. See for yourself.

<link>

She did give a better answer than a smirk and a wink. Good example. We could argue the adequacy and clarity issues on her response but that's not what I asked for,. You have provided what I asked for. Good job.

Simply not true. The story of Darwin's supposed 'deathbed conversion' have been so thoroughly refuted and repudiated, that the only possible conclusion left is that you have been....well, propagandized.

On the contrary, I suggest that Sarah Palin MUST think for herself. When she was asked what magazines or journals or newspapers she reads to keep up on current events, she hilariously answered 'All of them', but then could not cite a single one. Since she does not read, any thoughts that appear in her head must come from either the 'ether', or from the convolutions of her own brain. Sarah Palin's problem is that she thinks for herself....much too much. She does not inform herself with fact-based material and/or careful analysis.

Maybe she reads Varmint Hunters' Digest.

ophymirage

although I only read your rant I find it quite interesting. Athough I do enjoy the "action" movies I guess that makes me not an intellectual. I also do not read many of the books you say you read. But then I do not find self worth in being something other than myself.

I do agree that many people do not think much any more (or better stated do not think like I do). Who is better? Assigning worth is a major problem. There are times you need to assign worth but the way you seem to be doing it is nothing more than I am better than you.

Intellectuals, such as what we see in many colleges obtain and retain their whole self worth from being that expert, that intellectual. How much time have you spent on understanding good research? How much shit research is out there, much in the name of a person showing how much he knows. Many time this research is lacking and the points that are lacking are either ingonored (left out completely) or because of the ignorance of the research not mentioned (could be any number of other reason).

I am with you in that I believe people do not think enough. They are in a instant gradification mode. Some maybe lazy (I know I am that at times). But to rant how the intellectuals are under attack? You do not have to watch that TV and judging by your post you do not. That TV thing would also include the news btw. Talk about information full of bias but that is for another post.

Good luck with all that reading...but I would be a bit skeptical of any research you read. One last point, who judges what is correct/good/important to read? Surely not you or I.

If you're not, thanks for giving me a laugh. The top post had it exactly and you have just proved her point.

Can't be an intellectual without basic facts. You're absolutely safe.