But, for some reason, America’s pseudo-avant garde dominatrix keeps trying to start the engine, including with the latest installment of her semi-infantile and more than semi-delusional paeans to Sarah Palin.
Who knows? Given both Camille Paglia and Sarah Palin, maybe they’re in the midst of a torrid lesbian relationship.
Showing posts with label Paglia (Camille). Show all posts
Showing posts with label Paglia (Camille). Show all posts
December 10, 2008
November 12, 2008
Paglia gets Obama concerns right, Palin fluffing wrong
Camilla Paglia says the media blew it for not giving a serious look at Wiliam Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. I agree.
I, too took more than a cursory glance at Ayers, and at the Woods Foundation. Some of the culture-specific educational programs it funded, while not quite as far as, say, an Ebonics Academy, were iffy enough that they should have been easy-picking low-hanging fruit for McCain.
The failure to capitalize reflects more on the ineptitude of his campaign staff than him in person in debates, though. All they had to do was pull up a list of grant recipients made while Obama was also on the board, and had McCain read through a few of them, in the form of rhetorical questions: “Sen. Obama, do you support … “ (If you haven’t actually done reading for yourself about Ayers, or Dohrn, Paglia has more on the top of the jump page.)
The reality is that Obama and other board members, like most nonprofit boards, probably rubber-stamped a lot of grants.
But, then, McCain could have gone after Obama for lack of involvement, and related issues.
That was the opening on Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
IIRC, Obama talked about praising Jesus “every Sunday” at Trinity.
Well, re his claims to have never heard stuff like that out of Wright, that would make him either:
• A massive liar about hearing difficulty, or
• A similar liar about his comprehension level, or
• A whopper-teller about his memory skills, or
• Ditto on the frequency of church attendance, or
• A champion-level Sunday morning pew sleeper.
I suspect the answer is a mix of points three and four. Which of those two is greater, I’m not sure.
I don’t doubt that Obama “fluffed” his church attendance to some degree. That in turn makes me wonder how much he’s committed to expanding Bush’s faith-based principles for reasons of faith, how much for reasons of campaign politicis, and how much for yet other reasons.
This is an issue that McCain could better have handled through 527 surrogates rather than personally.
Anyway, so far, so good from Paglia.
But then, turn the cyberpage, and read down a little bit, it’s off the deep end she goes.
Comparing Sarah Palin to John Edwards? Puhleeze. You know it's about more than abstract "experience," but knowledge and a willingness to learn.
And, to claim this was ultimately all about Palin’s pro-life issues is more ridiculous yet.
So, Ms. Paglia, if you wrote this part of the column even after Palin’s “Africa is a country” statement became public, well, you've reached a new low in some sort of po-mo idiocy.
I, too took more than a cursory glance at Ayers, and at the Woods Foundation. Some of the culture-specific educational programs it funded, while not quite as far as, say, an Ebonics Academy, were iffy enough that they should have been easy-picking low-hanging fruit for McCain.
The failure to capitalize reflects more on the ineptitude of his campaign staff than him in person in debates, though. All they had to do was pull up a list of grant recipients made while Obama was also on the board, and had McCain read through a few of them, in the form of rhetorical questions: “Sen. Obama, do you support … “ (If you haven’t actually done reading for yourself about Ayers, or Dohrn, Paglia has more on the top of the jump page.)
The reality is that Obama and other board members, like most nonprofit boards, probably rubber-stamped a lot of grants.
But, then, McCain could have gone after Obama for lack of involvement, and related issues.
That was the opening on Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
IIRC, Obama talked about praising Jesus “every Sunday” at Trinity.
Well, re his claims to have never heard stuff like that out of Wright, that would make him either:
• A massive liar about hearing difficulty, or
• A similar liar about his comprehension level, or
• A whopper-teller about his memory skills, or
• Ditto on the frequency of church attendance, or
• A champion-level Sunday morning pew sleeper.
I suspect the answer is a mix of points three and four. Which of those two is greater, I’m not sure.
I don’t doubt that Obama “fluffed” his church attendance to some degree. That in turn makes me wonder how much he’s committed to expanding Bush’s faith-based principles for reasons of faith, how much for reasons of campaign politicis, and how much for yet other reasons.
This is an issue that McCain could better have handled through 527 surrogates rather than personally.
Anyway, so far, so good from Paglia.
But then, turn the cyberpage, and read down a little bit, it’s off the deep end she goes.
Comparing Sarah Palin to John Edwards? Puhleeze. You know it's about more than abstract "experience," but knowledge and a willingness to learn.
And, to claim this was ultimately all about Palin’s pro-life issues is more ridiculous yet.
So, Ms. Paglia, if you wrote this part of the column even after Palin’s “Africa is a country” statement became public, well, you've reached a new low in some sort of po-mo idiocy.
August 15, 2008
Camille Paglia despairs of Obama — including sounding TOO black
She throws a bit of everything into her worry bin.
First, Obama is like short-term FBI head L. Patrick Gray:
Next, he’s not playing his campaign strategy cards correct. (I agree.)
Then, contrary to Toby Keith and Ralph Nader, he sounds too black, or too young urban black, at least:
Paglia then claims she’s not surprised Hillary Clinton is still lurking, but says most of her votes weren’t actually for her, but for a dropped out “other,” without Paglia naming names.
Well, that’s stupid, just stupid, Camille. More stupid by far than the Obama is talking too black idea.
With all that wingers had already put Hillary through, many of her voters were just as “core,” if not more so, than Obama’s.
Just like the stereotypical self-hating Jew, liberal(ish?) female pundits and commentators who feel obliged to diss Hillary Clinton come off as self-hating women, almost.
First, Obama is like short-term FBI head L. Patrick Gray:
Obama is twisting slowly, slowly in the wind like a tempting piñata for right-wing cudgels.
Next, he’s not playing his campaign strategy cards correct. (I agree.)
Then, contrary to Toby Keith and Ralph Nader, he sounds too black, or too young urban black, at least:
A major gaffe this summer has been that, in trying to act more casual and folksy to appeal to working-class white voters, Obama has resorted to a cringe-making use of inner-city black intonations and jokey phrasings — exactly the wrong tactic.
Paglia then claims she’s not surprised Hillary Clinton is still lurking, but says most of her votes weren’t actually for her, but for a dropped out “other,” without Paglia naming names.
Well, that’s stupid, just stupid, Camille. More stupid by far than the Obama is talking too black idea.
With all that wingers had already put Hillary through, many of her voters were just as “core,” if not more so, than Obama’s.
Just like the stereotypical self-hating Jew, liberal(ish?) female pundits and commentators who feel obliged to diss Hillary Clinton come off as self-hating women, almost.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)