International Cat Speculators Since 2006

Saw a few tweats on this the other day and wondered “what’s up with that?!?” – twitter being what it is, detail isn’t exactly forthcomming.

This is getting to be a familiar pattern, so much so that maybe we need a tag for this.  It goes like this.  First Sarah Palin says something perfectly reasonable, showing what I consider to be at least average intelligence and knowledge.  Then a liberal, being less knowledgeable than her on the subject at hand, mistakes his or her own ignorance as evidence of Palin’s stupidity and in the process manages to look stupid themselves.  I mean we have the “Party like its 1773” example, and Gawker’s previous snark fail.  And now we have Richard Wolffe.

You can watch on the link but basically on Chris Matthews’ show they first played a clip with Barbara Walters where she asked Palin what she read.  Palin says that she reads C.S. Lewis when she wants “divine inspiration.”  (And notice, she doesn’t specify which book or series of books she is talking about.)  Which leads Wolffe to snark, “Look, divine inspiration from a series of kids’s books?”  Going on:

The 1773 one was probably the most extraordinary. The fact that people assumed she had the wrong date of the American revolution (when she was of course referring to the original Tea Party) and didn’t even bother to check with google before they prounounced her stupidity says a lot about certain members of the media.

Actually, the Gawker one was also pretty funny, given they had failed to read their own links on the very law they were lecturing Palin on. Heh, costly mistake!


Comments on: "Palin “reads only Kids books”" (2)

  1. Just shows Wolfe to be ignorant.

    • Well, that’s the point. These people are so intent on making her look bad that they’re not thinking about what they’re saying and it backfires.

Comments are closed.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: