CrabR Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 In her defense, does this mean "dumb", or "less than 40 years old"? a collage grad and and ran on national ticket then i would say dumb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 How do you feel about the "Spudnut Moment"? Do you feel that the Fed Govt needs to invest a coffee shop or two as opposed to alternative energy and mass transit? There's your problem. You fail to acknowledge Sarah's brilliant vision, which is not of America as a technology leader, but serving coffee to wealthy Chinese and Indian tourists. ---------- Post added January-30th-2011 at 10:58 AM ---------- Okay, I'm a college educated adult male. But what exactly makes this a sputnik moment? I think it was a far from perfect comparison, but it is a concept that at least can be debated. Sputnik genuinely shocked the world that someone could do something America couldn't. The growth of Chinese economic and technological prowess (Obama specifically mentioned high speed trains and computers) served to illustrate that someone else is ahead of us in important fields. And that maybe as a nation we have got complacent and think our problems are simply related to deficits. And that while we certainly need to manage the cost side much better, we need to look at boosting the economic engine to increase the top line too I'd certainly agree that Russia in 1957 is a very different 'enemy' to China in 2011. China represents a huge opportunity rather than someone intent on "burying" us, but the opportunity will come in serving that market through technological innovation, not through patriotic coffee shops. I'd hope we can agree that Sarah Palin's response was nothing short of idiotic and she should have been called out on it during the interview too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins Diehard Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 a collage grad and and ran on national ticket then i would say dumb Yes, I believe that we have established in this thread that everyone in this country, regardless of age, is raised to know what a "Sputnik Moment" is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRSmith Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 Yes, I believe that we have established in this thread that everyone in this country, regardless of age, is raised to know what a "Sputnik Moment" is Well if you do not understand what he meant probably best not to go on tv and make a fool of yourself and act immature, probably best to study up the subject and then given a grown up reposnse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metalhead Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 It's not awkward at all.What you have to do is realize that the Sputnik Moment was not anything Russian at all. Once you realize that, it isn't awkward anymore. The true meaning is the effect learning of Sputnik had on us. The "moment" wasnt when they launched it. It was when we realized they had, when we realized that they had achieved a possible strategic advantage that could shift global power. The comparison does make sense. If we don't get off our asses, economic power will shift, as if it has't already, and America can be left behind a new superpower. Same as then, the "moment" was when we realized if we didn't get off our asses, Russia could achieve a strategic advantage we could not overcome. ~Bang That's my point. I know what it is now. A phrase with a Russian name and achievement used to describe an American response and fervor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins Diehard Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 Well if you do not understand what he meant probably best not to go on tv and make a fool of yourself and act immature, probably best to study up the subject and then given a grown up reposnse Not talking about Palin...talking about people on this board. Probably would have been a good idea to use your speech writing staff to come up with a more exact analogy if you are going to use it to stir action from a country don't you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 Don't be too hard on O, this American exceptionalism cheerleading takes some getting used to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngestson Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 Yes, I believe that we have established in this thread that everyone in this country, regardless of age, is raised to know what a "Sputnik Moment" is No but reasonable people are raised to make sure and know what the hell they are talking about before going on national television making comments which could make them look like idiots. And if they do make themselves look foolish, to then understand it's their fault and not that of an evil force in the "Media". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 No but reasonable people are raised to make sure and know what the hell they are talking about before going on national television making comments which could make them look like idiots. And if they do make themselves look foolish, to then understand it's their fault and not that of an evil force in the "Media". I believe my favorite pre-interview question of all time came from an executive director during an economics piece about the safety net. She said, "Andrew, you're not going to make me sound stupid, are you?" and I remember looking at her and saying quite truthfully and kindly... "No, not unless you say something really, really funny" I think Palin is victimized by two factors... one she unwittingly says some really funny stuff and two she does a lot of "live" interviews. Regardless, I am often shocked by how unprepared she is for most interviews even friendly ones. Far too often, she makes softballs seem like 100 mph curve balls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins Diehard Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 No but reasonable people are raised to make sure and know what the hell they are talking about before going on national television making comments which could make them look like idiots. And if they do make themselves look foolish, to then understand it's their fault and not that of an evil force in the "Media". The only thing standing between the "reasonable people" that post on this board and Sarah Palin is audience and opportunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 That's my point. I know what it is now. A phrase with a Russian name and achievement used to describe an American response and fervor. All you had to do was listen to what Obama said right after he mentioned sputnik moment because he gave a concise explanation of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 The only thing standing between the "reasonable people" that post on this board and Sarah Palin is audience and opportunity. and ambition... perhaps drive too. I give Palin full marks for drive. She is self-created and has become very powerful and influential based on her own efforts and mechinations Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 Not talking about Palin...talking about people on this board. Probably would have been a good idea to use your speech writing staff to come up with a more exact analogy if you are going to use it to stir action from a country don't you think? It's been repeated a bunch in this thread that you didn't need to know what it was prior to the speech because Obama explained what it was in his speech. All you had to do was listen. Heck, his explanation was posted in here as well. Perhaps so many people know what the moment is/refers to because they listened to the speech? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 It's been repeated a bunch in this thread that you didn't need to know what it was prior to the speech because Obama explained what it was in his speech. All you had to do was listen. Heck, his explanation was posted in here as well. Perhaps so many people know what the moment is/refers to because they listened to the speech? Some know what it was and differ from his application of it.....but I'm sure they are just morons after all he explained it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 Some know what it was and differ from his application of it.....but I'm sure they are just morons after all he explained it The topic was people who don't understand the analogy. I also commented similarily to someone who sid they think people are in here claiming they know what a sputnik moment is and are lying. And really, some have just not understood the correct application of it despite it being clearly explained. Palin for example is not differing in its application, she is outright getting it wrong because she looks at it in terms of the effect on Russia, when it's about the effect on America. So other than that do you care to be more specific about the other applications of sputnik moment? Or how, after Obama explained it, you could interpret it any other way than as the effect on America? The vague one-liners are getting kind of old, and you know I'm generally open to discuss things with people I disagree with and I'm usually civil about it, so I don't need to be disparaged like you just did in your response, especially not from someone who has been posting off-topic one liners in here instead of addressing the points of those he responds to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 The topic was people who don't understand the analogy. Perhaps O didn't link the points of resemblance well enough to keep people from rejecting his analogy....which seems the case for more than Palin (as I have linked) A analogy rests on the strength of the linkage established and does not rule out a different one being applied...despite your protestations Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 Well, if you didn't understand the analogy you had three choices. 1, you could sit there and nod along pretending you understood it and totally missing the point 2, you could sit there not knowing what it is and assume that he's said something wrongbecause it sounds Russian, or 3, you could get up and google it and know what it means in about 30 seconds. And a lot of us don't even have to get up anymore. Use the phone in your pocket. But, I guess if someone talks about something you don't know about anymore, the response is to stone him for being a fancy pants intellectual know-it-all. Is we keepin' it real, y'all? ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 There is a difference between not understanding and understanding and rejecting a poor analogy. option 4 if you prefer However if you wish to limit your thinking to 3 feel free....I won't even accuse you of not comprehending 4 or more . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 Okay, I'm a college educated adult male. But what exactly makes this a sputnik moment? Are we competing with someone? WHo are we competing with/against? Do you guys realize that Sputnik happened under Eisenhower, and his response wasn't to just start throwing money at the problem?Those were my thoughts when I heard this Sputnik moment. Frankly, I think its a bad comparison to the times. You guys are welcome to disagree with me though. I thought the exact same thing. It was a bad comparison. Had Palin said exactly what you did I'd have agreed with her. But she didn't. She didn't even know what she was disagreeing with. If she's going to be a 'political analyst' or whatever she really should know this stuff, and it's not snobbish or elitist to think so. Just like it's not snobby to expect a football analyst to know the QB doesn't line up behind the left guard, regardless of how well the QB actually throws the ball. ---------- Post added January-30th-2011 at 04:56 PM ---------- There is a difference between not understanding and understanding and rejecting a poor analogy. Yes there is. Not understanding is Sarah Palin. Understanding and disagreeing is Veretax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oisn1 Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 There is a difference between not understanding and understanding and rejecting a poor analogy.option 4 if you prefer However if you wish to limit your thinking to 3 feel free....I won't even accuse you of not comprehending 4 or more . Exactly. You can disagree if we truly are in a "Sputnik Moment" and that seems worthy of consideration. But the definition of a Sputnik moment is pretty standard, as its taught in school. Here are two examples of people using the analogy before Obama's SOTU. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704156304576003871654183998.html http://blog.energy.gov/blog/2010/11/29/so-you-missed-secretary-chus-sputnik-moment-speech Palin didn't just disagree with the analogy, she didn't even understand it, which made for a flimsy rebuttal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 Yes there is. Not understanding is Sarah Palin. Understanding and disagreeing is Veretax. If you go beyond a clip to the whole interview it would appear she does both understand and reject http://nation.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/26/palin-obamas-state-union-sputnik-references-were-wtf-moments I do agree her own analogy was lacking as well though....is it just me or has her accent gotten worse? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRSmith Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 Not talking about Palin...talking about people on this board. Probably would have been a good idea to use your speech writing staff to come up with a more exact analogy if you are going to use it to stir action from a country don't you think? Not really since you are competing in a global economy and whichever country provides the best workforce, and infrastructure will draw jobs and investment and will innovate and lead in the future, hence why you had the AFL CIO and the chamber of commerce both push for more infrastructure spending ---------- Post added January-30th-2011 at 05:18 PM ---------- The only thing standing between the "reasonable people" that post on this board and Sarah Palin is audience and opportunity. I assume you are speaking for yourself, I think many here have a better understanding of the world and around them and history then she displays Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 There is a difference between not understanding and understanding and rejecting a poor analogy.option 4 if you prefer However if you wish to limit your thinking to 3 feel free....I won't even accuse you of not comprehending 4 or more . I'm sorry, but if someone understood the analogy, they'd realize that the"moment' was about America. The fact Princess Bimbo got that entirely backwards leaves the three, no matter how much anyone wants to gussy it up. She either completely misrepresented it, or didn't know what it meant in the first place. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 Not really since you are competing in a global economy and whichever country provides the best workforce, and infrastructure will draw jobs and investment and will innovate and lead in the future, hence why you had the AFL CIO and the chamber of commerce both push for more infrastructure spending Why are jobs and production going overseas then? Why are our students lagging despite more funding? Why is housing collapsing? Innovation and leading takes more than investment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 If you go beyond a clip to the whole interview it would appear she does both understand and rejecthttp://nation.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/26/palin-obamas-state-union-sputnik-references-were-wtf-moments Just for you I watched the whole thing. Sorry, I didn't see anything new there. Maybe you could point out the new context I'm missing? I do have to say I thought Greta was asking good questions, and some of Palin's answers, especially at the beginning, were totally reasonable. I do find it unfortunate that Palin didn't seem to think more civility in the national debate was a good idea. But that's for another thread, I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.