Yes, we know. Substance should matter, not appearnce. Yet,

[question everything]

can anyone, even the most rabid RWers, imagine listening to that screech coming out of Palin's mouth for four years? Can they, really?

[lapfog_1]

1. Also, and there again too... - n/t

[chaplainM]

2. That screech IS the substance! n/t

[JeanGrey]

3. Apparently fifty million did.

[question everything]

5. Oh they did it during the campaign when it was just big party for them

but day in and day out for four years? From a bunch of backwards who, either way, think that a woman's place is in the "home?"

[JeanGrey]

6. I hope not.

[uppityperson]

4. but she's so hawt!!!!!!!!!!!

:sarcasm:

[Honeycombe8]

7. Yes. They love her. Read Freeperville for awhile, and you'll see.

She can do no wrong, in the right wingnut opinion.
In fact, I think they consider her ignorance an ASSET. Remember that that's the party that denigrates the "elitist academia" (those with an education).

Their little minds think, "Hey, she's stoopid. Just like me! A regular person!"

[polichick]

8. They'll put her on mute and focus on their woodies. ;)

[Orsino]

9. Appearance is the substance, in the case of Palin.

The screech is irrelevant.

[alcibiades_mystery]

10. The greatest fraud of Western thought is the distinction between substance and appearance

It's a completely artificial distinction in practice. The worst holdover of Platonism.

The sophists were right. What's ironic is that the Susan Boyle episode actually confirms the artificiality of the distinction, since her appearance" is completely entangled with the so-called "substance" of her performance when it comes to reception.

[biopowertoday]

11. I do believe

the OP gets a bit of thrill each time the OP condemns her.

[rvablue]

12. When Shuster played the clip last night, I once again found myself yelling at the TV.

Hearing her yap again, even for a few minutes, was like a bad flashback.