Colleen Shogan
I wonder how often she was called horse face?
Posted on 09/22/2022 10:46:43 AM PDT by Red Badger
VIDEO AT LINK...................
Missouri GOP Senator Josh Hawley grilled Colleen Shogan, President Biden’s nominee to lead the National Archives and Records Administration, noting that she had written a paper he said disparaged every two-term Republican president since World War II.
Hawley’s questions came during a Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing on Wednesday.
“You have talked in today’s hearings so far and in your pre-hearing Q&A about how much it’s important to be a non-partisan leader, correct?” Hawley began. “And so if you’re confirmed, you will attempt to stay politically neutral in your decision making, is that fair to say?”
Shogan assented.
Hawley then brought up an article Shogan had written titled, “Anti-Intellectualism in the Modern Presidency: Republican Populism.” In the 2007 article, published by the American Political Science Association, Shogan wrote of Republican presidents Dwight Eisenhower, Ronald Reagan, and George W. Bush, saying that their “leadership posturing place them on the explicitly anti-intellectual side of the spectrum.”
“Do you consider this piece to be non-partisan?” Hawley asked.
“I consider it to be an academic article publication 16, 17 years ago, a scholarly piece,” she answered.
Hawley noted that Shogan had said modern GOP presidents had adopted an anti-intellectual posture and asked her how to define such a phrase.
“The ability so speak in very plain, common-sense terms to Americans,” Shogan replied.
In the article, she wrote, “Republicans tend to exhibit anti-intellectual qualities. Democrats coalesce on the intellectual tail of the continuum.”
In relation to this, Hawley asked, “So is your point that Republicans are stupid and Democrats are intellectual?”
Shogan argued she did not mean that, but then followed by saying that the three GOP presidents had a “rhetorical connection with the American people.”
“A rhetorical connection that you say is anti-intellectual and you feature every two term Republican president since Dwight Eisenhower,” Hawley noted. “It’s a piece on rhetoric, but you attribute part of the ‘anti-intellectualism’ of the Republican party, to in your words, to the rise of the religious Right. Because those voters are stupid?”
She disagreed with that characterization.
“You wrote an article saying basically that Republican voters are stupid, that Republican presidents deliberately appeal to anti-intellectualism,” Hawley pointed out with anger. “You roll it all up in this thing called Republican populism, yet you’re trying to present yourself here as a non-partisan. In fact, you’re an extreme partisan. … You’re someone who has denigrated Republican presidents; every two-term Republican president … since the Second World War and their voters.”
Hawley explained the importance of Shogan’s apparent partisan bias, obliquely referring to the FBI raid on former President Trump’s Mar-A-Lago home.
“This is not just a theoretical set of questions, because as you know, we have seen what happens when you have political activists in a position that you are up for confirmation for. And we are living through that as a nation right now,” he said.
“We are living through the weaponization, the political weaponization of the National Archives; the political weaponization of the Department of Justice; the political weaponization of the FBI, such that half of the people of this country cannot trust those institutions,” he continued. “We’re living with a president who calls half the voters of this county semi-fascists, who has said they are a threat to democracy.”
“How can you assure them that you will be truly non-partisan given what you have said?” Hawley concluded.
I’ve got SAT, ACT, and ASVAB scores that indicate she’s probably not as smart as me.
Every accusation by a Democrat is, in reality, a confession.
Well, have you seen the vote results from the climate bill (A group of 50 Senate Democrats and 19 Republicans voted to pass the Kigali Amendment to the 1987 United Nations (UN) Montreal Protocol.) that the senate just passed? Kinda got to agree with the archive person. Then again, what is the alternative? Not exactly behind the Trump supported candidates we have coming up on the ballot where we are but.......................
I’ve got PAC-MAN scores that indicate she’s not as smart as me!................. 😉
Did you hear her definition of “anti-intellectualism”?? At the 2 min mark- “the ability to speak in very plain, common sense terms to Americans.”
In other words, intellectuals don’t understand common sense.
I stopped at that point- no need to proceed further.
Talk about "anti-intellectualism." This woman can't even string together a coherent English sentence.
The danger of electing a figure head for President is the people they tend to bring in. Who’s $$$$# is behind the appointment? Who is owed a favor? Politics where the appointments go to the highest bidder or special gift giver.
Ayn Rand warned us about the ‘Politics of Pull’.............
Did well enough on it to score a 4 year Army ROTC scholarship 50 years ago.
I'm a big fan of "anti-intellectualism". LOL, my senior philosophy professor ripped the veneer off the mystery surrounding philosophy: "you have to understand with philosophy, it's not what you say, but how you say it. Philosophy is nothing but a bunch of BS."
My major was in public accounting, but I earned an unofficial minor in critical thinking, thanks to my accounting professor.
Tests were always 5 essay questions. Two, sometimes three of the questions required a first sentence of, "based on the information you've given me, I cannot answer the question." Then you told him "why".
He was my sole accounting professor for over 30 semester hours.
I wonder how often she was called horse face?
Hawley noted that Shogan had said modern GOP presidents had adopted an anti-intellectual posture and asked her how to define such a phrase.
“The ability so speak in very plain, common-sense terms to Americans,” Shogan replied.
In the article, she wrote, “Republicans tend to exhibit anti-intellectual qualities. Democrats coalesce on the intellectual tail of the continuum.”
—
Speaking clearly and in common-sense terms means you’re an anti-intellectual. Because only deep thinking geniuses can get so wrapped up in intellectual clap-trap that they can no longer define “woman”.
Of course populism is anti-intellectual. Are Trump’s arguments “intellectual”?
Hawley’s playing us for rubes who don’t understand the difference between intellectual and intelligent.
The ability to distill ideas into plain, concise language is a skill that takes effort to acquire.
“Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes a touch of genius - and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction.”
E. F. Schumacher
Donkey.......................
Any Republican who votes to confirm this bigot, and that is the correct terminology for her, is an appeasement weasel.
Where do they find all of these nasty skanks?.
Ivy League........................
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.