Apparently John McCain’s campaign manager is contending that Palin is being shielded from the media, not because she can’t handle an interview, but because they’re gonna be mean to her:
“Why would we want to throw Sarah Palin into a cycle of piranhas called the news media that have nothing better to ask questions about than her personal life and her children?” he asked. “So until at which point in time we feel like the news media is going to treat her with some level of respect and deference, I think it would be foolhardy to put her out into that kind of environment,” he said.
Three things occur to me:
1) If McCain’s people were taking this position with a male candidate, the perception would be that he’s weak and inept. So McCain’s people are banking on the concept that her being a woman will preclude that criticism, because anyone who says that will be tagged as being insulting and anti-feminist.
2) This sounds unbelievably patronizing to her and monumentally arrogant to the media. They’re saying she can’t handle tough questions, or at least shouldn’t have to, and they are endeavoring to dictate terms as to how the media has to treat her in order to rate an interview.
3) Someone who needs this much handling and protection doesn’t exactly inspire confidence in contemplating her being toe-to-toe with various foreign dictators and strong men, particularly if a stilled heartbeat thrusts her into the presidency anytime after January 2009. Golda Meir didn’t need insulation. Neither did Margaret Thatcher, to whom Palin has ludicrously been compared. Well…NOW Thatcher needs insulation, because she has dementia. So basically Sarah Palin needs as much protection as a former world leader who has trouble recalling her husband is dead. Make of that what you will.
PAD
• 
Of course, what if her response is “My daughter would never ask me for such a thing”?
TWL
My memory is neither selective or short, I just think the question is harsh and uncalled for. As it was with Dukakis.
Well, you certainly fooled me with your phrasing, saying you hoped nobody “would” ever be put in such a position.
PAD
The question in Palin’s case would not have the same effect as the question in Dukakis’s case, probably the opposite.
The point with Dukakis was to force him as a matter of principal to defend the life of the worst kind of criminal. going contrary to human emotions.
In Palin’s case she would be forced to defend the life of what she perceives to be a living child. She will look sympathetic to her crowd and rigid but not unemotional to the other side. The interviewer will seem heartless. The divide between pro-choice and pro-life will just be solidified.
…which is good for the pro-choice candidate, since those numbers skew in his favor.
Well, you certainly fooled me with your phrasing, saying you hoped nobody “would” ever be put in such a position.
PAD
Weird, but I would consider the question dealing with a child much more harsh then a spouse and didnt compare the two to be the same, not sure exactly why. Maybe its my leave the children out of it stance that does it for me.
The day the comments about whether Palin’s latest child was actually hers came out, we were driving and had a liberal talk-show on the radio for a bit. I was pretty dumbstruck how quickly people seemed to be willing to accept such a public and open conspiracy about those rumors. People were already accepting that this was fact, not just some rumor.
But it makes me wonder, who’s starting these things, and who’s running with them? The paranoid in me feels that it’s part of the GOP plan…that they’ve started the worst of the rumors themselves, in an effort to get people to focus on what amounts to trivial things, and gloss over the truly important matters like where she stands on certain issues.
I think the GOP wants people to focus on her children and personal life, because otherwise they’ll be focusing on just how much like Bush she very well may be…someone who’s not just guided by their religion, but controlled by it.
What always amazes me at election time, how each side uses the exact same arguments on each other. (fill in the blank) doesn’t have the expirence. (Fill in the blank) isn’t being treated fairly by the media. Many of the above comments on Palin have be said about Obama. It seems we lose sight of this and get swept away from the big picture that our country is a mess and we need to fix that. And no one party can do that alone.
Somebody posted:
“Here’s the TRUTH about Sarah Palin:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/kilkenny.asp
I posted the Snopes site to prove its truth, and not the letter.”
===========
Then Scott said:
“All that verifies is that the letter is real, not the content. It doesn’t verify that it’s true or accurate information or that the writer doesn’t have it in for Palin.”
===============
Yes and no, Scott. The letter is real. The writer verified that it is by her. And it was never intended for public view; it was sent to a few friends. Most or all of what was said is true. (And don’t ask me for proof. Do your own homework. You obviously have a computer and the same access to the internet that the rest of us have.)
Does the writer have it in for Sally Plain? Maybe. I do. She is evil.
Jerome Maida: As far your comment on Steele’s appearance on Maher, let me just say that if the focus is on her ISSUES, then the Obama camp and the media (though I feel sometimes they are the same entity) has every right to investigate, question, etc.
But focusing on her personal life the way the media has is beyond the pale. It is extremely vicious and seems angry.
Luigi Novi: I don’t see how the media has “focused” on her personal life. Most of what I read about in regards to her concerns issues like the ones I brought up in that large post I made on the previous Sarah Palin thread.
Jerome Maida: Combine that with the Obama camp’s first response belittling her as the mayor of 9,000 people – rather than an actual governor of an actual state – then Steele’s comment has resonance.
Luigi Novi: What precisely did they say that constituted “belittlement”?
And if you’re so sore about this, then why have you not expressed the same irritation at Giuliani and Palin herself belittling community organizers? Or how his career as a senator is “belittled”?
And as for an “actual state”, well, precisely what kind of state is the one of which Obama was a state senator and then U.S. senator? A paper mache state? Again, the capital of that state alone has four times the population of the entire state of Alaska. (I don’t want you to lose more sleep, but did you read my post on the previous thread, out of curiosity?)
Jerome Maida: It’s the lack of record, flip flops on policy and positions he does hold dear that terrify me.
Luigi Novi: What lack of record? He indeed has a record. There are entire Wikipedia articles, completely sourced, on his early life and career, his state legislator career, and his U.S. Senate career. I listed in summary form some of the major accomplishments from each of those times in his life on the previous thread.
And on what issues has he flip-flopped?
Jerome Maida: But I don’t feel anything close to hate for the man, unlike what I felt for John Kerry in 2004. I do feel Obama is different. It is just clear, to me at least, that he is not ready for the most powerful position on earth.
Luigi Novi: But Palin is?
Abortion because of rape. The only crime where you get to punish two people.
I hope they ask her a variation on the question that sank Dukakis: “Governor Palin, a hypothetical: At some point in the future, your daughter Willow–still underage– is raped. The rape results in pregnancy, and she begs you to let her have an abortion. Begs you. Sobbing. How do you say no to her?”
That could have been an effective question (perhaps reworded a bit)…but now, after everything else, I think she’d be able to duck it as just another attack on her family and avoid the issue entirely. And the boos from the audience would probably drown out the answer anyway.
In fact, I would expect that Joe Biden might even interject himself into the whole thing and criticize the question, which would actually do him some good.
I doubt I can convince you of this but I think I can almost guarantee that the bounce Palin has given McCain this far will be nothing compared to what would happen after what would probably become known as “The Baby Rape Debate”.
But can anyone name any mainstream media outlets (rather than the Daily Kos) that have published editorials bashing Palin for having a pregnant teenage daughter?
It seems to be part of the “She’s a bad mother” angle–not so much for her daughter getting pregnant but for deciding to run for higher office when she should be…I don’t know, boiling water and getting towels, whatever it is that a female candidate has to do for her pregnant daughter that a male candidate is never even asked about.
CBS’s Maggie Rodriguez–“We’ve talked this morning about whether a mother of five can handle being the vice president. Who looks after the kids when she’s working?”
The Washington Post’s Sally Quinn “Will she put her country first, or will she put her family first?” and “Her first priority has to be her children,” … “When the phone rings at 3 in the morning and one of her children is really sick what choice will she make?”
CNN’s John Roberts- “Children with Down’s syndrome require an awful lot of attention. The role of Vice President, it seems to me, would take up an awful lot of her time, and it raises the issue of how much time will she have to dedicate to her newborn child?”
Nicole Brodeur, Seattle Times columnist-One of the cardinal rules of parenting is to never judge how another does it. For Palin, though, I will make an exception.
Five kids. One of them a baby with special needs. Another with the special need of being 17, currently unmarried and pregnant. A son about to go to war, and two other daughters at home. The very thought brings me to my knees.
Ellen Goodman- As for Palin, is it beyond the pale to wonder whether she and her husband should have thought first of shielding their pregnant daughter from a media lens that they know will focus on the bump and a marriage that will take place during a national campaign? Has the candidate who mocked Obama for his celebrity status created the newest Jamie Lynn Spears?
Columnist Anita Creamer in the Sacramento Bee: I’d like to think that most mothers wouldn’t leap at the chance to sacrifice their 17-year-old pregnant daughter’s right to privacy on the altar of their own political ambitions. But that’s exactly what Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has done.
Dr Laura- I’m stunned – couldn’t the Republican Party find one competent female with adult children to run for Vice President with McCain? I realize his advisors probably didn’t want a “mature” woman, as the Democrats keep harping on his age. But really, what kind of role model is a woman whose fifth child was recently born with a serious issue, Down Syndrome, and then goes back to the job of Governor within days of the birth?
Becky O’Malley,Berkeley Daily Planet- Being president, or even vice-president, requires much more than the usual amount of focus and dedication, and leaves officeholders much less time to devote to their families. If the Palins, especially Sarah, really want to support these pregnant children, they would put their own professional ambitions on hold until both babies were in school and the young mother and father were able to support themselves and their child. If Sarah respected the privacy of the daughter and the boyfriend, she would not have thrust herself—and them—into the spotlight at this particular difficult moment.
Sara Stevenson, Austin-American Statesman- And now her oldest daughter, Bristol, is an unmarried pregnant teen. Doesn’t this teenage girl have needs? How well will they be met when her mother is touring the country campaigning for office? And once her baby is born, there will be two babies to care for in the family. Sometimes you need to put your family first. This is not just a women’s issue. People criticized John Edwards for continuing to campaign when his wife had terminal cancer. Maybe now is not the best time for her to run for Vice President. Sometimes both mothers and fathers need to stop and think of the children.
Campbell Brown, CNN- “Tucker…putting this young woman, Bristol Palin, smack in the middle of the media spotlight at what’s already got to be a very challenging time in her life… how do you respond to people who wonder why her mother would have subjected her to this kind of scrutiny by accepting this high-profile position.”
But it makes me wonder, who’s starting these things, and who’s running with them? The paranoid in me feels that it’s part of the GOP plan…that they’ve started the worst of the rumors themselves, in an effort to get people to focus on what amounts to trivial things, and gloss over the truly important matters like where she stands on certain issues.
Shouldn’t be too hard to find out. The websites and people who started it are out there. Of course, you’d have to believe that the GOP is so smart and the far left so stupid that a crazy conspiracy rumor like that would be able to gain any traction. And one might question why the idea that the anti-Obama rumors could be a Democrat trick hasn’t occurred to you.
Anyway, I’d be happy to see the crazy left go from believing stupid rumors to believing stupid rumors were put there to make them look bad by believing them. Curse those evil conservatives and their diabolical traps!
(Bobb–not accusing you of being part of that–you did say “the paranoid in me”, which indicates a willingness to see that idea as somewhat unlikely).
Jerome, I have to agree with Luigi. Obama has been on the national stage since his appearance at the ’04 convention. The DNC has been making sure his name and face has been in the media. His history as a community organizer in Chicago, and a state legislator, and his admittedly brief tenure as a US Senator, along with the attendant voting records are all easily available.
Palin’s record is also available, but the researcher has to first be aware of just who she is. Alaska is a big place with a small population. Outside of fans of “Northern Exposure”, oil executives and environmentalists, I doubt most people give Alsaka much thought outside of tourism. Not meaning to denigrate the Alaskan people, but Alaska is not a place that is easily accessible.
I’ve read the Kilkenny letter, and listened to an interview on NPR. She does not deny her dislike for Palin’s politics. She comes across as a very involved citizen, and the concerns she expresses are legitimate.
In regards to family being off limits, I agree to up to a certain point. Bristol Palin’s pregnancy is a matter of discussion as far as it relates to Palin’s beliefs regarding abstinance only sex ed. and abortion.
Posted by Peter David at September 8, 2008 07:27 AM
Food for thought: If Edwards had wound up being Obama’s VP, and suddenly word got out of his affair, and the Democrat’s position had been, “His personal life should be off limits,” I wonder how far that would have gotten with the GOPundits? I mean, personal is personal, right? The nature of the personal aspects shouldn’t matter.
Honestly? Here’s what I hope. I hope they ask her a variation on the question that sank Dukakis: “Governor Palin, a hypothetical: At some point in the future, your daughter Willow–still underage– is raped. The rape results in pregnancy, and she begs you to let her have an abortion. Begs you. Sobbing. How do you say no to her?”
PAD
PAD, I agree wholeheartedly. Before anyone flames me as an inconsiderate @%#%$%, here’s why.
When dealing with someone like Palin, who apparently never become even remotely acquainted with the terms “subjective” or “nuance”, it would force her to consider either the possibility that not everyone agrees with her, or that it’s not always as simple as black and white.
In regards to family being off limits, I agree to up to a certain point. Bristol Palin’s pregnancy is a matter of discussion as far as it relates to Palin’s beliefs regarding abstinance only sex ed. and abortion.
I keep seeing people say this but The LA Times has an article that seems to indicate that is not her position at all. She said on a questionnaire that she would not support “explicit sex-education programs”–whatever that means. But the next month, during a debate she denied that “explicit” included discussions of condoms, which she saw as “relatively benign.” She further stated that “Explicit means explicit.No, I’m pro-contraception, and I think kids who may not hear about it at home should hear about it in other avenues. So I am not anti-contraception. But, yeah, abstinence is another alternative that should be discussed with kids. I don’t have a problem with that. That doesn’t scare me, so it’s something I would support also.”
I assume that those who claimed that her daughter’s pregnancy was due to her mom only supporting abstinence-only education will now show their commitment to fairness by immediately stating that this proves discussing condoms in school is what leads to teen pregnancies.
Bill Mulligan just listed off reporters who questioned if Palin should be running for VP wth her family situation.
Anyone else think it is odd how many of those reporters were women? There have definitely been male reporters asking that question, but it seems like a lot more female reporters go down that road.
Yeah, I noticed that as well…and some of these women have kids of their own and would, one assumes, have reacted poorly to some guy suggesting that they put their careers on hold for full time motherhood. Politics trumps principle, once again.
Bill Mulligan: Politics trumps principle, once again.
I’m not so sure about that. These may actually be their principles. Some of them may have seriously asked themselves these questions when they had their kids, so now they’re asking them of Palin.
There are many women in the country who don’t make the same decision that Palin made. They have their career, they take a few years off when the kids are born, then they go back to work when the kids are off to school. Even if a reporter isn’t one of those, she might have considered it when she had her own kids. So when a mother of two sees that Palin has 4 kids at home, one with Down’s and another expecting a kid of her own, could it be that she’s seriously considering how much harder that would be?
I’m not saying their opinions aren’t inappropriate. But they can be their honest reactions and still be inappropriate. Which means they need to be discussed.
The Republicans were right to point out that nobody would ask a male candidate if he shouldn’t run with kids at home. But I think that everything they did after that blows the problem out of proportion and is detrimental. Instead of saying, “You guys did something bad and we should talk about it,” they said, “You guys did something bad and we’re going to shut down all discussion.” I think there should be a debate about *why* so many people ask this question of a female candidate. I’m guessing that it’s not just reporters asking it, but people at home, too.
Regarding John Edwards.
The joke coming out of my circles was:
Q: How could the McCain camp keep the Palin pregnancy out of the news?
A: Say John Edwards was the father.
Question, how many reporters are off to Kenya to interview George Obama, Barack’s half brother who lives in a shack? How many are in Alaska right now?
There were 3(THREE!!) frontpage stories on Palin’s 17 year old kid. I am sure of one thing, she never met and worked with unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers, nor had any business dealings with the jailed criminal Tony Rezko.
The veil was lifted on the lefty bias that has been debated for years.
Here are some interviews.
http://stubbornfacts.us/politics/2008_election/next_meme_on_the_chopping_block_palin_doesnt_do_interviews
Regarding John Edwards.
The joke coming out of my circles was:
Q: How could the McCain camp keep the Palin pregnancy out of the news?
A: Say John Edwards was the father.
Question, how many reporters are off to Kenya to interview George Obama, Barack’s half brother who lives in a shack? How many are in Alaska right now?
There were 3(THREE!!) frontpage stories on Palin’s 17 year old kid. I am sure of one thing, she never met and worked with unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers, nor had any business dealings with the jailed criminal Tony Rezko.
The veil was lifted on the lefty bias that has been debated for years.
Here are some interviews.
http://stubbornfacts.us/politics/2008_election/next_meme_on_the_chopping_block_palin_doesnt_do_interviews
Regarding John Edwards.
The joke coming out of my circles was:
Q: How could the McCain camp keep the Palin pregnancy out of the news?
A: Say John Edwards was the father.
Question, how many reporters are off to Kenya to interview George Obama, Barack’s half brother who lives in a shack? How many are in Alaska right now?
There were 3(THREE!!) frontpage stories on Palin’s 17 year old kid. I am sure of one thing, she never met and worked with unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers, nor had any business dealings with the jailed criminal Tony Rezko.
The veil was lifted on the lefty bias that has been debated for years.
Here are some interviews.
http://stubbornfacts.us/politics/2008_election/next_meme_on_the_chopping_block_palin_doesnt_do_interviews
Hmmm. Why in the hëll should we care about Obama’s half-brother in Kenya?
Speaking as a very liberal person and a big Obama supporter, asking these questions about who will care for her kids is legitimate. All Palin has to do is answer that the children have a father who is also perfectly capable of childcare. End of discussion. Everyone keeps focusing on her role as mother. Since there happens to be another parent involved, why can’t he take over as the main custodial parent while she goes to work, or answers 3 AM calls when one of her kids is sick. This is a non issue and is distracting us from more important things. The fact that the MCCain campaign chose to keep her away from the media instead of answering the question is a whole lot more troubling to me than the question itself.
AnthonyX: Question, how many reporters are off to Kenya to interview George Obama, Barack’s half brother who lives in a shack? How many are in Alaska right now?
The answer for both questions is the same: 1 Reporter for every month that the candidate spent with that family member. With Palin, that comes out to hundreds. With Obama, it rounds down to zero.
What a ridiculous question. Barack Obama didn’t even meet his brother until they were both fully grown, then they quickly parted ways again. George’s life has virtually nothing to do with Barack Obama, while Alaska contains the entirety of Palin’s political career.
Actually, Peter, she was asked that question, though not as “harshly”. She doesn’t believe in abortion even in the hypothetical case of her daughter being raped. Last night I watched a televised debate on CSPAN from when Palin was running for Governor in 2006, and she was asked that hypothetical and more. And reading some articles and blogs from back then ( http://community.adn.com/adn/node/102978 for one, and the comments) it makes me question many things about her, the least of which is her “80% approval rating”.
As a woman, I respect her, but other than that, I can’t help feel that she is, in essence, Cheney Mark II.
Actually, if she were asked that question, she would probably tear up, and the journalist would instantly be pilloried and drummed out of the business. The only journalist who could pull it off would be Barbara Walters.
PAD
The recent poll results show the effect that all the attention on Palin has had. Some people seem to be under the impression that when Obama tld everyone her family was off limits he was just joking. He wasn’t. I can well understand why Republicans would encourage it to continue but I can’t imagine why Democrats would, unless they think if they keep digging through the horse manure they are bound to find a pony.
Which Democrats are you referring to, Bill?
Whats important about how a candidate treats family no matter how distant? Character I suppose.
Having said that, compare and contrast my friends. How many frontpage stories, lies, disinformation on one side in less than 10 days , 10…and how many just general info stories on the other in 2 years??. Just for curiosities sake?
Article on Georgie-O Read it. Its sad.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/2590614/Barack-Obamas-lost-brother-found-in-Kenya.html
I can well understand why Republicans would encourage it to continue but I can’t imagine why Democrats would, unless they think if they keep digging through the horse manure they are bound to find a pony.
My guess is that Obama is playing the odds. He’s weighing the likelihood of doing Palin serious damage by painting her as a lousy mother and heartless woman (which is, let’s face it, the negative spin on someone whose underage daughter is pregnant and who believes in punishing rape victims by forcing them to bear their rapist’s children) against the likelihood of doing his party serious damage by being painted as bullies and big meanies ’cause they’re picking on the poor helpless soccer mom. He doubtless thinks the latter likelihood is far greater. He’s probably right.
PAD
Which Democrats are you referring to, Bill?
The ones that are arguing that since she has been photographed with her kids and has been described as “a mother”, her family is fair game. The one’s spreading the rumors and hoping that one of them sticks. One of the problems with Palin is that she’s so new and was such an unexpected pick that you can’t do opposition research without it being known. So when a bunch of reporters run to Alaska to read some guy’s divorce papers it becomes obvious that they are looking for dirt on Palin. When nothing turns up they look like a pack of jackals. Which may well be the proper role for them but such things look best when not seen.
What exactly were we supposed to read in that article, AnthonyX? The fact that his brother isn’t doing well?
If you’d done a little research, you’d have found out that George has stated he doesn’t want anything from his brother. So unless you’re upset that Barack Obama didn’t kidnap his brother and force him to improve his life, there isn’t much to say.
And how exactly do you know that George Obama exists? Because the media already did research on him, went to Africa, and wrote that article and others. Yet you’re saying that there is something wrong with reporters going to Alaska to do research on Palin.
I bet you don’t even see the hypocrisy in that, do you?
Bill, the reason I asked is that I wasn’t sure if you were referring to Democratic candidates and their staffs, Democrats in the media, or Democratic voters talking to each other.
OK, Anthony X, relevance, please? Obama has met his half brother twice. Palin has raised her children. They are for the most part still young, below age of majority.
Palin as an elected official, which, at very least, opens her conduct while in office to scrutiny. Unfortunately, it also puts her children’s conduct under the media microscope.
Regarding George Obama’s circumstances, please tell me how it is a reflection on Barak Obama’s character? If George was a child of Barak’s living in a Chicago slum, your point would have some legitimacy. We’re talking about an adult half brother here. Jenna and Barbara Bush getting popped for drinking underage says more about George and Laura than it does about Jeb.
As for the “evil liberal media”, are we talking about the same media that gave the Bush League a free pass on pre war intel? That was to scared to push back whenever questions were called treason?
The same “liberal” media that hooked onto Hussein
as a middle name meant Obama was an al-Quaida symathizer?
I didn’t hear O’Reilly come to the defense of John Edward. I didn’t see Fox News refuse to cover revelations about his affair. I do recall questions about whether he should be campaigning when his wife’s cancer returned.
Sorry, there is no liberal media conspiracy outside of the fevered imaginings of the radical right. In a functioning democracy, the media’s job is to put the feet of the powerful over the fire. Sometimes toes get burned.
Does anyone else find it really creepy the way McCain fawns over her and says stuff like, “Isn’t she great!” Like he’s shocked a woman could have any thoughts and she’s his pet. I think being with her makes him look even older and decrepit.
I don’t get the same vibe as you, Neil. However, he does seem more like a Grandpa when he does that stuff. Nobody is really noticing yet because they’re still excited about Palin.
This might backfire on McCain in some interesting ways. What if the people who are excited about Palin get into the voting booth and realize that to get Palin, they have to vote for McCain? All that excitement might drain out of them if they never liked him much in the first place.
Or, the way McCain treats Palin might start making more of an impression on people. That Saturday Night Live skit where McCain played a man who was always creepily close to his wife might make a reappearance. Who knows, maybe once we’ve seen more of McCain and Palin together, someone might paste Palin’s head into that SNL skit and post it on youtube.
Or none of this might happen. It’s amazing how much of a wild card Palin is. Predicting what will happen with her is really hard.
Actually it was a story from the English Telegraph after the Italian version of Vanity Fair ran with it.
What does it really matter in the long run, not much, all I am saying is compare and contrast how the 2 are covered.
She is running for a VP position. he is running for the top job! Don’t you think a little more attention to this unknown is warranted? And can you really say he has been treated the same as her?
Thought I posted this earlier but I guess not. The reason FoxNews is # 1 in the ratings is simple. They offer something that others do not. A centre right perspective. There “Fair & Balanced” is the biggest FU in history. They are not, but they slyly admit it. Hardly ever watch. Only for the great comedy show Red Eye on at 3am
The centre left is split between: NBC ABC CBS CNN PBS MSNBC etc etc etc and those news organizations do not admit it.
All of these media outlets plus general pop culture, plus Universities et al have made the perception that centre left is the norm, So if you are centrist your scratching your head thinking wait, I am no a bad guy. If your opinions range in the centre right well you a wacko if you are right wing, you should be shot. Left wingers, though, quirky but mean well.
I am pro gay marriage, pro choice-(anti abortion) pro immigration (anti multiculturism) and a Christmas and Easter catholic etc…I should vote for the liberals and root for the Dems, but I don’t. Because it has surprised me to see that the side that will eventually resort to TRUE fascism is the LEFT.
Obama-nice enough fellow, got my attention early on as the post racial candidate, as fallen fast in my eyes. AS the race thing is brought up by him a # of times. Eventually it will be racist not to support him. Also as the great Canadian band Sloan said in the Coax me song “its not the band that I hate, its there fans!
And I had to admit my own racism…as the only reason I was willing to give this guy a look was because he was black. If he was white guy Barry Baum, with the same speaking style and the same policies(socialist) I would not give him a 2nd look
one more for the road, literally as I am leaving work:
I present to you NBC’s Andrea Mitchell
*A sample question that Mitchell asked Giuliani:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwdLc9KJLbc&eurl=http://corner.nationalreview.com/
Let me ask you about your own speech, just briefly. You went after [Obama], you went after him hard, you were sarcastic. Barack Obama has 18 million votes and has survived a very tough Democratic primary test of 20 months. Did you have any pause at all in going after him this hard and belittling him the way you did?
*A sample soundbite from Mitchell’s coverage of Obama’s speech last week:
Well, one of the most startling things about this was, as exciting a speech as this was to the delegates down here on floor, they really didn’t get fired up until Barack Obama went after John McCain on exactly what you guys were talking about, his perceived strength, when he — he went right after him and said, if John McCain wants to have a debate on who has the judgment and temperament to be commander in chief, that is a debate that I will have, and then when he said, you know, John McCain likes to say that I will follow Osama bin Laden to the gates of hëll, but he won’t go to the cave where he lives.
So, it was those — those moments where people started jumping up and shouting, whoo-wee, whoo-wee. I mean, they were really into it.
This was the red meat that this crowd has been wanting, they have been waiting to see. They’re Democrats. They’re rank-and-file Democrats. Some were Hillary. Some were Obama. Some were still undecided. They were waiting to see if this man is a fighter, because this is a change election
In a prior thread I predicted Palin’s underage daughter’s pregnancy would result in a backlash from the religious right. Bill Mulligan called B.S. on that and it turns out he was right: I was allowing wishful thinking to color my reading of the facts. The religious right still loves Palin.
I subsequently defied anyone reading this thread to show me examples of the mainstream media bashing Palin for having a pregnant daughter. Mr. Mulligan came back with examples of MSM pundits questioning whether Palin can be both a good mother and an effective VP. Not quite what I asked, but close enough.
You’re two for two, Bill. 🙂
I still question whether this proves the assertions some have made of liberal bias in the media. When Russian initiated military action against Georgia, what got the most coverage on CNN? The revelation of John Edwards’ affair. The media’s bias is, I believe, toward sensationalism more than any political ideology.
Bill, I’m curious: irrespective of the way the media has covered her, what do you think of Sarah Palin? Do you think she is worthy of being a heartbeat away from the presidency? If so, what has she done to lead you to feel that way?
AnthonyX, it’s amazing that you can actually say that your George Obama comment was an attempt to “compare and contrast how the 2 are covered.”
You’re actually saying that Palin is being treated unfairly by the media because they’re, *gasp*, going to Alaska to do research on her?!
Horror of horrors, the reporters are doing research! And they’re going to the source, how incredibly unfair! Someone, for the love of god, point out the fact that they’re not currently reporting the half-brother story they already reported!
Anthony X: Because it has surprised me to see that the side that will eventually resort to TRUE fascism is the LEFT.
Luigi Novi: “True fascism” is not defined by direction. It’s defined by degree. The ultimate implication of those who takes their political views to the extreme, as both those on the extreme ends of the left and the right do, is fascism/totalitarianism. The right is simply better organized and closer to power than the left is in that regard.
ok one more.
A humourous take on the Palin effect!
Palin Dodges Tough Questions About Existence of “Alaska”
By Elizabeth Bumiller, New York Times, Wednesday, September 3, 2008; A1
Media Bubble, Sept. 2 — Embattled former beauty queen Sarah Palin* continued to wilt yesterday under the pressure of numerous fair, evenhanded media questions regarding the alleged state of “Alaska.”
Palin has claimed to be “governor” of the legendary northern land mass, which, while heretofore undiscovered by explorers, was once rumored to contain vast expanses rich with oil, gold, and “eski-mos.” Palin first made the “Alaska” claim during an Aug. 29 public appearance alongside elderly, mean-looking cancer victim John McCain.
McCain, a white man with even whiter hair, has long publicly blocked efforts by Barack Obama, a youthful black man with a certain indefinable aura about him, to move into Obama’s new house. Palin, also white-skinned, has been linked to the McCain offensive.
After four days of telling silence from the McCain camp, Palin finally deigned to reappear in public yesterday. In a followup press conference, Palin, who is a girl, lashed out at the media. “Listen to me: Alaska. Is. A. State. Seriously. The 49th state, in fact. Way up north there. What, did somebody go around your newsrooms and hide all the maps underneath the ethics manuals? Or are you idiots just completely insane?”
Shaking her head in a transparent attempt to feign exasperation, Palin — who is perhaps not as pretty as she thinks she is — then left the podium without answering followup questions regarding her plagiarism of CBS’s Northern Exposure. Internet reaction to the unfit mother’s unhinged rant was swift. Andrew Sullivan, right-wing blogger for The Atlantic, saw Palin’s comments as a major misstep. “She’s working the refs. This is what they do. Sure, blame the media. Is it their fault she’s too chicken to back up these suspicious claims? “Look, I’m willing to entertain the idea that there really is a place called ‘Alaska.’ We’ve all heard the old wives’ tales, and I’ve dreamed about such a rugged, outdoorsy paradise since I was about 13 or 14. But why is she so afraid to give us some proof? I mean, I’ve never been there, have you?”
Yukon Cornelius could not be reached for comment.
Update: After consultation with the Association of American Geographers and several DC-area kindergarten students, the Times can now report that many current world maps contain a small area in the northwest corner of North America labeled “Alaska.” Palin’s relationship with the mapmaking industry is currently under investigation.
Bill Myers: I subsequently defied anyone reading this thread to show me examples of the mainstream media bashing Palin for having a pregnant daughter. Mr. Mulligan came back with examples of MSM pundits questioning whether Palin can be both a good mother and an effective VP. Not quite what I asked, but close enough.
I actually disagree with you about those things being close enough. The inappropriate question and the rumor are two separate things.
The McCain campaign is trying to act like the media is guilty of both, when the truth is that *certain members* of the media are guilty of one, while less reputable members are guilty of the other. They’re trying to overblow this thing by painting it as all the media doing all the bad things, so I think it is important to note that the mainstream media did not jump on the rumor.
Bill Myers, The Edwards affair was known for over a year. It was out there yet no one wanted a piece of it.
Newsweek shelved the Clinton Lewinsky story 1 month before Drudge made himself famous. They had it and what? Thought it would not sell any product? Did there evil corporate masters say no to the $???
AnthonyXI am sure of one thing, she never met and worked with unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers, nor had any business dealings with the jailed criminal Tony Rezko.
Way to show the bias, Anthony. Obama worked on a board that Bill Ayers happened to be on. He got his house at market value from Rezko, then later called even that a “bonehead” move. Guilt by association is the best you’ve got?
Meanwhile, Sarah Palin actually *campaigned* with Ted Stevens. That’s not something she did that just happened to coincide with him being there, she made a choice to support a dirty politician. The fact that she turned on him when the press got bad isn’t much of a redemption.
And as for McCain? He was part of the Keating Five scandal. He didn’t “meet” someone from the Keating Five Scandal, he was in it. If you’re going to convict Obama for having been on the same college board as Ayers, you should follow that up with even harsher criticism of McCain.
I’ll admit that it’s shocking, how Obama’s half-brother is living. But helping an adult that doesn’t want to be helped (if that is the case here) is harder than it looks. I know that from personal experience with MY brother. Still, that Obama only met his half-brother twice, it doesn’t look good.
Pop culture has a center-left bias, yes. That is pretty obvious, the artistic and entertainment types usually skew left and I’m not sure every writer/filmaker/artist has to annouce it. Universisties? Oh yes, perhaps even more to the left.
I’m not so sure about the news, though. I’d say that in social matters, they’re mostly center-left too. But on economic and foreign politics, perhaps closer to the center or even center-right. American media was very friendly with Bush for years and years while the rest of the world’s press bashed him mercilessly.
Bill, I’m curious: irrespective of the way the media has covered her, what do you think of Sarah Palin? Do you think she is worthy of being a heartbeat away from the presidency? If so, what has she done to lead you to feel that way?
Wow, that’s a good question. I want to like her. I get a good vibe from her. But it’s hard for me to separate my feeling fro her as a candidate from my disgust with how she’s been treated. So that may well be coloring my opinion.
This has been a great election so far, one that will be talked about forever but it’s had a lot of twists and turns. Not much has turned out as I expected, other than John Edwards reaching his full potential. I thought Hillary would be able to combine the charm of her husband with her own steely discipline. Instead, Bill Clinton went coo coo for coco puffs and looked like a red faced bully. The campaign would have been more effectively run by chimpanzee with dartboards. The only reason she came as close as she did was that she was able to make herself a somewhat sympathetic figure. In other words, the exact opposite of how I would have predicted things would go.
Obama I see as a class act, as the last week has shown. Nothing so far has dissuaded me from that. And I see him as sufficiently…flexible in his principles to keep from worrying much about the fact that I don’t agree with many of his positions. Once in office he will not do anything crazy. Hëll, today he seemed to be saying that his tax on the rich (the rescinding of the Bush tax cuts) isn’t something he would do if the economy was in a recession and doing so would hurt the chances of a recovery. He thinks the surge is succeeding beyond anyone’s wildest dreams.
In other words, I think Obama will end up doing a lot of the same things McCain would do–but those actions will be acceptable to the left because he’s the one supporting them. Which would be a good thing for the country.
If Obama is defeated I think a lot of Democrats will just lose it. I think they need a little time in power to calm down. And hey, maybe they’ll do a good job; if not their fall will be swift and thorough. I think the days of decades long monopolies of one party may be over.
But Palin does throw a wrench into my thinking…I think it’s an excellent thing for an African American to be elected president (and if not Obama I don’t see anyone else really on the horizon). But a woman would be even more groundbreaking. It’s not the most important thing but it is a thing.
I’m looking forward to seeing her in action though I don’t know that I would vote based on a vice president…maybe if all else is equal.
But for all those who are gloomy about the country I think it’s great that we have running a biracial man from humble beginnings; a woman whose background reminds me of people I have known (prior to her rise in politics anyway), a crippled war veteran, a Catholic who overcame disability and personal tragedy…only in America kiddies.
I do sometimes get the feeling I’m the only person here who will be able to sleep comfortably whichever team gets elected. I don’t know, at some point don’t people get tired of always thinking that the End Of Democracy As We Know It is always just around the corner and This Election is Our Last Chance to survive as a nation? I’ve been hearing that since Reagan (though as I’ve said before, I never can take it seriously when people tell me the end of the world is coming but keep putting money in their 401K).
AnthonyX:
By chance, since you seem so concerned with how the “liberal” media reports on various issues with regard to Gov. Palin, I’m curious if you’ve seen the clips from Jon Stewart’s Daily Show last week ( http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=184086&title=Sarah-Palin-Gender-Card ) and what, if anything, you have to say about it.
I’m sure it’s still the liberal media’s fault somehow.
This occurred to me earlier: when Barack Obama felt that the media was being too hard on his wife, he faced the mics and cameras and told them to stop it.
He didn’t pout and refuse to do interviews, the way McCain is.
Neither did Michelle hide herself in a panic room somewhere and avoid the media.
So I’d say that’s another big difference between the two camps. One guy is willing to stand up for himself and for his wife, personally confront the people he feels are being unfair to them. The other guy? He RUNS AWAY.
Humanities, yup. Sciences? Maybe. Engineering, medicine and business? Don’t think so–or if they are, they tend to be socially liberal and economically/politically conservative.
This has probably been asked before, but if it were Mr S Palin, rather than Mrs S Palin – would there still be the same remarks regarding the number of children, special needs child, etc?
Almost certainly not, Megan. There’s definitely a double standard on that issue among both men and women.
My reaction when I first heard the question was, “Her husband is quitting his job to focus on the kids, so it’s not a problem.” I think that’s how reporters should have played the story, not as a possible failing on Sarah Palin’s part. I wouldn’t even have minded if they had talked about Sarah Palin taking a baby to city hall meetings, it would have been a reasonable contrast to the film we’ve seen of JFK interrupting an important phone call in the Oval Office to talk with his daughter.
This has probably been asked before, but if it were Mr S Palin, rather than Mrs S Palin – would there still be the same remarks regarding the number of children, special needs child, etc?
My guess is there wouldn’t be.
That any woman in politics is both subjected to types of poor treatment a man would not be and can get away with things a man could not get away with is extremely unfortunate. I really wish that everybody were treated the same way.