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
• 
Um, so McCain just claimed that Palin never requested earmarks as governor as Alaska? The same person who stated, this year, “My role at the federal level is simply to submit the most well-conceived earmark requests we can.”?
I’d think he would be a lot better off saying that Palin cut down on the size of earmarks, which has the benefit of actually being true…
I’d think he would be a lot better off saying that Palin cut down on the size of earmarks, which has the benefit of actually being true…
yeah, I’m not sure McCain knows how to handle suddenly having a shot at winning. You can only get so far with faux outrage and saying things that are demonstrably untrue.
I think now would be the time for Obama to start hitting hard with ideas for the economy. The “McCain doesn’t know how to use a computer ad” is cute but he already has the youth vote locked up, I don’t see that as particularly effective in going after the working class voters that Palin seems to be attracting. The again, maybe they’re hoping that McCain will continue to whine about things and people will get tired of it.
The youth vote doesn’t reliably show up on election day. Treating as an ongoing responsibility cute things that remind them their vote is urgent only sounds like good campaigning.
Is there any election-turning criticism that sticks to McCain as far as you’re concerned?
“I’m not sure McCain knows how to handle suddenly having a shot at winning. You can only get so far with faux outrage and saying things that are demonstrably untrue.”
Yeah, and Palin isn’t much better. Her latest claim from the Charlie Gibson interview was that Alaska “produces nearly 20 percent of the U.S. domestic supply of energy.” She cited this “fact” as the credentials she brings to the table. That’s not even close to true.
According to the federal government’s Energy Information Administration, Alaska’s share of domestic energy production was 3.5 percent. And if you assume that she means the energy used in America when she uses the word “supply” then it’s only 2.4 percent.
Again, it’s yet another statement by her that’s demonstrably untrue. But try and talk about it in most places and the facts and figures bore people. It sounds good so it must be good and they’re far too busy talking about the lipstick on a pig “insult” that was never really made or some other garbage.
Wow! It’s hard to believe Ann Coulter said all that. Is she for real, or just some sort of elaborate joke?
It’s what I was saying to Anthony X. The media may have a certain liberal bias, but is there any mainstream leftist figure in the US that is as extreme as Ann Coulter? Maybe Michael Moore?
And I’ve read that she wished women couldn’t vote. Holy šhìŧ. I didn’t know she was that crazy. I’m trying to have some sympathy for a fellow transvestite here, but it’s hard.
Wow, not even close. Did she miss a decimal point or did she confuse “oil” with “energy” or what?
On the other hand, if the Boston Globe story from 2000 is true and McCain can’t type because of his war injuries it might not be a great idea to try to get much mileage from his not using email. I suppose they could say he should use the many computer accessories available to the disabled but is this really a discussion they want to have.
”Wow, not even close. Did she miss a decimal point or did she confuse “oil” with “energy” or what?”
I would have accepted that as a possibility had McCain not already made this claim several times since his announcement of her as his running mate. He’s been questioned about it and insisted that he’s right. However, all he’s pointed out is an independent group’s website that promotes Alaska’s oil production, but even that site actually fails to source anything and says that its “20% of America’s oil” line is an average without saying what years this average was made up from. If it’s older figures there would be a problem even with the 20% figure for oil since Alaska’s production has decreased greatly in the last few years.
If Alaska has ANY major percentage of our energy we have a problem right there: shouldn’t we try to have our energy sources actually attached to the rest of the country?
That reminds me of something–I’ve seen mulch piles that were so warn they started smoking. Is there any way to generate usable heat for, say, air heating from mulch piles? Get rid of lawn clippings, heat the house, and make lovely mulch all in one fell swoop.
Is there any indication that the enthusiasm for Palin is diminishing?
Even if there is, I think for Obama to win he needs to restore people’s enthusiasm with him.
There are times when I really need my thinking cap tuned up. I wasn’t sourcing anything above because I was trying to remember which news link it was from. I should have just checked my usual faves.
go to factcheck.org and look for the header “Energetically Wrong” on their main page.
“Is there any indication that the enthusiasm for Palin is diminishing?”
Not really. She actually seems to bringing McCain’s numbers up.
Obama was going to go on Saturday Night Live but I suspect the hurricane may make him rethink how that might look.
On good thing about Palin getting all the attention–it took Biden off the front page. Which is a good thing since otherwise his asking a guy in a wheelchair to stand up and take a bow would have been the joke du jour. I actually like Biden, for some reason I can’t put my finger on, but he does have a habit of saying wacky stuff when he goes off script. Between his propensity for gaffes and Palin’s inexperience on the big stage, the VP debate has major potential for bøffø yocks.
So much for that “Gotcha!” moment:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
James,
Sorry, but that’s a no-go on your no-go attempt. The doctrine as explained by Gibson is the doctrine as explained by McCain.
http://www.jedreport.com/2008/09/john-mccain-explains-the-bush.html
James,
Sorry, but that’s a no-go on your no-go attempt. The doctrine as explained by Gibson is the doctrine as explained by McCain.
http://www.jedreport.com/2008/09/john-mccain-explains-the-bush.html
There’s also this one from 2002.
”… the Bush administration answers by promulgating a radically new doctrine of military preemption. “If the United States could have preempted 9/11, we would have, no question,” Vice President Ðìçk Cheney told the annual convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Nashville this summer. “Should we be able to prevent another, much more devastating attack, we will, no question. This nation will not live at the mercy of terrorists or terror regimes.””
http://www.cfr.org/publication.html?id=5251
Mike wrote:
>You’re just pretending you haven’t made up your mind when you already have, to get everyone to accept your criticisms of Obama regardless of the truth. It’s called “concern-trolling.”
LOL someone else noticing how manipulative Bill is.
And this from George Bush in the State of the Union from 2002.
“North Korea is a regime arming with missiles and weapons of mass destruction, while starving its citizens. …
“Iran aggressively pursues these weapons and exports terror….
“Iraq continues to flaunt its hostility toward America and to support terror. …
“States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world.
“We’ll be deliberate, yet time is not on our side. I will not wait on events, while dangers gather. I will not stand by, as peril draws closer and closer. The United States of America will not permit the world’s most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world’s most destructive weapons.”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020129-11.html
Charles Krauthammer says in the link above that Gobson was wrong in his description of the Bush doctrine since there were four different formulations of the doctrine, and the one described by Gobson was the 3rd but not the last, and therefore correct version.
That’s a little strange, isn’t it? Wouldn’t it be more reasonable to say that the Bush doctrine included all four formulations than to claim that the latest cancelled out the previous 3? Or maybe there is no such thing as the bush doctrine,, only different speeches made at different times about different subjects? And isn’t the fact that Palin didn’t know any of the formulations more troubling than the fact that Gibson not knowing about formulations 1 (pre 9/11) and 4?
In a graduation speech at West Point, Bush said this.
“Our security will require all Americans to be forward-looking and resolute, to be ready for preemptive action when necessary to defend our liberty and to defend our lives.”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020601-3.html
Jerry, quotes from 2002 don’t really invalidate what Krauthammer said in the linked article. But what he said was pretty silly anyway.
“LOL someone else noticing how manipulative Bill is.”
Yes! I’m not even sure he really likes zombies. It’s all part of an elaborate deception.
Almost six years ago to the day, Bush releases his administration’s National Security Strategy (NSS). In this document, Bush outlines the idea that the US will rely on preemption to deal with rogue states and terrorists harboring weapons of mass destruction.
“The gravest danger our Nation faces lies at the crossroads of radicalism and technology. Our enemies have openly declared that they are seeking weapons of mass destruction, and evidence indicates that they are doing so with determination. The United States will not allow these efforts to succeed.We will build defenses against ballistic missiles and other means of delivery. We will cooperate with other nations to deny, contain, and curtail our enemies’ efforts to acquire dangerous technologies. And, as a matter of common sense and self-defense, America will act against such emerging threats before they are fully formed. We cannot defend America and our friends by hoping for the best. So we must be prepared to defeat our enemies’ plans, using the best intelligence and proceeding with deliberation. History will judge harshly those who saw this coming danger but failed to act. In the new world we have entered, the only path to peace and security is the path of action. “
…
“defending the United States, the American people, and our interests at home and abroad by identifying and destroying the threat before it reaches our borders.While the United States will constantly strive to enlist the support of the international community, we will not hesitate to act alone, if necessary, to exercise our right of selfdefense by acting preemptively against such terrorists, to prevent them from doing harm against our people and our country;”
…
“The United States will not use force in all cases to preempt emerging threats, nor should nations use preemption as a pretext for aggression. Yet in an age where the enemies of civilization openly and actively seek the world’s most destructive technologies, the United States cannot remain idle while dangers gather. We will always proceed deliberately, weighing the consequences of our actions.”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nssall.html
“Jerry, quotes from 2002 don’t really invalidate what Krauthammer said in the linked article.”
But it’s not merely quotes from 2002, Micha. It’s quotes from Bush outlining his view of his doctrine after 9/11. It’s also not merely reserved to the year 2002. Bush, Cheney, Rice and others from Bush’s own administration have advocated and spoken of our right to use preemptive military action against threats for years now. Hëll, some of the Bush crew have been claiming that we should have the right to use preemptive military action since the late 90s. The many members of the Bush Administration that were also founders and members of The Project for the New American Century have this idea in writing and with their signatures on the bottom of the page in a number of areas.
Preemptive military action is and has been a large pert of what is referred to as The Bush Doctrine and it has been articulated as such by Bush himself and key members of his admin. For the Right to start acting like there is nothing in writing saying that and that no one in the Bush Administration has articulated it as such is hugely disingenuous.
Besides, again, the definition of the Bush Doctrine as used by Gibson to question Palin is the exact way it was described ny John McCain himself. If anyone therefore loses the right to cry foul on this it’s McCain, Palin and their supporters.
On the third hand, I thought McCain used a Blackberry….
LOL someone else noticing how manipulative Bill is. M.i>
I know it will be hard to accept that you will be voting for the dame guy I am. But you will just have to deal.
What amuses me is the idea that I would pretend to like Obama so that I could…what exactly? Trick you imto liking him as well? Moo hoo hoo hoo hwah…and then you’ll go vote for him! Mwhah ha ha! That will really…um…really…ok, maybe I haven’t thought this out all the way. But it’s devious, I tells ya, devious!
If you think voting for Obama means that you have to drink the koolaid and think that every little thing he does is magic, I’m sorry, not my style. Voting Democratic doesn’t mean you have to check your brain at the door, though your mileage may vary.
If my stating that Obama’s biggest problem is that some of his “supporters” are too dumb to see when they are hurting the campaign, well, that’s my opinion. I think the last 2 weeks have provided some evidence of that. If anyone is a secret shill for the McCain campaign I’d say it’s those who have kept the attention on Palin for 2 weeks now, to the point where nothing Obama says gets any traction at all (unless it’s about Palin). But I will give you the benefit of the doubt and consider you someone who really thinks they are helping Obama. Which is what makes it so sad.
Yes! I’m not even sure he really likes zombies. It’s all part of an elaborate deception.
Ðámņ your cold Israeli heart! It’s true; what i really love are vampires. yep, I loves me some vampires. They are so cool, what with their moping around about immortality and how hard it is to live forever and never being able to feel the sun’s warm rays upon their pale pallid cheeks. Hanging out with their mopey eurotrash friends all night, talking talking talking. And they’re tough! Except for crosses, garlic, holy water, running water, running holy water, hawthorne bushes, wood, silver, sunlight, decapitation, lightning, anything religious, and probably about a dozen other things, many of which will not hurt a normal person.
Oh who am I kidding? I hate vampires. The only time I liked them was on Buffy, and I note that the word vampire was immediately followed by the word slayer. Could there BE a more useless monster. As I think I mentioned in an email to you once, you almost have to feel sorry for them–everything kills them! Christopher lee spent most of the Hammer Horror movies standing around in abandoned churches or in a castle and who could blame him? Whenever he ventured outside to chase after Peter Cushing it would end badly. SATANIC RITES OF DRACULA, perfect example. He lives as a reclusive Howard Hughes figure in a highrise, living off the wealth from his savvy investments (ok, actually it was just $12 he put in a bank back in 1738 but through the miracle of compound interest he’s sitting pretty) and when Peter Cushing finally gets him to chase him outside what happens? He walks right into a Hawthorne bush which was what the crown of thorns was made from that was placed on Christ’s head and he bleeds to death. The look on his face is really sad to see. He can’t believe it. “What, this kills me too? Son of a bìŧçh!”
And this is the king of the vampires!
(OK–one really great vampire that I loved– Marv Wolfman and Gene Colon’s TOMB OF DRACULA. the last 12 or so issues–Marvel Comics at its best).
“The dame guy?” I meant “same guy.” Barak America, of course.
Hey, off topic but is anyone on the board from texas? In the Galvaston area? If so…stop reading this, turn off the computer…I’d say leave but that ship has [probably sailed, possibly down the middle of the street. Did I miss something or has there been a lot less attention to this than there was for Gustav? Why didn’t they get everyone out of Galveston? Screw the gas prices, this thing looks like it could be a major disaster on a human scale.
Anyway, hope everyone is ok.
That’s a little strange, isn’t it?
Not really, when you consider how many times they changed their mind on why we really went to Iraq.
Well, Bill, not to pick nits, but decapitation is bad news for most people, Myers and Chandler being notable exceptions.
Did I miss something or has there been a lot less attention to this than there was for Gustav?
There will always be a segment of the population who will ignore the warnings. And, unlike with so many before Katrina, these people had their chance to get away. I also think there’s a segment that simply sees this as ‘cry wolf’ after Gustav 2 weeks ago. Ike, however, is very real, and very dangerous, much more so than Gustav.
I think the region is taking the right approach this time though: get people the @#$% out of Galveston and the other low-lying towns, and try and keep those who live in Houston away from the bay to stay home, so the roads aren’t completely jammed with people and therefore nobody can get away from the hurricane.
They’re saying about 250k of the 1.2 million that were under mandatory evacuation in the coastal areas have stayed behind. Call me a cold-hearted bášŧárd, but if you stay behind in Galveston or some of those other low lying towns with this hurricane, thinking it’s no big deal, you get everything that’s coming to you.
“Myers and Chandler being notable exceptions.”
Just because I have a face that sours my cereal’s milk every morning…
So, when are the discussions here, and in America, going back to the presidential candidates instead of one of the vice-presidential candidate? Inquiring redhead wants to know!
So, when are the discussions here, and in America, going back to the presidential candidates instead of one of the vice-presidential candidate? Inquiring redhead wants to know!
I think the McCain team would like to talk about Palin right up to Nov 4.
Well, Bill, not to pick nits, but decapitation is bad news for most people, Myers and Chandler being notable exceptions.
Ok, I’ll give them that…but I can walk through a frikken hawthorn bush. Ok, I’ll get a few nasty scrapes but nothing a little Bactine won’t fix.
Call me a cold-hearted bášŧárd, but if you stay behind in Galveston or some of those other low lying towns with this hurricane, thinking it’s no big deal, you get everything that’s coming to you.
I can’t go that far…but isn’t Galveston where we had the worst US hurricane disaster of all time? That would be all the incentive I’d need.
Rene: The media may have a certain liberal bias, but is there any mainstream leftist figure in the US that is as extreme as Ann Coulter? Maybe Michael Moore?
Luigi Novi: In terms of dishonesty, sure. But in terms of bigotry and pure hatred, no. Moore’s a propagandist, but he’s not the bigot that Coulter is.
“Oh who am I kidding? I hate vampires.”
What can you do? They control the media.
All I can say about the interview w/ Charlie Gibson is that her answer on the Bush Doctrine qusetion reminded me of nothing so much as the video PAD posted last spring about the Miss Teen South Carolina answer set to cabaret music.
Lisa said, “she sounded like my students, trying to toss enough words together that you couldn’t tell they didn’t have a clue what you’d asked.”
TWL
Hey, off topic but is anyone on the board from texas? In the Galvaston area?
Not in the Galvaston area, thank God, but in Bryan. That’s 100 miles up Highway 6 from Houston. Texas A&M is in our twin City of College Station and just 5 miles away if that helps. The outside weather is decidedly nasty at the moment, but things should be okay if we just stay inside. The wind outside is currently 30 mph with gust of 45, but I think that what says everything is that we are one of the places that some people are being evacuated to.
So, while Ike pretty much ruined my weekend, I think that the worst that it might visit on me is a few hours of lost power (and I don’t expect that).
I’m glad it wasn’t nearly as bad as it could be, David.
Back to Sarah Palin’s interview w/ Gibson for a moment, I thought this article was beautifully written. I don’t know the author’s background, so I don’t know if there’s an ax to grind here, but he makes a great case.
http://jamesfallows.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/09/the_palin_interview.php
TWL
Stay safe, David.
Rene,
I like your style. Next time I am in Brazil, I’ll look you up (wink, wink)
“…Rene: The media may have a certain liberal bias, but is there any mainstream leftist figure in the US that is as extreme as Ann Coulter? Maybe Michael Moore?…”
My first response would be that you would not hear about it. Tedd Rall said some equally hateful things. Michael Moore has spouted some awful stuff that is not spotlighted in the MSM. They are always protected.
by the way…
Charles Gibson’s questions :
Obama interview:
How does it feel to break a glass ceiling?
How does it feel to “win”?
How does your family feel about your “winning” breaking a glass ceiling?
Who will be your VP?
Should you choose Hillary Clinton as VP?
Will you accept public finance?
What issues is your campaign about?
Will you visit Iraq?
Will you debate McCain at a town hall?
What did you think of your competitor’s [Clinton] speech?
Palin interview:
Do you have enough qualifications for the job you’re seeking? Specifically have you visited foreign countries and met foreign leaders?
Aren’t you conceited to be seeking this high level job?
Questions about foreign policy
-territorial integrity of Georgia
-allowing Georgia and Ukraine to be members of NATO
treaty
-Iranian nuclear threat
-what to do if Israel attacks Iran
-Al Qaeda motivations
-the Bush Doctrine
-attacking terrorists harbored by Pakistan
Is America fighting a holy war? [misquoted Palin]
And I have never taken Ann Coulter seriously…I always thought she was a comedian with a potty mouth.
No, not, um, to trick anyone to do the thing I’ve demonstrated you’re discouraging them from doing. But for the clear reasons I’ve provided you had to wait for “Brian” to refer to indirectly.
Isn’t your soul worth more then the stupid 3¢ privileges you get from your tiny thefts of hypocrisy? Look through all of our exchanges. How sad is it that no one here cares about you more than I do? Who here cares about you more than the guy trying to stop you from trading away your soul for scraps?
Tedd Rall said some equally hateful things.
Yeah but who takes Ted Rall even a little bit seriously? Coulter still gets invited on shows to spout her idiocy. Her books sell.
There’s always the patented Google Relevancy Test to experiment with.
Ted Rall:
Results 1 – 10 of about 337,000 for “Ted Rall”. (0.22 seconds)
Ann Coulter:
Results 1 – 10 of about 4,010,000 for “Ann Coulter”. (0.18 seconds)
Yeah, the two compare so well.
Is it possible to have politics without namecalling, mudslinging, hypocracy, lying (or self deception)?
“Stay safe, David.”
I’ll 2nd that.
“stupid 3¢ privileges”
Wow, the dollar has been plummeting.
“Is it possible to have politics without namecalling, mudslinging, hypocracy, lying (or self deception)?”
But… But… But… How would we know it was politics without all of that?
~=?)`
Tim Lynch: All I can say about the interview w/ Charlie Gibson is that her answer on the Bush Doctrine qusetion reminded me of nothing so much as the video PAD posted last spring about the Miss Teen South Carolina answer set to cabaret music.
Luigi Novi: Okay, it wasn’t THAT bad. At least Palin could form coherent sentences. Caitlin Upton’s problem was that she is either brainless, or was just overwhelmed by appearance on stage on TV. Palin’s is that she was evasive.
“Stay safe, David.”
Ditto.
I didn’t say it was an exact model, Luigi — just that that’s what it reminded me of. And her answer to the Bush Doctrine question wasn’t evasive — she pretty clearly didn’t know what it was and was trying to talk around that fact.
TWL
I wasn’t going to call you out and publicly spank you over this, Mulligan, but I realized that so many public mischaracterizations, slanders and half truths can’t be left unchallenged. You must be stopped for your own good (as well as the general edification of the people here at Peter’s blog) or else your next few posts could devolve to you claiming that you personally stopped the bridge to nowhere.
I perform this intervention with the sincere belief that you will one day thank me for it.
” I loves me some vampires. They are so cool, what with their moping around about immortality and how hard it is to live forever and never being able to feel the sun’s warm rays upon their pale pallid cheeks. Hanging out with their mopey eurotrash friends all night, talking talking talking. And they’re tough! Except for crosses, garlic, holy water, running water, running holy water, hawthorne bushes, wood, silver, sunlight, decapitation, lightning, anything religious, and probably about a dozen other things, many of which will not hurt a normal person.
Oh who am I kidding? I hate vampires. The only time I liked them was on Buffy, and I note that the word vampire was immediately followed by the word slayer. Could there BE a more useless monster. As I think I mentioned in an email to you once, you almost have to feel sorry for them–everything kills them! Christopher lee spent most of the Hammer Horror movies standing around in abandoned churches or in a castle and who could blame him? Whenever he ventured outside to chase after Peter Cushing it would end badly. SATANIC RITES OF DRACULA, perfect example. He lives as a reclusive Howard Hughes figure in a highrise, living off the wealth from his savvy investments (ok, actually it was just $12 he put in a bank back in 1738 but through the miracle of compound interest he’s sitting pretty) and when Peter Cushing finally gets him to chase him outside what happens? He walks right into a Hawthorne bush which was what the crown of thorns was made from that was placed on Christ’s head and he bleeds to death. The look on his face is really sad to see. He can’t believe it. “What, this kills me too? Son of a bìŧçh!”
And this is the king of the vampires!”
I find this casual disregard of the real vampire lore and the disparagement of it to be truly shocking when coming from a fan of zombies. Zombies have been, in many horror circles, one of the most misunderstood and maligned of the horror monsters out there. I’ve seen people call zombies stupid because they never act the same way or that different things can kill them in different movies.
For years now I’ve defended the beasts… er… ghouls from attack by people who either don’t know anything about them or merely know enough about them to be confused by the fact that there’s more than one cinematic representation of them with more than one set or rules. I’ve sometimes spent hours explaining to people that the whole ”we want brains” thing was from Return of the Living Dead and that the zombies in Dawn of the Dead (original) act differently because Return isn’t a Romero film. I see people who complain that zombies can run in one film but not the other while in still other films they can leap thirty feet into the air and back with no problems.
There are many zombie films and each zombie film has its own set of rules. The same can be said of vampires.
While I love all things Hammer Horror, they really went crazy with their copy of “Vampire Slaughtering 101” when working on that series. In some cases they pulled different ways to kill a vampire from different regions’ legends and lore and used them as though every vampire was susceptible to every one of them. Hëll, neither they nor many other have even gotten the sunlight issue right. In many legends, including those that Bram Stoker drew his inspiration from; sunlight will not kill a master vampire. It might harm some undead slave thing that it has created, but it won’t kill a master vampire. Sunlight merely weakens a master vampire in those legends so that, while he is moving about during the day, he is more vulnerable to those things that can harm him. But those things that can harm him are not as numerous as many believe.
Remember the film, staying in the Hammer lines, Captain Kronos: Vampire Hunter ? Remember how they were running a test to find out how to kill the master vampire of the film? Remember how they were explaining to the one local that there are many forms of vampire and there are just as many different techniques that you need to know in order to combat them all? Remember how the clichéd tricks like the stake and holy water were doing jack and $&!^ to the guy they were using as their Guinea pig? That was truer to the vampire lore as a whole. Not everything that we know of that kills a vampire kills every vampire. Actually, most of the things that we “know” kills a vampire don’t work on most of the worlds vampires.
It’s a bit like Japanese demons VS American demons. There are many demons in Japanese lore that can be repelled by you throwing certain kinds of beans at them. I’ve never come across an American demon myth that references that and it would be both wrong and unfair to claim that demons were wimps because you could just chuck a can of Heinz’s finest at them and they would slither away with their slime tucked between their legs. It might also been seen as unfair to tar zombies with the brush of stupidity that Day of the Dead (2008) was, but that’s kinda what you’re doing with vampires.
The whole ”hanging out with their mopey eurotrash friends all night, talking talking talking” thing is also more to do with crap trends than it is to do with actual vampires. For some unfortunate reason everyone writing vampire fiction in the last few decades decided that the sympathetic and romantic vampire was the be all and end all of the lore. The simple fact is that, in the totality of vampire fiction and legend, there are far more vicious and vile monsters than there are wimpy little lovesick puppies with dreams of holding hands with Sarah Michelle Gellar on a sunny Malibu beach. Some people have even tried to turn the clock back on this particularly craptacular fad by reintroducing audiences to the vile monsters that vampires usually are. Does 30 Days of Night ring a bell? How about the bad áššëš that were Lance Henriksen and Bill Paxton in Near Dark?
Vampires are unfortunately, like zombies, whatever society chooses to make them through the quality of their depiction in pop culture. Rather than disparaging the negatives that have been thrust upon them by the stupidity and laziness of filmmakers, you should give them the respect that the actual lore and legends has earned them.