Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Shop AMAZON*
The pettiness that the press will not stoop to regarding this woman is astounding. I guess it's hard to top the whole "she's not really her son's mother" story. I'm sure they'll keep trying.
the pettiness that is shown by consuming this kind of crap "info-news" by the people who read it and are interested in all things Palin is astounding.stop blaming the press for her problems. it isn't the mainstreammedia whatever that is. It is Ms. Palin.
hd,Whether you love Palin, or hate Palin, she is a consistant newsworthy topic to all women, and a lot of men.
Whether you love Palin, or hate Palin, she is a consistant newsworthy topic to all women, and a lot of men.You maybe right, but this constant whinig about the press is getting to be a bore. If you are a putting yourself out there as a "public figure" its just silly to then whine all the time about the coverage your receiving. We just spent a weekend going over whether or not Obama might have slipped a peak at some girl's goodies, but from the Palinistas here, no one in the history of teh world has ever been treated so bad. If she wants she could have slinked away from the press coverage, like Jindal has managed to do, but she didn't want to. It's too late to complain about that now.
Kinda hard to slink away from press coverage, when the New York Times is constantly writing stories about her. Don't ya think?
The NYT thinks it understands Palin perfectly and it wants to share its insights daily: She is a blundering and inept mean girl who causes every attack against her by being unable to handle a man's job. Stay tuned, the same story will be written tomorrow with a sprinkling of new insider thoughts.
Kinda hard to slink away from press coverage, when the New York Times is constantly writing stories about her. Don't ya think?Again, common sense. Palin, the defeated VP candidate in a Presidential race and national zietgeist, resigns unexpectadly a little over a week ago. NY Times sends reporters down to cover the story. Reporters because they weren't prepared for a Palin self-immolation begin sourcing for the "real" story. A week later they have a recorded account of the reasons leading up to the resignation.This ain't rocket science. It's a week after the resignation not some random story after months of silence.
Obama could never withstand the kind of attacks that have been made on her. He gets pissy when someone asks him a question he doesn't like.
"Ethics complaints mounted." That's the way the Times coyly describes the Left's orchestrated assault by frivolous lawsuit after frivolous lawsuit on Sarah.
If you are a putting yourself out there as a "public figure" its just silly to then whine all the time about the coverage your receivingAnd why, pray tell, are we all just supposed to be resigned to living with jackals and hyenas in our political system and in our press?Especially when, by most of the left’s account, we are NOT supposed to feel a sense of resignation about global warming or about votes against gay marriage.She has a right to be outraged, even if she doesn’t have a right to sue for defamation.
Palin had a hair-thinning emergency.This is no laughing matter.Should Governor Palin find herself with anything less than a gorgeous head of hair, the Nazarite oath would be broken and God would leave her to suffer at the hands of the Philistines.Not pretty.
- got that right, Allen. What a threat she is to some people, gawd, to be plucking at her hair of all things, further concrete proof she is incapable of being more than a VP candidate and Governor
Obama could never withstand the kind of attacks that have been made on her. He gets pissy when someone asks him a question he doesn't like.Ha, double hah. Let's see people have branded his wife as hating her country, and also made fun her appearance on occassion. The Washington Times put his daughters on the cover of their paper coupled with a story about murdered children. He's been called a Socialist. He's been called a Marxist. He's been called a Fascist. He's been depicted in numerous racist ways from being called a 'coon' by the head of the Young Republicans to being hanged in effigy. He's created a "Terrorist Fist Jab" that white/black men have been performing for about 20 years. There have already been numerous death threats and plots on his life and his families. And yet he's complained less than Sarah does about a single joke from Letterman.Poor, poor wittle Princess Sarah. No one has ever in the history of humans had it oh so hard.
Only Maureen Dowd has had sufficient acuity to point out that Al Gore is undergoing male pattern baldness. Why have no reporters interviewed his hair stylist and body man to find out how Gore is handling this crisis?
Kinda hard to slink away from press coverage, when the New York Times is constantly writing stories about her.I thought the story portrayed her very sympathetically. What she's been going through is more than she can endure.Kinda makes you wonder how she thought she could handle being in the national spotlight, but so be it.Palin is a classic example of the Peter Principle. From the Time magazine review of Lawrence Peter's text:The "Peter Principle" states that "in a hierarchy, every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence; the cream rises until it sours." People who show competence are promoted whether or not they are qualified to perform competently at the next level. Eventually they go beyond their limits, become incompetent, and stop getting promoted. Here, the promising hockey mom became PTA leader, town councilwoman, village mayor, state commission chair, and finally governor. I recommend stepping back a bit, to find a job she can be successful at, before she attempts forward motion again. Maybe United States Senate?She'd be in DC, within easy reach of the rubber chicken circuit.
FLS...Have you considered writing free-lance for the NYT? I think your comment nails the NYT approach to reporting The Only Truth fit to print about Sarah Palin's arrogant attempt to become President of this country, which has been always ruled out of New York, while letting its monuments be kept further south at a Potomac River site.
This is the first I've heard that stress can cause hair to thin. Coupled with the prior unattributed sentence about Palin being "anxious and underweight," the observation suggests that Palin's "emergency" visit to the hairdresser is, for her, a matter of almost medical urgency. While there's certainly a limit to the gender neutrality we can expect of the press's Palin coverage, this is a bit much.I also found the article to be surprisingly sympathetic for the NYT, notwithstanding the up-front assertion that she blithly ignores advice. But I'd be a lot more sympathetic to the argument that Palin should be expected to weather such opposition if it weren't so extraordinary hostile.
I think some people under stress will pull out their hair. Literally. There's even a term for it: Trichotillomania.Was this what happened to Sarah!? Only her hairdresser knows for sure.
They burned her church down.They made sexual mockery of her daughter on network late night television.They are still diving in dumpsters in Alaska trying to crucify her.[blockquote]stop blaming the press for her problems. it isn't the mainstreammedia whatever that is. It is Ms. Palin[/blockquote]You're a moron.
I'm beginning to think the press is blaming her for THEIR problems. Seems to me the press is filled with an awful lot of not-very-bright mean girls with significant personal problems (and I'm including the men in the press under the "mean girl" rubric) and hair issues galore.This lurid press coverage is nothing but projection.
They burned her church down.They made sexual mockery of her daughter on network late night television.They are still diving in dumpsters in Alaska trying to crucify her.David Letterman is an arsonist? Who knew?One thing I do know: you can't dig up dirt on someone if there's no dirt there in the first place.
IM-That was quite a laundry list that you sputtered out, but it doesn't support your point. The so-called fist bump came on the cover of the New Yorker, a pro-Obama mag. I had not heard of the juxtaposition of the Obama daughters and the murdered students - I guess it didn't get much traction. The rest of your claims are pretty muddled - "he's been called" and such.But thank you for providing insight into the liberal mindset.
"One thing I do know: you can't dig up dirt on someone if there's no dirt there in the first place." This collection counters your point.
The so-called fist bump came on the cover of the New Yorker, a pro-Obama mag. I love how simple minded the rubes are. "Pro-Obama" as if the world is some binary place where either only one of two options.I had not heard of the juxtaposition of the Obama daughters and the murdered students - I guess it didn't get much traction. Here's where you make my point for me. The reason that there was no traction is because Obama didn't get on his pedestal and decry the Washington Times. Tell us how they are pro-children murders. Tell us how much everyone hates him, and how the "MSM" is trying to destroy him. My point remains, shit that Obama lets roll off his shoulder, Palin and the rest of you treat as some affront that requires your thin-skin to paint everyone as against you. Seeing that both Palin and Obama have been treated terribly by their respective opponents and the media requires some ability to look at a situation rationally instead of with some skewed partisan lens. Seeing that Palin somehow is the only, or the worst, victim of the media and the other side of the aisle, despite reems of evidence for Obama and the Clintons receiving similar scrutiny requires a willful blindness that forces you to be ignorant of everything except what matters to you. That's called delusion.
I'd thought that the picture of the Obama girls paired with the unrelated story *thing* was immediately apologized for and explained as something of a typesetting error. Ie. The wrong picture got put in the wrong place. Sort of like the Chelsea/"White House dog" thing... which was immediately apologized for (profusely) and claimed as a mistake, the wrong picture getting put in the wrong place.There's always the possibility that it was on purpose, but it's not a surety that it was on purpose. In the case of Rush and the picture of Chelsea I figure the probability of a genuine mistake is small, though it's still possible. The chance of the photo of the Obama girls being a *deliberate* misplacement, IMO, is highly improbable... but those girls have been treated extremely well and that doesn't leave any legitimate examples of their mistreatment, does it."They burned her church down."I'd forgotten about that. Hacked her personal e-mail, too. Not that hacking e-mail is on the same plane of hate the way burning a church is, of course, it was just another thing that I realized that I'd forgotten.
"Here's where you make my point for me. The reason that there was no traction is because Obama didn't get on his pedestal and decry the Washington Times."Not in the least.It didn't get traction because NO ONE really believed that it was deliberate.Please describe a case where any of the coverage of Sarah Palin's children was accidental. Even OBAMA got on his pedestal long enough to make a statement "decrying" the abandonment of the general rule than families and particularly children are off limits... not in defense of HIS children, who were let entirely alone by everyone, but in defense of Palin's children because it was clearly obvious to everyone that they were being attacked and it was politically necessary, whatever his private opinion, that he go on record opposing that.
Invisible man...On the first Tuesday in November 40 months from now the world will be as completely binary as we are discussing it today. It's called winner take all. The will to hose the mud off of Palin as fast as it hit its appointed target who will likely be one-half of that great binary Day is not an evidence of delusion. It is American politics. The third party trick may still work. In 2008 the great Day had a third party flavor to it ( which was the great Racial Atonement Party) throwing its vote Obama's way. In 40 months, God willing, the decision will once more be a Binary one.
Was anyone ever charged in the church arson, by the way?Exactly who is the they in the statement They burned her church down?
Another reason that the scandal of the misplaced picture of the Obama girls got no traction is that everyone denounced it (even if the denunciation was that obviously somebody screwed up badly) and no one at all defended it.The treatment that Palin's children receive are not denounced by everyone. They're *defended*."I love how simple minded the rubes are. "Pro-Obama" as if the world is some binary place where either only one of two options."Who lives in a binary place? At least conservatives are willing to defend Obama's children.
The NYT citing the so-called "Troopergate" investigation by the "Republican-dominated Legislature," of course, fails to mention that it was overseen by two Democrat Obama supporters, Kim Elton and Hollis French.It also conveniently ignores that the State Personnel Board contradicted the negative findings of the French investigation.Typical NYT sleaze.
NYT isn't even a legitimate newspaper anymore. They should just change their name to NYFishWrap.
The NYT citing the so-called "Troopergate" investigation by the "Republican-dominated Legislature," of course, fails to mention that it was overseen by two Democrat Obama supporters, Kim Elton and Hollis French.It also conveniently ignores that the State Personnel Board contradicted the negative findings of the French investigation.elHombre fails to mention that the Alaska Legislative Council that authorized the investigation of Palin by a 12-0 vote contained 8 Republicans and 4 Democrats. This Republican-dominated group picked Democrat Hollis French to oversee the investigation.elHombre also conveniently ignores that Sarah Palin simultaneously directed the State Personnel Board (whose members serve at the Governor's pleasure) to investigate her and defended herself from the allegations that she had made. Of what value is having your subordinates clear you of any wrongdoing?Typical elHombre, I suppose.
Palin backers insist that the criticisms of Palin come from Democrats. You know, those "big city Democrats."Well, as the article documents, that's a load of crap. Many Republicans are also criticizing her. People should remember that her ascent to the Governorship came about by taking on the former Governor. And he had a lot of friends, - many of whom then became her enemies. So, try not to be complete parrots for every chunk of nonsense to come out of her mouth.
"People should remember that her ascent to the Governorship came about by taking on the former Governor. And he had a lot of friends, - many of whom then became her enemies."Yes.People should remember this.
It didn't get traction because NO ONE really believed that it was deliberate.What no one are you talking about? I doubt you would be so forgiving if it was one of Sarah's kids in the NYTimes.And, on the defending of Palin's kids, most people spoke out against Letterman's joke and he apologized. Where people's defense stopped was when Palin decided to milk it by accussing him of "mind statutory rape".
"And, on the defending of Palin's kids, most people spoke out against Letterman's joke and he apologized."It took him a week to apologize mostly because the reaction was *not* condemnation, it was "It was a joke, a JOKE, don't you understand the concept of JOKE? Get over it!"A bit on CNN (I think it was) reporting on the kerfuffle was so blind to the inappropriateness of rude jokes at the expense of politician's children that they honestly thought it was all about the slutty stewardess remark.And even when Letterman *did* apologize it was "Wow, sorry, I was talking about Bristol," as if that was okay then.Which did not gain general disapproval from the politically liberal at all, but agreement that, indeed, Bristol is 18 and therefore not the least off-limits.Which someone should explain to Hillary who had kittens over the "pimping out Chelsea" remark despite the fact that Chelsea isn't an 18 year old adult, she's twenty-NINE.
Perhaps these stories get so much traction because conservative bloggers repeat them ad infinitum.In fact, they seem to have a much longer shelf life amongst right-wingers than they do in the MSM.BTW, what's the story with the photo at the beginning of the linked article? Maybe AA can deconstruct the image and assure us that no child abuse was going on.
fls wrote: elHombre fails to mention that the [Republican-dominated] Alaska Legislative Council ... picked Democrat Hollis French to oversee the investigation.I didn't mention that several Republican legislators sued to stop French's witch hunt either. So? Unless French and Elton ceased being Democrats and prominent Obama supporters at the time, your comment is just another non sequitur.elHombre also conveniently ignores that Sarah Palin simultaneously directed the State Personnel Board (whose members serve at the Governor's pleasure) to investigate her.... Of what value is having your subordinates clear you of any wrongdoing?I didn't ignore this. It's nonsense. (a) Board Members serve six year terms and can only be removed for cause. (b) The independent counsel hired by the Board was a highly respected Democrat lawyer who had supported Palin's opponent in the 2006 election. (c) The Personnel Board, by law, is the proper body to hear ethics complaints and has handled all subsequent complaints against Palin.The Board found for Palin and contravened the "French Report." The NYT should have said so. That was my point. Why pimp for the NYT, fls? Kindred ethics?
Nice piece from Dahlia Lithwick:Once you understand that Palin's only actual message is the importance of loving and understanding Palin, it becomes easier to understand why she quit. .http://www.slate.com/id/2222523/
I thought the story portrayed her very sympathetically. What she's been going through is more than she can endure.Oh, what a nice comment!Kinda makes you wonder how she thought she could handle being in the national spotlight...Ah! Maybe not so nice after all.You've just underlined the purpose of the article, which is to present Mrs. Palin in a 'sympathetic' light while trashing her at the same time.Same old same old.
and I'm including the men in the press under the "mean girl" rubric... as well you should. No one more deserving. Not only that, but as this saga goes on, and especially now that Palin has stepped down, I'm a little repulsed by the willingness of so many guys on the Left to pile on a girl. Not just journalists, either. So many guys who just can't stop themselves from posting one more nasty comment. That's very catty, girlish behavior, for sure.
"I thought the story portrayed her very sympathetically. What she's been going through is more than she can endure."And Murtha didn't say anything BAD about those cold blooded murdering Marines, after all, he explained how it wasn't THEIR fault that they are all hovering on the knife edge of atrocity.Very sympathetic.
Just when you think the going can't get a step farther into the land of the dumb, up pops:paul a'barge who said... "They burned her church down.They made sexual mockery of her daughter on network late night television.They are still diving in dumpsters in Alaska trying to crucify her."1. who is "They" Paul?....2. hey, it was Sarah the wonton who tossed her daughter under the promisxcuity bus, or did you forget who made it button issue in the last campaign when the democrats NEVER brought it up3. diving into dumpsters to crucify her?oh Paul. oh Paul....pitiful. what the hell are you talking about?...ooops asking the wrong person. you don't know.
Abuse is okay if you can claim someone "asked" for it.The simple fact that Sarah Palin showed up on stage with a pregnant daughter means that every nasty thing that follows is ALL HER FAULT.Remember... being liberal means you always have someone else to blame.
Honestly... the democrats "never brought it up"... wow.By those standards Al Gore never once mentioned Global Warming.
This just breaks MY heart...HA!A new CBS poll found that most Americans think she's not up to the task of being President---including a huge majority of Republicans.22% say she does have the ability to be an effective president. 33% of Republicans say she does. 65% of all Americans51% of Republicans say she does not.Another CBS poll shows that most Americans believe she quit to help her own political career.24% of those polled accept Palin's explanation that she resigned because it was the right thing to do for Alaska. 52% cited her political ambition as the reason for her resignation.
Turns out Palins's hairdresser says the NYT's reporting is false.
Seeing that both Palin and Obama have been treated terribly by their respective opponents and the media requires some ability to look at a situation rationally instead of with some skewed partisan lens.Sorry, the treatment was not remotely comparable. Remember all the weeks of fuss regarding people supposedly shouting "Kill him" at Palin rallies, which grew from one reporter's claim that he heard this at a Pennsylvania rally before Palin had even come on stage? That was declared unfounded by the Secret Service after a lengthy investigation, but every leftie I know stIll absolutely believes this was taking place everywhere she went.But almost no one has heard about Sarah Palin being hung in effigy for days in Hollywood, or having shots fired at her bus in New Mexico, or about the Obama volunteers selling "Sarah Palin is a Cunt" T-shirts from the pages of mybarackobama.com. These things really happened but were judged not newsworthy by the national media. It's a complete double standard.
Post a Comment