Originally Posted by trumptman
The point is that Biden did not interview on the Sunday shows in the same time frame as we are discussing for Palin and you and no one else accused him of ducking the press. We hear about McCain being a zillion years old when Biden is 6 years younger and is a "seasoned citizen" as well. We hear talk about Palin's hair, clothes and glasses and none about Biden's hair plugs and spray tan.
The McCain campaign specifically announced that Palin was embargoed till she was ready. Talking about "time frames" when a Democrat didn't appear on a talk show for a few days is a very obvious attempt at irrelevant distraction.
To the extent that the media talks about Palin's hair, clothes and glasses when they don't talk about a male candidate's looks, it is, in fact, sexist. Are you saying that Palin should get a pass on being questioned on the issues because there is sexism in the media? I guess the pit bull with lip stick isn't such a bad ass after all. Maybe Hillary could give her a few tips.
It is ridiculous to complain about not knowing issues when the media, in a frenzy doesn't want to inquire about issues but about crap. Not even good or interesting crap like did you like the pot when you tried it Mrs. Palin? Instead they want to show their rage about their messiah being challenged, toss their principles to the wind and attack Palin about why she isn't June Cleaver. It is nonsense.
Quite a rant. However, for every passing reference to Plain's glasses or having a special needs child, I see 20 or 30 stories about her abuse of power problems, her mischaracterization of her record, and questions about her qualifications. I understand why you want to pretend like there is a "frenzy" around "sexist" attacks, because that's easier to defend against than the real questions about her track record.
BTW, I seem to recall you being a big proponent of the "fair game" principle, wherein anything foregrounded by the by the candidate becomes legitimate fodder for attack. Are we to assume you no longer believe that, or can we expect you to continue to adopt and shed "values" for strategic purposes or as the mood strikes?
George Ste... screw spelling that was interviewing Obama today and they had a very cute exchange about Palin having lead her basketball team to the state championship and whether she or Obama would win in a game of HORSE or other basketball challenge. It wasn't an important issue and Obama was asked several substantive questions before it. However it shows the respect that Obama is accorded that Palin is not. It was cute, nice and very humanizing. Asking if your son is really your grandson, about kids that are off limits by informal rules and also by the demands of both campaigns, etc. means the media just doesn't get it yet. Perhaps a few have and we will see those interviews. I want to see them too.
How would you know what kind of respect interviewers would afford Palin, given that she hasn't given any?
And if the "press" is so enamored of Obama, why did they spend a good long time grilling him about flag pins and whether or not he puts his hand on his heart when he says the pledge of allegiance and if he truly loves America and if his wife truly loves America?
You have your little theory about press bias, but it requires extensive amounts of amnesia. I guess you have the ability to will away evidence, I don't.
I have no doubt that this woman will continue to persuade and will bring more voters to the Republican ticket. She has done so in the past and I have no doubt about the future. The media in their bias forgot the ground rules. When they remember them, the interviews will happen.
Yeah. And if she becomes vice president she can use the justice department as a political tool, stepping into her Cheney shoes, and if anyone asks any questions she can remind them that they've "forgotten the rules" and have another rally.