AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Why they hate her (Sarah Palin)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why they hate her (Sarah Palin) - Page 11

post #401 of 626
9/30/08 at 10:29pm
Even political junkies don't read "all of them."

I read the Times, TPM, and Yglesias as my main sources of news.
Reply
Reply
post #402 of 626
9/30/08 at 11:24pm
The fact that she is hyperdefensive (this comes out in her debates in Alaska as well) when challenged on facts reveals how little she actually knows. What is interesting is that her instinct is to paint the fact that she is defending her lack of knowledge in terms of folksy country bumpkin speech is the only way to come off as anything but an asshole.

Unfortunately, her role as VP candidate means she has to defend someone else's positions -- it isn't simply enough for her to say that I don't know how were gonna solve this problem but John McCain has an answer...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #403 of 626
10/1/08 at 1:13am
Palin's approval rating in Alaska ain't 80% no more, I tell 'ya, so you can stop claiming she's the most popular, Camp McCain.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20...mt4r_PO_Cs0NUE

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #404 of 626
10/1/08 at 8:25am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

She could have at least named a few of the larger ones: WP, NT, USAT, even Alaska's ADN...

Yikes, now she doesn't even read! This has gotten to be a deranged Borkfest.

When her coverage started -- started -- with her "faking her pregnancy to hide her daughter's love child", followed by lists of banned books, sexist jokes, and bigoted commentary on her religulous practices......wait a minute, how do you poison a relationship again? (And which candidate is getting similar treatment?) If Palin had told people that FDR had gotten on television in 1929, she'd probably would have done a Harriet Myers due to press coverage by now.

The press has been running a time-tested, full-fledged Borking, and her handlers know it, and won't let her loose. (Handlers did the same thing with Al Gore, when we saw him pitch for "counting every* vote" after the general, everyone thought "who is this passionate, nearly charismatic guy who wants to be president?") The situation is poisoned, with a froze-up candidate on one end, and the press obviously looking for more material for their "she's so stupid" coverage on the other.

Imagine that, instead of playing go-along, get-along with the Daley machine, a certain candidate had run an anti-corruption campaign in Chicago, won upset in an election, then driven a hard bargain with Big Oil, then raised taxes on Big Oil, then gave all his constituents a check for $1200 dollars**? That might -- just maybe -- get some coverage.

So, when a story as juicy as what she pulled off in Alaska goes begging, so that she can be played as a bimbo -- maybe there's little point in participating in a low-brow game. The press' antics lack the same integrity now, as it did when they did this to Bork, Reagan, Quayle, etc. Nothing new (and still pretty tame by 19th century standards, so go figure.)

Just don't ask me to look at all this a see a single network journalist who is "just covering Palin". It's a ridiculous notion.


















*except military
**for a full description of the plan, see BHO's campaign ad telling us that McCain is in the pocket of Big Oil, and that a windfall profit tax would provide everyone with a $1200 check.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #405 of 626
10/1/08 at 8:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmz View Post

Yikes, now she doesn't even read!

No one said that. The point is that, when asked simply to name some magazines and newspapers she reads, she couldn't do it.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #406 of 626
10/1/08 at 8:48am
When Katie Couric asked her about the bailout, this is what she said. She was cribbing from *index cards* on her lap. Read it. It's fucking gibberish. And it shows no understanding of the bailout, either the context in which it sits, the way it's operating, and what exactly is happening.

"What the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health care reform that is needed to help shore up the economy Helping the Oh, its got to be all about job creation too. Shoring up our economy and putting it back on the right track. So health care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions and tax relief for Americas.

And trade weve got to see trade as opportunity, not as a competitive scary thing. But 1 in 5 jobs being created in the trade sector today. Weve got to look at that as more opportunity. All those things under the umbrella of job creation."
meh
Reply
meh
Reply
post #407 of 626
10/1/08 at 8:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

No one said that. The point is that, when asked simply to name some magazines and newspapers she reads, she couldn't do it.

The context is poisoned by a partisan press [which I'm not decrying -- that's part of a free society]. But in this context -- why say anything meaningful to Couric? Why not put her off and be intentionally vague?

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #408 of 626
10/1/08 at 8:51am
Please tell me this is a joke.

You're standing for election. No matter what you're asked, you say what you believe in. This is what has sunk Democrats for the last 12 (at least) years.

Even Republicans have done a bit of that.

This reads like the worst water carrying and rationalisation.
meh
Reply
meh
Reply
post #409 of 626
10/1/08 at 8:52am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harald View Post

Please tell me this is a joke.

You're standing for election. No matter what you're asked, you say what you believe in. This is what has sunk Democrats for the last 12 (at least) years.

Even Republicans have done a bit of that.

This reads like the worst water carrying and rationalisation.

When that part of the press has it in for you, and your handlers overreact -- no. This is what happens. She'll save it for the rallies.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #410 of 626
10/1/08 at 8:59am
Didn't Palin do an interview with Hannity?

Didn't he ask her any hard questions or was the interview scripted?
Reply
Reply
post #411 of 626
10/1/08 at 8:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmz View Post

The context is poisoned by a partisan press [which I'm not decrying -- that's part of a free society]. But in this context -- why say anything meaningful to Couric? Why not put her off and be intentionally vague?

What fucking context? Couric asked her to name a few magazines and newspapers that she reads so that people can get a sense of what shapes her world view. National Review? New Yorker? Atlantic? Foreign Affairs? Economist? NYT? WSJ? WaPo?

And she said "Oh, I read all of 'em."

She was unable, for whatever reason, to answer a simple question about what she reads, for fuck's sake.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #412 of 626
10/1/08 at 9:01am
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmz View Post

The context is poisoned by a partisan press [which I'm not decrying -- that's part of a free society]. But in this context -- why say anything meaningful to Couric? Why not put her off and be intentionally vague?

There's intentionally vague and then there is embarrassing yourself.
Reply
Reply
post #413 of 626
10/1/08 at 9:01am
Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

Didn't Palin do an interview with Hannity?

Didn't he ask her any hard questions or was the interview scripted?

here.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #414 of 626
10/1/08 at 9:02am
Man, I wish I had time to "read all of 'em".
Reply
Reply
post #415 of 626
10/1/08 at 9:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

Didn't Palin do an interview with Hannity?

Didn't he ask her any hard questions or was the interview scripted?

I don't watch Fox and don't listen to Hannity -- can't help you there.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #416 of 626
10/1/08 at 9:05am
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

What fucking context? Couric asked her to name a few magazines and newspapers that she reads so that people can get a sense of what shapes her world view. National Review? New Yorker? Atlantic? Foreign Affairs? Economist? NYT? WSJ? WaPo?

And she said "Oh, I read all of 'em."

She was unable, for whatever reason, to answer a simple question about what she reads, for fuck's sake.

You've got to keep what I said up at the top of page in mind. The "caribou barbie" blood is in the water, and both she and her handlers know it. What other context could there be?

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #417 of 626
10/1/08 at 9:21am
Oof.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Palin

Gov. PALIN: I'm saying that personally I would counsel that person to choose life, despite horrific, horrific circumstances that this person would find themselves in. And if you're asking, though, kind of foundationally here should anybody end up in jail for having had an abortion, absolutely not. That's nothing that I would ever support.

It's murder unless it's not, I suppose.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #418 of 626
10/1/08 at 9:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmz View Post

You've got to keep what I said up at the top of page in mind. The "caribou barbie" blood is in the water, and both she and her handlers know it. What other context could there be?

Um, how about this context: she is running for VP?
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #419 of 626
10/1/08 at 9:24am
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Oof.
It's murder unless it's not, I suppose.

Shit...Couric asked her specifically in a case where a father rapes his daughter and even then Ms. Palin is against letting the girl have an abortion. Speaking just for myself, this is more offensive and frightening than not being able to name a newspaper or magazine.
Reply
Reply
post #420 of 626
10/1/08 at 9:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

Shit...Couric asked her specifically in a case where a father rapes his daughter and even then Ms. Palin is against letting the girl have an abortion. Speaking just for myself, this is more offensive and frightening than not being able to name a newspaper or magazine.

Here's one to make her head Explode,

"If the Devil rapes a woman and the woman got pregnant with the son of Beelzebub himself, would you advocate abortion in this case?"
Reply
Reply
post #421 of 626
10/1/08 at 9:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Oof.



It's murder unless it's not, I suppose.

Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

Shit...Couric asked her specifically in a case where a father rapes his daughter and even then Ms. Palin is against letting the girl have an abortion. Speaking just for myself, this is more offensive and frightening than not being able to name a newspaper or magazine.

I think we're getting warmer as to the source of both your objections over Palin. Objecting to her religulousness is at least straightforward. (!)

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #422 of 626
10/1/08 at 9:34am
Time out, everyone. Palin is not responsible for being unknowledgeable, uninformed and more incoherent than anyone you've heard speak in years (besides, arguably, ms south carolina). No, sirs, the "press" is, and you are all just a bunch of anti-religious bigots.
Reply
Reply
post #423 of 626
10/1/08 at 9:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Um, how about this context: she is running for VP?

I think you're batting aside the points I made at the top of the page -- the "caribou barbie" thing is in play -- that's the political reality. She's not [been told to?] going to pick a fight with the press.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #424 of 626
10/1/08 at 9:37am
So I read the Hannity interview, on dial up here, video not an option, and she didn't embarrass herself even though it was a softball interview.

So who is the real Sarah Palin?

The Hannity version or Couric version?
Reply
Reply
post #425 of 626
10/1/08 at 9:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmz View Post

I think you're batting aside the points I made at the top of the page -- the "caribou barbie" thing is in play -- that's the political reality. She's not [been told to?] going to pick a fight with the press.

So answering Couric's question about her news sources would have been "picking a fight" with the press?

That makes even less sense than anything else you've tried so far.

Sorry, but you're doing a really, really poor job of scrambling for excuses for Little Miss "all of 'em". Harald's comment was dead-on... water-carrying and hyper-rationalization is all you're demonstrating here.
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #426 of 626
10/1/08 at 9:41am
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmz View Post

I think we're getting warmer as to the source of both your objections over Palin. Objecting to her religulousness is at least straightforward. (!)

This all comes back to McCain. He chose her and he still defends her.

Quote:
NPR: Given what you've said Senator, is there an occasion where you could imagine turning to Governor Palin for advice in a foreign policy crisis?

MCCAIN: I've turned to her advice many times in the past, I can't imagine turning to Senator Obama or Senator Biden because they've been wrong, they were wrong about Iraq, wrong about Russia...

NPR: But would you turn to Governor Palin?

MCCAIN: I certainly wouldn't turn to them, and I've already turned to Governor Palin particularly on energy issues and I've appreciated her background and knowledge on that and many other issues.

NPR: Does her energy qualification extend to the international energy market?

MCCAIN: Of course. Of course. That's what it's all about. It extends to a broad variety of issues from her worldview to threats that we face, to radical Islamic extremism, to specific areas of the world. I'm very proud of her, and proud of the knowledge and background that she has.

Well, that explains the whole not knowing where countries that aren't Russia.

It's crazy to me that McCain has no problems spouting off complete and utter lies. I mean really, does anyone believe that McCain has turned to Palin for foreign policy advice even once in the past, let alone "many times"? It is painfully clear that not only Palin but McCain will do and say anything it takes to get into the White House.

By the way NORAD called Sarah, they want the truth back. Before you create an international incident.

Never in my thirty years following politics have I seen two morons of stupidity and ignorance.
Reply
Reply
post #427 of 626
10/1/08 at 9:52am
Quote:
Originally Posted by outsider View Post

here's one to make her head explode,

"if the devil rapes a woman and the woman got pregnant with the son of beelzebub himself, would you advocate abortion in this case?"

funniest thing i've read all day.
Reply
Reply
post #428 of 626
10/1/08 at 9:53am
Quote:
Originally Posted by FormerLurker View Post

So answering Couric's question about her news sources would have been "picking a fight" with the press?

That makes even less sense than anything else you've tried so far.

Sorry, but you're doing a really, really poor job of scrambling for excuses for Little Miss "all of 'em". Harald's comment was dead-on... water-carrying and hyper-rationalization is all you're demonstrating here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

This all comes back to McCain. He chose her and he still defends her.



Well, that explains the whole not knowing where countries that aren't Russia.

It's crazy to me that McCain has no problems spouting off complete and utter lies. I mean really, does anyone believe that McCain has turned to Palin for foreign policy advice even once in the past, let alone "many times"? It is painfully clear that not only Palin but McCain will do and say anything it takes to get into the White House.

By the way NORAD called Sarah, they want the truth back. Before you create an international incident.

Never in my thirty years following politics have I seen two morons of stupidity and ignorance.



Not at all, this sort of angry reaction -- again -- starting her coverage with a conspiracy theory about her pregnancy, says everything about how they are approaching her. At first it was "evil genius," then it slipped into "dragon lady with an enemies list", which has settled into the default "she's and idiot" coverage, edited for maximum effect. The press, and BHO's team of attorneys have been crawling all over the state for over a month now -- I guess the bimbo angle is all they could collectively manage.

It's not arguable any other way, and it's obvious to registered Independents, and other nominally objective spectators. What she has accomplished is literally right out of an BHO ad. I made, and have made, salient points about what she accomplished in Alaska -- how it would be played by a favorable press, you guys wont touch it with a ten-foot pole. I'm left with quote mining and gaffe strafing.

Lame!

Guys, for your part, this doesn't have the ingredients for a meaningful discussion. Take a look at her past, and tell me she's has the accomplishments of an idiot. (?)

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #429 of 626
10/1/08 at 10:00am
Fact: Obama sent no lawyers to Alaska.

dmz, you really ought to be ashamed of your partisan support of your clearly out of her league governor...

Also note: You are attempting to suggest that her story is remarkable -- no one is denying that she changed the game in Alaska, but at the same time, she is playing her own much more morally reprehensible version. That is the rub.
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #430 of 626
10/1/08 at 10:09am
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmz View Post

I made, and have made, salient points about what she accomplished in Alaska

What does that have to do with her embarrassing presence on the national stage?

Most of us are probably more prepared to have a discussion like that than she is.
Reply
Reply
post #431 of 626
10/1/08 at 10:25am
From the Free Republic Forums...

Quote:
"Damn if he isnt hard to defend! Help us out John! Or just shut up and let Sarah talk."

I think I have to agree with that guy on that one. For the sake of the Obama campaign, please! Let Sarah talk more!
Reply
Reply
post #432 of 626
10/1/08 at 10:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

From the Free Republic Forums...



I think I have to agree with that guy on that one. For the sake of the Obama campaign, please! Let Sarah talk more!

I just glanced through the posts on that page...

um, is it just me or does the undercurrent of racism worry you?

not to mention the moments of sexism.
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #433 of 626
10/1/08 at 10:47am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

I just glanced through the posts on that page...

um, is it just me or does the undercurrent of racism worry you?

not to mention the moments of sexism.

\ There's a whole lot of crazy going on at that website, sorry I didn't warn you. It reminds me of discovering 4chan* for the first time.

* Again, be warned.
Reply
Reply
post #434 of 626
10/1/08 at 10:52am
How is it even possible that the debate moderator is writing a book on Obama, to be published on Inauguration Day?

How will Americans ever run proper elections, when you can't even run the debates?
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #435 of 626
10/1/08 at 10:58am
Frank, it's Gwen Ifil, and you really don't get more respected than her. She's moderated many debates, and I'm not aware of any claims of partisanship.
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
post #436 of 626
10/1/08 at 10:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

How is it even possible that the debate moderator is writing a book on Obama, to be published on Inauguration Day?

How will Americans ever run proper elections, when you can't even run the debates?

Aha, an excuse to cancel the debate.
Reply
Reply
post #437 of 626
10/1/08 at 11:01am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flounder View Post

Frank, it's Gwen Ifil, and you really don't get more respected than her. She's moderated many debates, and I'm not aware of any claims of partisanship.

Then you entirely missed the reaction to her commentary after Palin's convention speech.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.p...w&pageId=76645

But it's not even about her commentary. Do journalists no longer understand what a conflict of interest is?
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #438 of 626
10/1/08 at 11:08am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

Then you entirely missed the reaction to her commentary after Palin's convention speech.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.p...w&pageId=76645

But it's not even about her commentary. Do journalists no longer understand what a conflict of interest is?

Well, I don't have sound at work, but I certainly didn't see any "look of disgust" on her face. The other big complaint seems to be that she kept Cheney on the time schedule in the VP debate in 2004. The horror!

Also, to quote your own source:

Quote:
She told AP her view of Obama: "I still don't know if he'll be a good president."
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
post #439 of 626
10/1/08 at 11:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flounder View Post

Also, to quote your own source:

He's also sourcing from Michelle Malkin, that's in bat country...
Reply
Reply
post #440 of 626
10/1/08 at 11:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

She was unable, for whatever reason, to answer a simple question about what she reads, for fuck's sake.

That only proves that the EVIL EASTERN LIBERAL ELITE MEDIA™ was attempting a gotcha question based on a sexist attitude rooted in a deep fear of the American way.


---
It is amazing how this is continuing. The bar just keep getting moved lower.

---
My friends here in Japan are laughing their heads off at the Republican party; it is embarrassing.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Why they hate her (Sarah Palin)