It is if one is Palin (She probably doesn't read any except perhaps the Standard, Spectator etc.).
Palin in 2012
- Thread starter Walter
- Start date
It is if one is Palin (She probably doesn't read any except perhaps the Standard, Spectator etc.).
Indeed, Gopher. Some people evidently regard everything they read on internet as the Gospel truth (especially if it supports their preconceived views). However, a lot of what is posted on internet is trash. So I always look at the source before I read anything. If the source is questionable, forget it.
So if somebody has known far right credentials (or far left credentials), what he says is worthless as far as I am concerned. I wouldn’t believe anything Rush ‘drug addict’ Limbaugh, Anne Coulter or this Dean Barnet character says, unless confirmed by an independent, reputable source. That pertains to facts and figures reported by them. As far as opinions are concerned, I wouldn’t believe them, period.
It's a good thing I'm not a right winger, because if I were, you would not permit me to have an opinion.
Why Is No One Laughing?
By R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. on 11.19.09 @ 6:09AM
WASHINGTON -- What would the mainstream media's response be if former governor Sarah Palin described China's economic growth to an audience of students in Shanghai as "an accomplishment unparalleled in human history"? That is what the most inexperienced president in modern American history said in Shanghai this week. I wonder if any of the assembled journalists choked. President Barack Obama makes such unhinged pronouncements with the kind of frequency that if he were anyone else he would be set down by the media as a boobie. I take that back. Vice President Joe Biden is equally gaffable, yet no one in the mainstream press makes him out to be a boobie. When he was tapped to be Senator Obama's running mate he was widely acknowledged -- from ABC to NBC and with all the like-minded newspapers in between -- as a foreign policy colossus.
Both of these men, when untethered from their Teleprompters, are prone to gibberish. Actually I suspect that the President's Shanghai preposterosity appeared in the text rolling down his Teleprompter. His speechwriters are as prone to the absurd as their boss. Nonetheless, President Obama is reputed in the media to be an orator of great gifts and anyway he is very charismatic. So apparently the journalists are insensate as the gaffes, the howlers, the jaw-dropping exaggerations roll forth.
Sarah Palin is accorded no such dispensation. During the 2008 presidential campaign, in answering a foreign policy query by Katie Couric about Russia's proximity to the state Palin then served as governor, she was mocked for saying Russia is so close it can be seen from Alaska. Her explanation to Couric, whose face was contorted in disbelief, contained the perfectly sensible observation that Alaska and Russia share "a very narrow maritime border." That and nothing further that the governor said was laughable. Still, the media laughed. The media did not laugh when Couric at about this time in the campaign listened attentively to Biden claim President Franklin Roosevelt talked to a nonexistent television audience during the 1929 stock market crash, four years before he was president and even more years before there was a television audience. Couric's respective countenance betrayed no evidence that she recognized that Herbert Hoover was actually then president and a television audience was years from reality. Couric too is a boobie.
There is something odd about the media's present absorption with the pulchritudinous Ms. Palin and her book tour. The media are exalting her even as they are disdaining her. The weird phenomenon puts me in mind of the way the media treated scandalous tales of President Bill Clinton's sex life. They covered the scandals in excruciating detail even as they sniffed that a politician's sex life (sex extravaganza) was beneath professional journalism's proper interest. Oh, and one other thing -- the journalists who unearthed these stories, stories that would appear over and again in Clinton's White House, were unworthy of being dignified with the designation "journalist."
Actually, as Palin began her book tour through rural America, it was the journalists who made the rural tour a stroke of public relations genius. It was up to the journalists to cover it or not, and though Palin is a candidate for absolutely nothing and is in fact a retired politician, the journalists followed her with their usual mixture of intense interest and contempt. They may not turn her into a presidential candidate, but they certainly have turned her into a celebrity. What we have here is still more evidence that the American journalists' proclaimed standards are not standards at all. American journalism is a chaos of subjectivity.
Put the politician who sees China's economic development as "an accomplishment unparalleled in human history" next to the politician who notes that her state borders Russia (and Canada too), thus giving its governor occasion for at least some foreign policy knowledge. The first is boomed as very charismatic, but so is the second. The first orates successfully to large crowds, but so does the second. The first is telegenic, charming, and a pioneer: the first mixed-race politician to be president. The second is telegenic, charming, and a pioneer: the first Republican woman to be nominated vice president. Is there a difference in their qualifications? Well, yes, the pulchritudinous Ms. Palin in 2008 had more executive experience than Mr. Obama, having been both a small town mayor and a governor. In fact, as President Obama comes up on his first year in office former governor Palin still has more executive experience. Why is no one laughing?
By R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. on 11.19.09 @ 6:09AM
WASHINGTON -- What would the mainstream media's response be if former governor Sarah Palin described China's economic growth to an audience of students in Shanghai as "an accomplishment unparalleled in human history"? That is what the most inexperienced president in modern American history said in Shanghai this week. I wonder if any of the assembled journalists choked. President Barack Obama makes such unhinged pronouncements with the kind of frequency that if he were anyone else he would be set down by the media as a boobie. I take that back. Vice President Joe Biden is equally gaffable, yet no one in the mainstream press makes him out to be a boobie. When he was tapped to be Senator Obama's running mate he was widely acknowledged -- from ABC to NBC and with all the like-minded newspapers in between -- as a foreign policy colossus.
Both of these men, when untethered from their Teleprompters, are prone to gibberish. Actually I suspect that the President's Shanghai preposterosity appeared in the text rolling down his Teleprompter. His speechwriters are as prone to the absurd as their boss. Nonetheless, President Obama is reputed in the media to be an orator of great gifts and anyway he is very charismatic. So apparently the journalists are insensate as the gaffes, the howlers, the jaw-dropping exaggerations roll forth.
Sarah Palin is accorded no such dispensation. During the 2008 presidential campaign, in answering a foreign policy query by Katie Couric about Russia's proximity to the state Palin then served as governor, she was mocked for saying Russia is so close it can be seen from Alaska. Her explanation to Couric, whose face was contorted in disbelief, contained the perfectly sensible observation that Alaska and Russia share "a very narrow maritime border." That and nothing further that the governor said was laughable. Still, the media laughed. The media did not laugh when Couric at about this time in the campaign listened attentively to Biden claim President Franklin Roosevelt talked to a nonexistent television audience during the 1929 stock market crash, four years before he was president and even more years before there was a television audience. Couric's respective countenance betrayed no evidence that she recognized that Herbert Hoover was actually then president and a television audience was years from reality. Couric too is a boobie.
There is something odd about the media's present absorption with the pulchritudinous Ms. Palin and her book tour. The media are exalting her even as they are disdaining her. The weird phenomenon puts me in mind of the way the media treated scandalous tales of President Bill Clinton's sex life. They covered the scandals in excruciating detail even as they sniffed that a politician's sex life (sex extravaganza) was beneath professional journalism's proper interest. Oh, and one other thing -- the journalists who unearthed these stories, stories that would appear over and again in Clinton's White House, were unworthy of being dignified with the designation "journalist."
Actually, as Palin began her book tour through rural America, it was the journalists who made the rural tour a stroke of public relations genius. It was up to the journalists to cover it or not, and though Palin is a candidate for absolutely nothing and is in fact a retired politician, the journalists followed her with their usual mixture of intense interest and contempt. They may not turn her into a presidential candidate, but they certainly have turned her into a celebrity. What we have here is still more evidence that the American journalists' proclaimed standards are not standards at all. American journalism is a chaos of subjectivity.
Put the politician who sees China's economic development as "an accomplishment unparalleled in human history" next to the politician who notes that her state borders Russia (and Canada too), thus giving its governor occasion for at least some foreign policy knowledge. The first is boomed as very charismatic, but so is the second. The first orates successfully to large crowds, but so does the second. The first is telegenic, charming, and a pioneer: the first mixed-race politician to be president. The second is telegenic, charming, and a pioneer: the first Republican woman to be nominated vice president. Is there a difference in their qualifications? Well, yes, the pulchritudinous Ms. Palin in 2008 had more executive experience than Mr. Obama, having been both a small town mayor and a governor. In fact, as President Obama comes up on his first year in office former governor Palin still has more executive experience. Why is no one laughing?
Indeed, that is the official conservative line, EagleSmack, that every democrat is deathly started of every Republican. Indeed, the democrats are so scared that it must be astounding to you that they win any elections at all.
So no doubt Obama is deathly scared of Joan of Arc (and I suppose she positively made him pee in his pants in 2008 ). Same as every Democrat was deathly scared of every Republican in 2006 and 2008.
But you may have missed the boat here. The latest darling of the Republican base is Bachmann. The latest party line is that every democrat is deathly scared of Bachmann. Of course, every Democrat could be deathly scared of Joan of Arc and also of Bachmann.
I read this far, and thought, 'Wow, that's fairly insightful for Palin. She's smarter than I thought'. Then I continued reading, and discovered that it's just a collection of whining by some guy who must have a smaller peepee than Obama.
Why with the mere mention of the name to libs and dems run to the media to rip her. Why do the libs in here race to the thread to rip her?
Really? Wow...I didn't know that. You know everything joey!
Really? Wow...I didn't know that either!
Which boat was that Joey?
Are you going to make something else up? I await your silly response.
I would like to see that. Do you have the official party line that says...
"All Democrats are scared of Bachman"?
Can I see that?
Before 2012 come around many candidates will have popped up and made their intentions known.
Just as everyone believed Hillary Clinton has an unsurmountable lead over Obama, it is possible that Palin could very well get a great start. However the race is not over and no one can be considered a winner till the end.
Of course the left will be watching with interest just as the right followed the last time with as much interest. Each has a vested interest in the oppositions winners candidate and that's no secret..
That said, there is a long way to 2012 and many more hats to be thrown into the ring..
Just as everyone believed Hillary Clinton has an unsurmountable lead over Obama, it is possible that Palin could very well get a great start. However the race is not over and no one can be considered a winner till the end.
Of course the left will be watching with interest just as the right followed the last time with as much interest. Each has a vested interest in the oppositions winners candidate and that's no secret..
That said, there is a long way to 2012 and many more hats to be thrown into the ring..
Yes, it's just meaningless divisive bull crap in the same way "bowgate" is.:roll:
Really? Dude you are one of the most divisive folks in here.
Hey Avro...on another note... I loved the SNL clip on Obama that you posted. The one where he says he has accomplished nothing since he's been in office. That was great!
It has nothing to do with the Obama Bowing thread. I am stating that you are one of the most divisive people in here PERIOD.
I agree... Obama has done nothing. Not a thing.
Francis, no doubt here will be many candidates in Republican primary in 2012. But Joan of Arc is the favorite with the base, and therefore must be regarded as favorite, since in the primaries it the base that predominantly votes.
But Republicans have a strange, winner take all primary system. That is why McCain won the nomination; he won many primaries by as little as 35% votes. So if it is a crowded field, it is not inconceivable that somebody else may win the nomination, especially if the Republican base is split between Joan of Arc, Huckabee and Bachmann.
Still, I think Joan of Arc has a very good chance of winning the nomination. The only thing she has to worry about is vote splitting by the base.