And the knives are Out!

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

I find it hard sometimes to not feel a little sorry for Mrs. Palin. She struck me as someone plucked from obscurity because she fit a specific profile or image the party wanted. They expected her to fall in line and perform on command. Eventually when it was determined that she was incapable or unwilling to comply; the party seemed to turn on her, marginalize her, and now ship her back to Alaskan obscurity.

 

It will be really interesting to see what else comes out and what else she may or may not do. Historically and politically its all quite fascinating.

Agreed.

[Steely Dan]

What is worse is that they picked someone who didn't have a clue the glass house she was stepping into and that she would no longer have any privacy. There are other Republican women who would have been better choices including better Governors:

 

Laura Lingle comes to mind, HI

or Jodi Rell, Ct.

 

Laura Lingle

 

Jodi Rell

 

Sarah Palin

 

Which one do you think would appeal more to the vacuous voters?

 

 

The blame for Jamie Lynn's pregnancy falls directly on the parents....

 

but Palin's child's pregnancy is a deeply personal issue.

 

Well Jamie Lynns parents are Pinheads.

 

The night of the election he got on a conference call at 1 am with tens of thousands of campaign workers across the country and told them he would pay them an extra month of pay that they weren't supposed to get and pay their health insurance for the rest of the year. It was on MSNBC this morning. And he did the same thing with his (1000x smaller) staff when he won his senate seat.

 

But problems in one city are a lot more fun to use when there isn't much else.

[In-A-Gadda-Levitre]

The media thrashing began looong before any interviews with Charlie and Katie . . . She had to admit that her daughter was pregnant on the first weekend . . . Care to check the date on the US Weekly cover?

 

But since you're apparently on the left . . . WTF, facts don't matter, just repeat the same things over and over again until they are regarded as truth . . .

let's see, a relatively unknown (to the national stage) is chosen to be the GOP vice president candidate and you don't think the media should checking out who she is? Some probably went too far, but of course, that damn liberal, left-wing media that is actually part of the Democratic campaign was out to get her.

 

turn that record over...

[scribo]

The night of the election he got on a conference call at 1 am with tens of thousands of campaign workers across the country and told them he would pay them an extra month of pay that they weren't supposed to get and pay their health insurance for the rest of the year. It was on MSNBC this morning. And he did the same thing with his (1000x smaller) staff when he won his senate seat.

I guess these people somehow missed that conference call.

[Kelly the Dog]

I guess these people somehow missed that conference call.

Little late to the party are you?

[Philly McButterpants]

let's see, a relatively unknown (to the national stage) is chosen to be the GOP vice president candidate and you don't think the media should checking out who she is? Some probably went too far, but of course, that damn liberal, left-wing media that is actually part of the Democratic campaign was out to get her.

 

turn that record over...

 

If you don't think that the MSM has a left-leaning bias, you're walking through life with your eyes closed. If the MSM had done HALF the vetting process on Obama that they did on Palin, he wouldn't have even gotten the party nod . . .

 

Oh, and before you can say it, I know that Fox news leans right. I can admit it. Try saying the same for CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, the NY Times, the LA Times, WaPo, etc, etc, ad nauseum . . .

[Steely Dan]

The media thrashing began looong before any interviews with Charlie and Katie . . . She had to admit that her daughter was pregnant on the first weekend . . . Care to check the date on the US Weekly cover?

 

But since you're apparently on the left . . . WTF, facts don't matter, just repeat the same things over and over again until they are regarded as truth . . .

 

I don't read US so I wouldn't know. Her coming out about her daughter was due to internet gossip and not much else. The mainstream media didn't do anything with it until she spoke about it. I seem to recall the coverage to be sympathetic and not attacking.

 

It's funny when you accuse "the left" for repeating things until they're truth because the right did the same thing with the "W"s being removed from the keyboards and Al Gore saying he invented the internet to the lies about John Kerry's service in 'Nam to the accusations of the Clinton's being involved in several murders. Nice.

[elegantelliotoffen]

If you don't think that the MSM has a left-leaning bias, you're walking through life with your eyes closed. If the MSM had done HALF the vetting process on Obama that they did on Palin, he wouldn't have even gotten the party nod . . .

 

Oh, and before you can say it, I know that Fox news leans right. I can admit it. Try saying the same for CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, the NY Times, the LA Times, WaPo, etc, etc, ad nauseum . . .

 

If that's really true WHY ARE YOU WINGNUTS SO BENT OUT OF SHAPE OVER THE FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?

[Philly McButterpants]

I don't read US so I wouldn't know. Her coming out about her daughter was due to internet gossip and not much else. The mainstream media didn't do anything with it until she spoke about it. I seem to recall the coverage to be sympathetic and not attacking.

 

It's funny when you accuse "the left" for repeating things until they're truth because the right did the same thing with the "W"s being removed from the keyboards and Al Gore saying he invented the internet to the lies about John Kerry's service in 'Nam to the accusations of the Clinton's being involved in several murders. Nice.

 

Yeh, those all all incredibly relevant today . . .

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

The media thrashing began looong before any interviews with Charlie and Katie . . . She had to admit that her daughter was pregnant on the first weekend . . . Care to check the date on the US Weekly cover?

 

But since you're apparently on the left . . . WTF, facts don't matter, just repeat the same things over and over again until they are regarded as truth . . .

Agree, somewhat, but those attacks were started by LW bloggers who made hay about it and the media who took it up ended up looking bad. What gave the issue some legitimacy was that O'Reilly had attacked the parents of the Spears girl that summer and conservatives have often made it a game blaming parenting for children born out of wedlock, especially from teenage girls.

 

Yet that issue gained Palin sympathy, especially amoung Soccer Moms and the media backed off until the Charlie and Katie interviews. The fumbling on Palin's part exposed her dim wittedness and provided ammunition for the media to turn against her.

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

It's funny when you accuse "the left" for repeating things until they're truth because the right did the same thing with the "W"s being removed from the keyboards

 

P.S. The Ws were removed from keyboards... Sorry, that one is true. Immature, but true.

[Steely Dan]

If you don't think that the MSM has a left-leaning bias, you're walking through life with your eyes closed. If the MSM had done HALF the vetting process on Obama that they did on Palin, he wouldn't have even gotten the party nod . . .

 

Oh, and before you can say it, I know that Fox news leans right. I can admit it. Try saying the same for CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, the NY Times, the LA Times, WaPo, etc, etc, ad nauseum . . .

 

Just admit "leans left" means not ultra conservative. There is no more middle ground. CNN had Glenn Beck and Nancy Grace on in primetime but that doesn't make them moderate or conservative because they don't take the Republican talking points and read them word for word over the air.

 

To evangelicals the "liberal media" includes the History Channel, Discovery, The Science Channel, Animal Planet and any other media outlet that believes in evolution over mythology.

 

So let's be clear on what the "liberal media" is.

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

Just admit "leans left" means not ultra conservative. There is no more middle ground. CNN had Glenn Beck and Nancy Grace on in primetime but that doesn't make them moderate or conservative because they don't take the Republican talking points and read them word for word over the air.

 

To evangelicals the "liberal media" includes the History Channel, Discovery, The Science Channel, Animal Planet and any other media outlet that believes in evolution over mythology.

 

So let's be clear on what the "liberal media" is.

Lets also be clear what the "LW media isn't" and "RW media" is...The Weekly Standard, The Washington Times and plenty of other newpapers... The Chicago Tribune, the Heritage Foundation's TV station,.... ABC is not exactly liberal.

 

MSNBC has Morning Joe with Scarborough and Buchanan, though he tries to interview on both sides, his comments are on the right and he gets his shots in. CNN also has Wolf Blitzer who is not partisan just an idiot and what's his name, Lou Dobbs and his editorials on immigration. The man is off his rocker, not exactly partisan, though. Lets not get started on talk radio which heavily slants Right.

 

That being said, there are plenty of LW media types too and the RW love's to list them without acknowledging that they have their sympathizers.

 

However, blaming one or the other is just an excuse for a campaign's inadequacy and an excuse for why an election was lost.

[Steely Dan]

Thank you for proving my point.

 

The GAO doesn't think so.

 

 

When it was initially reported that on exiting the whitehouse the Clinton staff removed the 'W's from keyboards and trashed the place. It started from one source, and wasn't confirmed, but after the story seemed to be big everyone jumped on board and ran with it. It wasn't until later that it turned out to be false. We found that out thanks to the GAO report. The media got it wrong, and it favored conservatives. The same is true when they ran with the false story about Gore supposedly saying he invented the internet.

 

GAO report

 

On January 29, 2001, you wrote us that you had become increasingly

concerned about media reports of damage to the White House and the

EEOB that was discovered by the incoming Bush administration and asked

that we investigate whether damage may have been deliberately caused by

former Clinton administration staff. We subsequently asked EOP and the

General Services Administration (GSA) whether they had any information

that may be responsive to your request. On April 18, 2001, the director of

the Office of Administration (OA),1 an EOP unit, wrote us a letter indicating

that the White House had no record of damage that “may have been

deliberately caused by employees of the prior [a]dministration” and that

“.…repair records do not contain information that would allow someone to

determine the cause of damage that is being repaired.”

 

Later on in the report it says that in June another investigation was done and an invoice was "found".

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

Thank you for proving my point.

 

The GAO doesn't think so.

 

 

When it was initially reported that on exiting the whitehouse the Clinton staff removed the 'W's from keyboards and trashed the place. It started from one source, and wasn't confirmed, but after the story seemed to be big everyone jumped on board and ran with it. It wasn't until later that it turned out to be false. We found that out thanks to the GAO report. The media got it wrong, and it favored conservatives. The same is true when they ran with the false story about Gore supposedly saying he invented the internet.

 

GAO report

 

On January 29, 2001, you wrote us that you had become increasingly

concerned about media reports of damage to the White House and the

EEOB that was discovered by the incoming Bush administration and asked

that we investigate whether damage may have been deliberately caused by

former Clinton administration staff. We subsequently asked EOP and the

General Services Administration (GSA) whether they had any information

that may be responsive to your request. On April 18, 2001, the director of

the Office of Administration (OA),1 an EOP unit, wrote us a letter indicating

that the White House had no record of damage that “may have been

deliberately caused by employees of the prior [a]dministration” and that

“.…repair records do not contain information that would allow someone to

determine the cause of damage that is being repaired.”

 

Later on in the report it says that in June another investigation was done and an invoice was "found".

 

Everybody shut up about it, but it was true, I knew some folks who were involved. It was not worth the media coverage, but there were some immature pranks done.

 

Remember, I was an appointee down at USDA.

[X. Benedict]

Seriously?? Do you expect anyone to believe that's true? The media destroyed her from the word go . . .

 

But she restored her image nicely on Meet the Press, This Week, and Sunday.....wait......her staff wouldn't let her go on those because they still wanted to win.

[scribo]

I would love to hear who people here think was the last very good vice president. I cannot remember one.

[Kelly the Dog]

I would love to hear who people here think was the last very good vice president. I cannot remember one.

Gore was a very good VP, simply because the job of the VP isn't all that important or powerful. But he was very experienced and smart, knew Washington inside and out, and could step in at a moment's notice if he had to. He turned out to be a lousy Presidential candidate because he had a stiff, lousy personality, and made a bunch of campaigning blunders. And yet still should have won. But he was very good as a VP choice.

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

Gore was a very good VP, simply because the job of the VP isn't all that important or powerful. But he was very experienced and smart, knew Washington inside and out, and could step in at a moment's notice if he had to. He turned out to be a lousy Presidential candidate because he had a stiff, lousy personality, and made a bunch of campaigning blunders. And yet still should have won. But he was very good as a VP choice.

From a power standpoint Cheney was powerful and an effective one. I don't agree with his policy decisions, but partisan though I am, I have to admit he is still and was very influential and effective.

[Steely Dan]

Lyndon Johnson.