KOPEL: Media's hypocritical fixation on Palin a boon to McCain
Culture wars now a factor in campaign
By Dave Kopel, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Published September 6, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.
Photo by Morry Gash / Associated Press
GOP vice presidential candidate Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and presidential candidate Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., attend a rally Friday in Cedarburg, Wis.
"Please, media, keep it up." So begged Tom DeLay, speaking at a press panel on Tuesday at the Republican National Convention. According to Politico.com, DeLay said that "The media has done more for John McCain in the last two days than he's done for himself in the last year and a half."
Why would the hard- nosed Republican want the media's anti-Sarah Palin frenzy to continue?
Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton - expert politicians all - have been polite in their comments about Gov. Palin. The media have not, and they have inadvertently done the Republicans an enormous service by making the culture wars a key factor in the presidential election.
The local and national media's treatment of Palin and her family this week has been the quintessence of hypocrisy, the vilest form of the politics of personal destruction.
When Bill Clinton offered Al Gore the vice presidency in 1992, Clinton had met Gore only once before, according to The New York Times (Oct. 20, 2000). Clinton's thin personal knowledge of Gore did not result in relentless media harping - like that of Rocky Mountain News columnist Mike Littwin this week - that Clinton had not properly vetted Gore.
For Gore had been vetted - in the sense that he was personally well-known and well-liked - by the establishment media.
New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd fussed that Palin has never been on Meet the Press, a charge that could not possibly be leveled against Gore.
With MSNBC in the forefront, the mainstream media switched sides and recommenced the mommy wars, piously fretting that a Vice President Palin wouldn't spend enough time with her five children, including her Down syndrome baby. (Although it's really four, since the eldest is shipping out to Iraq.) Never mind that the vice presidency has no must-do commitments except showing up in the Senate once every few years to break a tie vote. Compared to being governor of a state, it's rather easy, at least in terms of scheduling flexibility.
Nor have the media worried about how infrequently Obama has seen his little girls in 2007-'08, or how little he would see them, given the enormous responsibilities of the presidency. And by the way, unlike Obama's spouse, Palin's spouse has never announced an intention never to be a stay-at-home parent.
We have been given in-depth analysis - from Rocky columnist Paul Campos among many others - of Palin's decision to fly home to Alaska after her water broke. Call me old-fashioned, but I don't think the tactical details of childbirth are a fit topic for political dissection.
Biden's adult son is a Washington, D.C., lobbyist for credit card companies, and Biden sponsored a massive rewrite of the federal bankruptcy code that drastically changed the law to the benefit of credit card companies. The issue has received some attention; nobody could call that coverage obsessive.
On Monday, military control of Anbar province - formerly the stronghold of al- Qaida in Iraq - was turned over to the Iraqi government. But on Monday and Tuesday, the 2 4/7 focus of the media was Bristol Palin getting pregnant before marriage. The media's prurient assault on the governor's 17-year-old daughter was couched in terms of speculation that her pregnancy would alienate conservative Christians - a flimsy pretext, and a maliciously ignorant misunderstanding of the Christian worldview, in which the rule against premarital sex is of far less importance than the commandment against intentionally killing innocents.
An adult child of a candidate who enters the public policy arena - like Ronald Reagan's daughter Patti Davis (who promoted unilateral nuclear disarmament) or Joe Biden's lobbyist son - is fair game for media analysis. Children who have not chosen to do so have been left alone. In 1992, a Saturday Night Live skit mocking the young Chelsea Clinton produced such tremendous blowback from the rest of the media that she was, properly, left unmolested by the media during the Clinton presidency.
The media have not treated Bristol Palin with comparable respect. I know of no example in American history of the majority of the respectable media intruding so deeply and hurtfully into the personal life of a national candidate's child. This week's treatment of Bristol Palin is a new, shameful low in for the American media. (Kudos to Obama for stating that a candidate's children should be off-limits, as he pointed out that his own mother got pregnant with him when she was 18 and unmarried.)
The media should report topics such as Palin's change of mind on the Bridge to Nowhere, or her former support of pork king Sen. Ted Stevens. Or, if you want, the Internet charges that Palin bullied her way onto the basketball team that won the state championship. But leave her children alone.
Dave Kopel is research director at the Independence Institute, an attorney and author of 10 books. He can be reached at kopeld@RockyMountainNews.com.
Featured
-
DNC in Denver
Complete coverage of the 2008 Democratic National Convention.
-
The Crevasse
A five-part series that examines one tragic day on Mount Rainier.
-
Deadly denial
Sick nuclear workers applied for government compensation but most haven't seen a dime.
-
Final Salute
The Rocky followed Maj. Steve Beck as he took on the most difficult duty of his career.
-
'Colorado's burning'
Coverage of the state's worst wildfires.
-
Columbine shootings
Coverage of the April 20, 1999, shootings at Littleton's Columbine High School.
-
The Crossing
Colorado's deadliest traffic accident killed 20 children on Dec. 14, 1961.
-
Osveli's journey
Osveli Sales left Guatemala for a better life. Two months later, he came home in a box.
-
Wake for an Indian warrior
Oglala Sioux bestow a tribute to the first tribal fatality in Iraq.
September 6, 2008
6:25 a.m.
Suggest removal
Mike846 writes:
Right on, David! This is only the latest example of "selective" reporting by the mainstream media. And they wonder why the American people as a whole are tuning out on air and canceling subscriptions en masse. Hillary, despite a documented history of malfeasance, got a pass, as has Obama, because both espouse the "correct" view of the world. Apparently the idea of a conservative woman being the one to break that glass ceiling causes much consteration, confusion and knee-jerk hatred. Its sort of like when Thurgood Marshall died, the Left screamed and yelled that we needed another black man named to the Supreme Court. However, when Clarence Thomas was nominated, the cry was, "Well....not THAT black man!". Its the same with Mrs. Palin: "Well....not THAT woman!". Many women themselves, within their families, or among their friends, have dealt with similar situations regarding both the managing of jobs versus family or an unexpected pregnancy. Every day the media is stupid enough to keep carping on these issues adds voters to the McCain-Palin ticket. Keep it up, "useful idiots". Again, well done, David. Mike
September 6, 2008
8:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
CO_Native_CO writes:
Well said Dave & Mike846... Well said...
September 6, 2008
8:40 a.m.
Suggest removal
dilligaf writes:
Every women I have talked to feels insulted by this pick. They feel all McCain did was toss them a bone to come to him. Many Many Republicans have said they are toast except the ones that still think Nixon didn't do anything wrong.
September 6, 2008
8:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
mrfxx writes:
I don't recall Dave Kopel defending Chelsea Clinton's "right to privacy" when she was referred to as the "national dog" since she seems to have failed some cuteness standard growing up - or that the Clintons' had the right to send her to private school. I do recall the media being disappointed that they couldn't get Chelsea to rail against her father about Monica, and now there are some who complain about a 28 year old young woman helping her mother campaign. I also recall the media covering up the escapades - including underage drinking to excess - of the Bush twins. I guess Kopel believes only underage GOP children need protection from the media.
If Gov. Palin didn't realize that all aspects of her life were going to come under scrutiny during a presidential election (think about all those lovely 527 ads that sling mud), she is too big a fool to be VP. The reason her daughter's pregnancy comes into play is the right's savaging of other unwed teen daughters and their parents combined with Gov. Palin's belief that abstinence is the only sex ed a teenager needs. As far as the delivery of Trig, I wonder if Gov. Palin mentioned to the airlines involved that she was in labor when she took that 10+ hour trip back to Alaska after her water broke (knowing this was a high risk pregnancy and that the child had Down Syndrome). How many mothers (or fathers for that matter) out there think this trip just might be a questionable decision?
Gov. Palin is a sop to the uber right with her positions on sex ed in schools, banning books she has HEARD may be unsuitable for the local library, abortion (only in the case of danger to the mother's health; no exceptions for rape/incest) and her belief that the Iraq war is a "task from God" (does this smack of jihad to anyone else?). The rest of us have the right to question just how prepared she is to deal with the economy when she was mayor of a town smaller than Metro State's enrollment and governor of a state with a population about a third the size of the metro Denver area which has ALL expenses paid by oil remittances (an increase Colorado's rate is being fought tooth and nail by big oil which meanwhile has snapped up BLM oil leases at "fire sale" prices) with enough left over to give every citizen a check of at least $1000 annually. It can't be too hard to balance a budget when the income exceeds the outgo - unlike virtually any other state, let alone the country. Wouldn't you have expected McCain - since he admits he knows nothing about the economy which is reported to be the top of the voters' issue list - to have picked someone who could help "pick up the slack" there?
By the way Mike486, thanks for minimalizing Gov. Palin by referring to her by her marital status instead of as Gov. How about telling us how you like her wardrobe and her laugh next? Since you clearly are on the right, it can't be a slur can it?
September 6, 2008
10:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
Frank25 writes:
Dave Kopel, Well done. I agree with Mike 846 but don't forget those at AM 760 who spew gutter garbage. Check out the tapes of last week of Randi Rhodes (rancid mouth) and Ed Schultz telling us of what the majority party has done for seniors and veterans. Being one of those veterans, I lost $4,200 earned pension between 1994 and 2001, only getting back my military healthcare under Tricare for Life in 2001. Also gained $100 a month from tax reduction (FICA) to use for wife and I to use for ourselves under Pres. Bush. This administration also increased VA funds by over 80% in 7 years, while improving military healthcare even if main media does not give him credit. When DNC decided Hillary was not to be the candidate, Randi called Hillary and Geraldine the "b" word and was fired by Air America. Now back with meaner potty mouth, going into long rants with no callers. Called Cindy McCain the "b" word 2 days ago, and bragged of talking 3 hours that day, and 2 1/2 hours the next. Retiring in 1976, I have volunteered as leader for senior and veteran issues. I screen "trash-talkers" and writers to be prepared for questions from members who are confused. Media has been somewhat balanced through the conventions, but the fringe media and bloggers go over the line. Sleazy and sexy photos come around the net daily that were produced by MS photoshop purporting to be Sarah Palin. Since WWII working mothers have been in the work places, and asking for equality. They will never achieve equality until they put a stop to those who only want to see them as sex objects, especially if successful. Sarah Palin and Linda Lingle both became Governors on their own merits, and did not ride the coat tails of someone else. Both are governors of Gateway States to the Pacific, where they deal with foreign governments for fishing rights, business, tourists, and both exert executive power not shown by the other party candidates. Major party saw same thing I saw and heard this past week. Blue collar, middle income families, and if all stays cool next month, will be our next president after next 4 or 8 years. No wonder majority party (at present) is in "put-down" mode.
September 6, 2008
11:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
HolierThanThou writes:
The conservative media relentlessly insulted Chelsea Clinton when she was a teenager, calling her a dog and other epithets. She was a good girl doing well in school and has grown up to be a beautiful intelligent woman.
What the conservative Christians did to the Clinton family was unconscionable. Conservative Christians created the prurient monster and they now complain when it turns on them? Where's my sympathy fiddle? I'd like to play you a tune, poor dears...
Dave Kopel, you are a pathetic excuse who only sees one side of the issue. But I agree with you! The media is ignoring the real story about Sarah Palin: she's a vindictive religious nut.
John McCain is probably going to croak leaving Palin in charge of the Oval Office. The trouble is that Christian conservatives like Palin believe in a myth called Armageddon. There are variations on the idea regarding who exactly will cause the end of the world, but they don't see destroying the Earth as a big problem. They fully expect God to show up and fix our mess.
I don't know about Mr. Kopel, but I don't think it's a good idea to give someone like that the launch codes. Never mind the hypocrisy of telling the rest of America how to live. Sarah Palin has it well within her to show the rest of us how to die.
Grow some huevos and cover that story, media idiots!
September 6, 2008
11:17 a.m.
Suggest removal
jdm8794 writes:
What a bunch of Hypocrites. I am of the generation of 'woman can do it all' and isn't this what we all have been striving for as those bra's burned? I guess it only Democratic women who are allowed to do it all then. Here comes a no-nonsense, strong, capable republican woman and all you can say is who is going to take care of the kids.? Probably the same people who have been doing it before-her and her husband...you know, that man who also had a hand in bringing those children into the world. As to the daughter-good grief-we have all been there..you teach your kids and then pray that it takes. More of us than not, have had family members who have been in this position. My sister raised all her kids with traditional values, was there for them and we still had it happen. To judge Sarah is really rude and assinine. I want someone like Sarah Palin in the 2nd seat-I believe that she will do what she says and all you liberals out there can just shake in your boots-knowing that your socialist agenda is fading fast.
HYPOCRITES!
September 6, 2008
12:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
Eastwood writes:
This op-ed is nothing but doublespeak and deception, which is not a shock coming from the GOP, whose entire existence depends on doublespeak and deception. The fact is, Palin is not just a woman anymore, but an aspiring national politician, and she should be vetted, questioned, and scrutinized with vigor, just like every other politician out there.
The hypocrisy of this op-ed, or should i say, the primary hypocrisy, is the self rightous finger wagging at the media for talking about Palin's children, but not a word about McCain's pathetic, insulting, and untenable treatment of Chelsea Clinton, about whom he opined...
"Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father."
That's the standard for handling children for McCain.
Smear them with personal insults.
How about an op-ed about that!
September 6, 2008
12:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
ellenp writes:
SARAH PALIN ON BEING PRO-LIFE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGPFPB...
September 6, 2008
2:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
anderson writes:
What is all this talk about "the" media done wrong? For those who have leveled unsupported or unfair allegations against Palin (like Paul Campos) call them on it. But not everyone has. On the other hand, it's quite legitimate for Americans and media to question or examine the qualifications of the V-P candidate.
This column smacks of a theme that was mentioned a lot at the GOP convention as if it were part of their campaign strategy: "the media" is against us.
September 6, 2008
2:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
oma writes:
kopel is such a partisan hack and his argument fails on many levels. first his statement "When Bill Clinton offered Al Gore the vice presidency in 1992, Clinton had met Gore only once before" is fatuous. gore had a long resume already and had been vetted several times as a senate candidate. then there is the question of judgement on both of their parts. second, mccain is duplicitous. he runs as a moderate then he chooses this political neophyte and hack who is without a doubt in the pocket of the religious right. if this partisan,doddering old fool does "leave" office before his time, which could happen given his age, there is a good chance of this becoming a theocracy and as a previous letter writer points out, a chance for all these rapturous nutcases to bring on the long hoped for armegeddon. scary. leave the hypocritcal theocracy in co springs where it belongs. they should put a fence around that place. third, i question any mother who undoubtly had to know that this exposure of her 17 yr old daughter would bring on a media circus. i know of no believing or non-believing mother, who would willingly do this to their child. this election is about judgement and there is enough evidence the mccain palin lack it in spades. palin is a charlatan and we deserve a media that digs further and deeper to find out more about someone 95% of the people in this country had never heard of two weeks ago.
September 6, 2008
6:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
bassman writes:
Oma, many Dems believe in Armageddon and the Second Coming also. It is a part of the Bible and last time I checked many Dems were Baptists and the like. You accuse McCain of being duplicitous and yet Obama runs as a moderatre with the #1 liberal voting record in the senate. McCain has made a career out of thumbing his nose at the far right. Obama cut his teeth as a far left organizer and attended a church which unabashedly preached Black Separatism and Liberation Theology. Farrakhan was the Man of the Year in the church magazine. Moderate credentials, I think not. Mc Cain has sponsored bipartisan legislation several times in the Senate, many times at the expense of his career. Obama hasn't written a single piece of legislation. I don't think he did anything in Illinois' legislature except vote present 180 times. He has found time to write 2 memoirs, however. What a public servant. Can you say cult of personality?
September 6, 2008
6:36 p.m.
Suggest removal
bassman writes:
As for Palin's daughter, what other choice did she have? Keep it quiet and Dems will rightly scream cover up when she begins to show. Abortion? Cover up and hypocrisy. Oma give me 1 other choice she had. Despite abstinence and/or sex ed kids will get pregnant. At one point in time the media would have shown decency and not even reported the pregnancy as they once ignored JFK's dalliances.
September 7, 2008
12:06 a.m.
Suggest removal
clyde writes:
C'mon libs. Can we do away with the Youtube and Comedy Central links as if there was something relevant there? Is Captain Kangaroo in there somewhere? Try to at least keep it in the K-12 range.
September 7, 2008
12:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
daRock writes:
dlllllgaf, "Every women I have talked to feels insulted by this pick."
Do you speak to any women other than Gloria Steinem or Diana DeGette?
I have spoken to a LOT of women that are excited about Sarah Palin. Many many of them are single moms, non-partisan and Christian by faith..but not fanatical (just like the VAST majority of voting women). They work and raise families, try to give their children strong morals and values. While they may be pro-choice to a degree (abortion in the case of rape or incest) that is not their single issue, and are abhorred by partial birth abortion, or killing a child that has survived a botched abortion. They would want to be informed if their underage daughter was facing that difficult decision and not support laws that would block that communication. Most believe that abortion should not just be a convenient form of birth control but would not fault a woman that did make a decision to terminate a pregnancy for a few very specific reasons.
A woman that has worked her way up by being strong while feminine bucking the 'good ol boy' network and is self made. Middle class. Led by her convictions, not by her political drive or a plan to advance her political career.
The see Sarah Palin as more like them, and relate to her that way.
Not from an Ivy League school, tremendous wealth with beltway contacts and part of a powerful political machine.
Many do not like Hillary. For many reasons. Would Hillary have ever become a political force if she had not been married to Bill? Would she have ever become a Senator, especially from New York if it was not a calculated political step to position her for president? Nothing wrong with that, use what you have to work with and Hillary had a lot to work with.
Many do not like or relate to other women on the national political front. Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer or even Condalezza Rice. Besides those four women, most cannot even name another woman politician on a national level.
But do not be confused. There are a LOT of women that like Sarah Palin, for many many reasons. And resent the way she is getting bashed.
September 7, 2008
8:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
rvail136 writes:
Most of the women I know (& no, they're not all Repub's) are excited by McCains choice of VP...they were very disappointed that Hillary neither won the Dem primaries, nor was selected as the VP (the usual place for the #2)...so, as was said about Nixon in '72 "I don't know ANYONE who voted for him...", I strongly suggest that you get outside of the box you're in and start talking to people from a different background than your own...after all, isn't the Dem party the "diversity" party? Or, is that diversity, only the politically correct sort, and thus to be shouted down or belittled in every context.
September 7, 2008
8:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
Andrew_Garland writes:
1 President + 1 Vice President = 1 President
The Vice President Doesn't Matter Much
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Nan...
John Nance Garner IV, nicknamed "Cactus Jack" was the 44th Speaker of the US House of Representatives (1931-33) and the 32nd Vice President of the United States (1933-41). He served as Representative from Texas between 1902 and 1933. He was an experienced and successful politician.
He is famous for his evaluation of the Vice Presidency as "not worth a bucket of warm piss."
Continued at
http://easyopinions.blogspot.com/2008...
September 7, 2008
8:42 a.m.
Suggest removal
deana writes:
I'm one of those women who was going to vote for Obama even though I was only mildly lukewarm to him. Now I'll be voting for McCain/Palin. I'm a 40-something, married mom of 4 from the battle-ground state of "bitter" PA, and yes, I had a strong negative emotional response to the press coverage of Sarah Palin last weekend. I don't like to mix it up about politics in my bluish city, so I don't know if my vote-changing reaction is typical, but I'll tell you that on another message board I was accused of being a Republican operative in disguise. Fine, whatever: belittle my opinion, or else don't believe me at all if it doesn't suit you comfortably to accomodate what I have to say. But making fun of ordinary voters (like mothers, for example) is not a winning strategy.
September 7, 2008
9:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
Kitcarry writes:
Oma - by your account of Al Gore, than Sarah Palin was similarly vetted by the people of Alaska. All of this talk about vetting is really MoDo and the rest of the self important press saying, "Wait a minute! I didn't have my copy ready on this person! He didn't clear this with me! Although the conservative media have been in love with her for years now, if I don't know anything about her, they didn't vet her! I might have to do some research." But rather than research - and there is plenty to research from all of her campaigns and public record - they called her a bad mother and write poorly sourced stories that fall apart hours after publishing and have to retract (way to be professional NYtimes and Bumiller).
You know who wasn't "vetted" well by the press (since that is what we are talking about here), Bill Clinton. He had a long reputation in Little Rock with his treatment of women and lying, yet they all looked the other way. And they were shocked (even George I can't believe he looked me in the eyes and lied to me Stephanopoulos!) when he lied to their face. The icing on the cake was the pardons for political favors (and especially to help Hillary in NY with the FARC and pardons of Hasidim crooks who bilked NY State out of millions!) and after momentary shock it is ALL FORGOTTON! Amazing.
Also strange that I don't remember any complaints from the dems about John Edwards "lack of experience....." or Obama's for that matter.
Keep it up. You will hyperventilate McCain straight to the White House.
September 7, 2008
10:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
RLaitres writes:
Perhaps those who criticize the criticism of Ms. Palin by the press are really saying that "she" for whatever reason, needs to be given a "free pass". Perhaps they should explain to us why they do. It would seem to me that 'the press', as well as those who take umbrage because she is being critiqued believe that she should be held to a differing standard, for what? Is it because she is a woman? If that is the case, then those who use that standard are just as 'sexist' as any man who will not vote for a woman, merely because she is a woman.
Man or woman, what one should be looking at is what the candidate believes, and what they are advocating for the future of the country. That requires far more effort than most are willing to expend. Those who fail to make that effort are themselves "hyperventilating" and allowing their emotions to guide their decision, not reason and logic. That is totally wrong, no matter what candidate or what issue one is voting on. Yet, many will succumb, not because they can't but because they don't want to or "it's too hard". That is one one of two things, it is either cowardice or sloth, using emotion in order to rationalize either or both.
September 7, 2008
10:49 a.m.
Suggest removal
anderson writes:
I'd say you're right, RLaitres, the GOP is asking for a free pass, and part of their strategy is to claim over and over and over until every gets it, that Palin (and by extension McCain) is being unfairly criticized. "The media" is against them.
She has faced some unfair criticism, but it's not unfair to question her credentials.
Since this is a column about media, note the power of the media to shape our image of who she is. daRock's post, for example, is a walking press release:
"A woman that has worked her way up by being strong while feminine bucking the 'good ol boy' network and is self made. Middle class. Led by her convictions, not by her political drive or a plan to advance her political career."
Andrew Garland asks us to believe that the VP doesn't matter. Sorry if I don't believe it.
September 7, 2008
3:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
cjoyce writes:
mrfxx, holierthanthou, eastwood:
Not that it will do any good, but here goes: could you cite examples (links please) of mainstream media attacks on Chelsea Clinton? If you can find them, would you care to compare the number with the attacks on Palin's children? For God's sake, Huffington Post has a comment site up with individual pages for each of the Palin children; one prominent meme at HuffPo regards that candid moment during Palin's speech when her 6-year old daughter licked her hand to smooth down her baby brother's cowlick. Some feel that it was staged (pretty good for a 6-year old to hit her mark just as CNN cuts over to her), other's that it was unhygenic and further proof of the Palin white trash bona fides. No media bias, really? Repeat after me: Bristol Palin vs John Edwards.
September 7, 2008
4:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
rjnova writes:
I think Kopel you have look into this in a very even handed way. Chelsea Clinton was a teenager while her parents were both the most opportunist and manipulative of the benefits that accompany the Presidency.
There were some very wierd and even ugly interpersonal relationships where her mother was willing to overlook her husbands infidelities because he would be able to provide her with the financial resources for her ambitious run for the Presidcency. That is a fact but Chelsea was given a pass by the Liberal media, as she should have been.
The mainstream media should have decency to allow these children a privacy because Democrat or Republican they are children and deserve the respect and privacy that children deserve.
September 7, 2008
10:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
bassman writes:
Nobody is asking for a free pass. Criticism of Palin on Troopergate and whether or not she was for the bridge to nowhere are legitimate questions. These are policy issues and hence are fair game. Questions about her daughter are irrelevant and, according to Obama himself, not fair game. It is charachter assassination of the worst sort and is already backfiring bigtime. Or maybe you hadn't noticed that McCain now leads in several polls. When Us magazine, never a political forum before, runs a cover headlined "Babies, lies and scandal" it is fair to question the media's objectivity. Obama has been given a fairly free pass with regards to Tony Rezko, how he's going to pay for his myriad new programs, and his comments that Iran is a small country and poses no threat. Then there's the admitted cocaine use, and his half brother George who lives in poverty in Kenya. Gee, I'd think an altruist like Obama would be able to help his half brother escape a life of destitution. Then there's his speech in Colorado Springs where he called for a national security force " just as large, as well funded" as the military. If McCain had proposed this the media would have attacked him and rightfully so. It smacks of Fascist Brownshirts. It was completely ignored and the Obama campaign scrubbed the statement in the released transcripts and yet, there it is on youtube. Why didn't they release that part of the speech? Hmm.
September 9, 2008
7:49 a.m.
Suggest removal
JYP3500 writes:
Great article David, totally agree.
What I can’t understand is why liberals continue their personal attacks on Palin? It may play well in their small circle of liberal friends, but don’t they realize that Americans are angry?
I saw a clip of a British comedian (if that’s what you want to call him) on MTV bashing Palin & Bush. He sounded like an absolute moron. Hopefully FOX keeps showing the clip, because 10,000 more people will vote for McCain/Palin each time they run the piece.
September 11, 2008
12:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
anderson writes:
Fox News, MTV (and any other media outlets) love it when consumers respond unquestioningly and emotionally to soundbites, brief quotes, and short videos. Eliminate context (even part) and you can make someone say about anything.
September 12, 2008
4:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
FormalistAesthete writes:
Cut the crocodile tears, Dave. We all know which party was responsible for making personal morality an important part of running for political office. And we all know what you and the other right-wingers would have been saying had Chelsea Clinton got pregnant.
"...the media's prurient assault on the governor's 17-year-old daughter was couched in terms of speculation that her pregnancy would alienate conservative Christians - a flimsy pretext, and a maliciously ignorant misunderstanding of the Christian worldview"
First of all, the media hardly made a "prurient assault" on Palin's daughter. It is a fact that Palin's daughter is pregnant. What was the media supposed to do? Won't it soon be obvious that she is? The only "maliciously ignorant misunderstanding of the Christian worldview" that the mainstream media engaged in was to not understand that for the Christian right morals are not something to live by but rather a way to rationalize their dislike of those who differ from them.
September 13, 2008
7:58 a.m.
Suggest removal
diggtbks writes:
Well done column. The public isn't as stupid as the media likes to think we are. Too many news organizations beat the same drum with messages similar to National Enquirer reporting equals something is amiss. All they can get on Sarah Palin are rumors.
I hope the media will continue their assault for 7 more weeks.
September 15, 2008
8:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
anthony writes:
Search Google News for "Bristol Palin" and you get 9202 hits. Search for "Tony Rezko" and you get 1695 hits. Is that because Bristol is more newsworthy than Rezko? I've no problem with the media "vetting" our presidential candidates, I'm only wondering when they'll start vetting Obama.
When you put lipstick on a chauvinist he's still a pig, sweetie.
September 15, 2008
10:32 p.m.
Suggest removal
raoul writes:
Palin can probably beat the token in a bball game to 21 too. Palin's hot, smart and somehow doesn't come across like the weak-wristed token.
I'm decided. Screw you lib schmucks!
September 18, 2008
12:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
JYP3500 writes:
Excellent piece Dave, right on the money!
The democrats are facing the perfect storm. Barack is dropping in the pols because people are starting to see how he acts under pressure (negative ads v. theme of change) and communicates (horrible to listen to without teleprompters). His judgement & leadership skills are MIA, otherwise he would have chosen Hillary.
But then McCain "the Maverick" stuns the democrats with a brilliant VP choice. Palin is the most genuine, honest and down to earth politician I've ever seen. And the biased media and elite liberals (feminists & hollywood) have done all the heavy lifting for McCain with their frenzied attacks.
If McCain wins, this will go down in history as the most stunning upset in American politics.
September 19, 2008
5:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
Barb writes:
JYP3500 -- are you joking?? McCain -- a "brilliant" VP choice?
Just wait -- her shiny finish is wearing off quickly.
We've had dems and Repubs in D.C. to be "stewards" of our money that we are "loyal to" -- and what do we have now? The WORST economic crisis since the depression?
One definition of "crazy" is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
This is outrageous!
KICK THE BUMS OUT -- VOTE 3RD PARTY!
September 19, 2008
5:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
Barb writes:
Our country is in the worst economic crisis under the Republican watch and all Fox "News" (loose term) can intelligently discuss is the non-newsworthy "issue" of hacking into Palin's yahoo e-mail account!"
Are they completely insane at Fox News?!