Posted on 07/23/2010 2:30:03 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Sarah Palin can't expect anyone to take her seriously as a presidential candidate--not after what she said this week.
In recent days, the former Alaska governor and Tea Party fave has been on a tear against Journolist, a listserv for nearly 500 journalists, policy wonks, and academics, most of whom are self-identified liberals working for self-identified liberal outfits. The participants on this off-the-record email chain promoted their work, debated politics and policy (occasionally quite sharply), and traded and tested ideas for articles and columns. Last month, The Daily Caller, a conservative website, began running articles based on Journolist archives it somehow had obtained. Some conservatives immediately denounced Journolist as a secret cabal that established a party line for the dreaded liberal media.
Palin was one such rightwinger. On Tuesday, citing a Daily Caller article that focused on how several liberal opinion journalists in 2008 were pondering how to respond to stories about Jeremiah Wright (Barack Obama's controversial reverend), she contended that Journolist was proof that the mainsteam media--or, as she calls it, the "lamestream" media--is biased, characterizing Journolist members as "'prominent' mainstream media personalities." That was a misrepresentation: writers and bloggers for The Nation, The American Prospect, Mother Jones (my home base), the Center for American Progress, the New American Foundation, and other liberal media organizations and think tanks are not usually considered mainstream media leaders. (The founder of Journolist, Ezra Klein, did move from The American Prospect to The Washington Post, but he was knowingly hired by the newspaper as a liberal blogger.) It's hardly surprising that out-of-the-closet progressives would share progressive ideas with colleagues. Journolist was no conspiracy; it was a community--a virtual bar, without booze. I explain all that here. (Membership declared: I was a mostly nonactive member of Journolist; I haven't used it in years.)
Palin's blast revealed deep ignorance. Journolistas were generally not prominent MSMers. And the few prominent journalists who were part of Journolist were mostly already known as commentators of a liberal bent. Yet Palin was pretending that Journolist was evidence of an MSM cabal. Worst, she tweeted, "forget freedom of speech and freedom of the press if these yahoos ever get their way in America."
During an interview with The Daily Caller, she went further, calling Journolisters "sick puppies"--as she reacted to another article on the now-defunct listserv revealing email messages sent the day John McCain surprisingly picked Palin to be his running mate. In these emails, several participants--including two Mother Jones reporters who worked for me at the time--pondered why McCain had picked Palin and what would be an effective critique of her. That liberal reporters would privately discuss how best to criticize a conservative politician whose policies they oppose does not strike me as shocking. In fact, I am certain that during the 2008 campaign journalists at conservative media outfits talked among themselves about how best to puncture Obama.
But Palin was offended. In responding to The Daily Caller piece, though, she conceded a major point about herself: she does not posses a hardy enough constitution to be president. In that interview, The Daily Caller reports, Palin said the media became a key reason she decided not to finish out her term as governor.
Consider that for a moment. Eight months after the grueling 2008 campaign was over, Palin, by her own admission, was not tough enough to handle the media and had to quit her job as Alaska governor. After confessing that, how can she possibly present herself as presidential timber? If she allowed herself to be hounded out of office in Juneau by the big bad press, could she withstand the slings and arrows of the media while under pressure in the White House?
This part of her reaction to The Daily Caller article is a tell. Looking to scapegoat the media for her decision to quit--a decision widely described at the time on the left and right as bizarre--she displays her own weakness. Does a true commander in chief turn tail when "sick puppies" bark?
I wonder if Palin meant to reveal this much. Possibly, she was lazily exploiting the latest Journolist revelation. Bashing the liberal media is good for Sarah Inc. It sells books and six-figure speeches. And it's good politics, for this theme is an oldie-but-goodie relished by the GOP base and tea partiers--the sort of voters who will dominate the Republican Party's 2012 presidential primaries. Still, saying that she could not do her job in Alaska because of pesky reporters is a true admission of weakness. If you can't stand the heat from reporters (including the ferocious liberals of Journolist), how can you be strong enough to deal with the Russians, the Chinese, the North Koreans, the Iranians, the Taliban, and, oh yes, the terrorists? They're a bit more fierce than Katie Couric.
****** One of my Twitter followers, Greytdog, sent me this tweet on Thursday: "perhaps the question should be why is the media obsessed w/Sarah Palin who hasn't done anything except quit & twit." Good point. But given that there is a chance she will run for president in 2012--and be a credible candidate with a base of supporters and fundraising potential--that means there is a chance she will become president. (I'm not handicapping the odds of either possibility.) Consequently, she deserves to remain under close scrutiny from journalists. In the 1950s and early 1960s, Ronald Reagan was regarded by some as a joke: a Grade B movie actor pitching for GE and then Barry Goldwater. He certainly warranted watching.
She's basically right on every major issue. The only problem which many will have with her will be the abortion question.
The president doesn't just sail above such attacks. Palin resigned due to these attacks, not entirely due to out-of-pocket expenses.
Palin resigned from a previous position, as well, and that had nothing to do with expenses.
You don't know, and neither does anyone else, how she'd react to attacks while president.
By that standard, you are unfit to opine on Palin. You're good only for firing up Liberals by puking back up their own anti-Palin Kool-aid. You poor iggerint sap, you don't even see it, do you? Don't worry, Gargy is here to help you open your eyes an free your few, trapped brain cells.
There, there now.
:-)
According to her post, now one of the major reasons why Palin quit was the attacks by the media. That isn't going to go away as president.
Talk about an idiot. He says she said she wasn’t tough enough to be president. He THEN says she’s not tough enough to be president. The article should have been titled “Author and Palin Agree on One Point”.
And this guy says he’s CERTAIN conservative writers figured out ways to critique Obama. What they did was figure out a way to tell the truth and left the results to the people. Unfortunately not enough people believed it.
We can’t afford any more presidents from the banking/oilcompany wing of the republican party. I’d be happy to deal with whatever problems Palin might bring into the picture.
But will she be willing to deal with the problems she brings to the picture, that's the question.
So is this what FR is now--people can't even disagree over a politician without being called lib tools?
I thought we were the adults who didn't blindly follow leaders. I thought we were the ones who were independent-minded and didn't just cheerlead for politicians.
I guess we're just supposed to follow the S*T*A*R and not think, just proclaim out unworthiness.
My issue isn't with Palin; I don't see her as presidential material but think she is doing not a good but an incredible job as what she is now--a TRUE maverick, outside the party but part of it, getting the people focused on Tea party candidates, making that a viable movement (not another party, but something scarier to the Dems).
My issue is with those who claim to be her biggest fans, who can't argue points and realities, but just heap praise on every action Palin takes, defend every single thing she does, and view any independent reaction to her as treason. They seem to think Palin is or would be their personal friend, when in fact she is a politician, and we're no more getting the "real" story than we would if we listened to the lib pukes who try to destroy her and her family.
Personality worship--the unthinking zombielike following of ANY politician--is for the weak. Conservatives want politicians to have the minimum amount of control over our lives because politics is a necessary evil, not something we look to to provide "Hope" to our lives...right?
I don't believe ANY politician who's considered a possible leader of MY country can't be criticized on their pros and cons (which was all the poster you responded to was doing)--I'll think for myself, thanks.
In his own words admitting that media weenies did and do conspire to destroy candidates and bend public opinion to their will. It's not reporting, it's conspiring. Forget “credible chance”. The leftwing scumbags can't be forced to print the mountain of damning evidence against the communist puppet Obama, yet they send thousands to sift through Palin’s garbage cans.
Nice spin but not her stated reason. She quit for two reasons. To save money for herself and the taxpayers. To use her influence to help elect those of a like mind. And not stated is to amass a warchest for 2012.
Why is there any mystery about this?
Lefties try to tear down righties; righties try to tear down lefties.
THAT isn’t the conspiracy.
The conspiracy is the Journolist (what a freakin annoying title for a group) bunch being accepted and interpreted as mainstream, objective reporters by CNN and the alphabet networks.
In itself there’s zero wrong with a bunch of lefty columnists (Corn isn’t a beat reporter) hashing out their political approach. They’re lefties, they’re hanging out talking about their leftism.
The big story is that they KNOW Wright and those other stories are legitimate issues, but they work as press agents for Obama.
That they’re lefties who dig for dirt on R’s isn’t the issue—it’s that they’re specifically propping up CANDIDATES instead of values. They should be attacking Obama for coddling Wright. Instead, like good little party members, the cause is more important than the truth. Someone who actually believed in certain values wouldn’t fear revealing the dirsty secrets about individuals because the VALUES they prize would persevere.
That’s not what these folks do. They’re true party hacks—The Party and The Star! are all-important. Cult of personality 101.
It’s wrong when either side does it, but unfortunately we hardly have any genuine conservatives to prop up in the first place.
“If she’s weak, idiotic, a quitter, etc. why do you keep killing forests of trees and millions of electrons writing about her? Methinks thou doth protest too much... “
Lol! That was my first reaction also after reading the article. The Left’s fear of Palin is palpable.
Is Corn the guy with a lisp?
The last two reasons are the only two she should have stated for stepping down. Kind if like telling the dems, I am coming. The other reason could have just been treated as an aside as thoughan annoyance that finalized her decision.
Those are positive reasons. Powerful reasons. She could have went on to say that she was confident that her Lt, Governor would carry on her program.
The only problem she would have changing the narrative is that presser in front of the lake. Talking points for people like Corn.
He is a buddy of Hurricane Katrina Van dan Awful of The Nation.
She did say the Lt. Gov would carry on her programs or words to that effect. Those reasons were all given in that presser. But the left doesn't want to focus on anything she really says. They made up fake opinions to make her look bad and report those fake opinions as news.
Imagine that.
Thousands of “journalists” waiting, tied
to their monitor-teat connected to the White House and Obama,
waiting, waiting to be told exactly what to say.
From the Nation to Mother Jones, each “journal” now exposed
for what it really is, a paid PR flack making output for
the DNC, antiAmericanism, and (so last century) Communism.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
