Posted on 09/14/2008 12:30:06 AM PDT by mojito
The New York Times does the all-so predictable Sarah Palin bill of indictment for its Sunday front page. It certainly sounds compelling in the paragraph called the “nut graf”:
"Throughout her political career, she has pursued vendettas, fired officials who crossed her and sometimes blurred the line between government and personal grievance, according to a review of public records and interviews with 60 Republican and Democratic legislators and local officials.?"
But what is so remarkable is how little there is in the page after page of minutiae thrown against the wall by the Times. And indeed there’s plenty of favorable material there. Up front we learn:
"Ms. Palin has many supporters. As a two-term mayor she paved roads and built an ice rink, and as governor she has pushed through higher taxes on the oil companies that dominate one-third of the state’s economy. She stirs deep emotions. In Wasilla, many residents display unflagging affection, cheering “our Sarah” and hissing at her critics."
In just the first few paragraphs you have testimony that she was “effective and accessible.” So where are we going here? Well, despite the testimony that she was ”accessible,” others find her “secretive” and inclined to put a premium on “loyalty.” The evidence? The Governor’s office declined a request for emails that would have cost over $400,000. Proof positive. Oh, and the records sought (about Polar Bears and such) were in fact obtained.
Then there is the ” she blurs personal and public behavior” charge. The evidence? A phone call from Todd Palin to a state legislator about the latter’s chief of staff, which Palin denies was mentioned. Pretty thin gruel.
Next we have her tenure as mayor, where again all heck breaks loose because — are ya sitting down? — she brought in her own team. No! Unheard of. Jeeez. Next she’ll be firing the town museum director. Oh no– it’s true! Palin says (”Oh yeah, she says,” you can hear the Times reporters hrrumphing) she was cutting the budget.
This is pathetic, really. Is there something illegal here? Is there something nefarious? What is the point?
The next offense: while she was mayor city employees were told not to talk to the press. The horror! Might there have been a procedure, a public affairs or press person for that? We don’t know and the Times doesn’t tell us.
Then we get to the book banning. But if you read carefully there is no banning, no censorship, no list and no nothing other than someone became “scared” of Palin:
“People would bring books back censored,” recalled former Mayor John Stein, Ms. Palin’s predecessor. “Pages would get marked up or torn out.”
"Witnesses and contemporary news accounts say Ms. Palin asked the librarian about removing books from the shelves. The McCain-Palin presidential campaign says Ms. Palin never advocated censorship."
"But in 1995, Ms. Palin, then a city councilwoman, told colleagues that she had noticed the book “Daddy’s Roommate” on the shelves and that it did not belong there, according to Ms. Chase and Mr. Stein. Ms. Chase read the book, which helps children understand homosexuality, and said it was inoffensive; she suggested that Ms. Palin read it."
“Sarah said she didn’t need to read that stuff,” Ms. Chase said. “It was disturbing that someone would be willing to remove a book from the library and she didn’t even read it.”
“I’m still proud of Sarah,” she added, “but she scares the bejeebers out of me.”
So Palin talked “about” removing books — but the piece doesn’t tell us what was said. And we hear about Palin’s distaste for a book about homosexual parenting. Again, is there some story in here? We’re up to page three and it hasn’t popped out yet.
We then learn that she did take on her own Republican Party and won the election for Governor by, goodness gracious, preparing for debates with notecards. Color-coded no less.
Then on page four of this eye-popping account, we learn as Governor she had the temerity to have ”surrounded herself with people she has known since grade school and members of her church.” No! She hired people she knew? And people she trusted because she had just run against a hostile machine of her own party? The Lieutenant Governor offers up that they were “competent, qualified, top-notch people,” but are you going to believe him? And then the kicker: it seemed to, well, work out pretty well. We learn:
"To her supporters — and with an 80 percent approval rating, she has plenty — Ms. Palin has lifted Alaska out of a mire of corruption. She gained the passage of a bill that tightens the rules covering lobbyists. And she rewrote the tax code to capture a greater share of oil and gas sale proceeds."
“Does anybody doubt that she’s a tough negotiator?” said State Representative Carl Gatto, Republican of Palmer."
The nerve — hiring trusted people and running a competent, popular administration. So we veer back to “secrecy” –dastardly tales of using a private email account and reliance on a circle of close advisors. Once again, the sheer banality of it all is both numbing and humorous. Surely the Old Grey Lady hasn’t devoted all this space for nothing? But that’s the conclusion one reaches as we stumble into page five. And that seems to have more of the same — people who didn’t get emails returned or thought she was too adversarial, harboring a “siege-like” mentality against her foes.
Wow, are you shocked and appalled yet? Me neither, and I can’t for the life of me figure out the point of the story. Ah, yes: the reporters were told to “get the goods” and this is all they found. But being the New York Times they made it really long, put it on the front page, and hoped people wouldn’t read it all that closely and say, “I guess she has a pretty good record if that’s all they had.”
And if you are looking for any detailed description of any of her accomplishments — presumably the reason for her 80 percent popularity — forget it. No room for that.
You don't say?
And it's all a bunch of trumped up exagerations and innuendo?
Knock me over with a feather.
MSNBC website is posting the same kind of garbage:
Headline: Palin Hired Friends, Hit Critics.
Laughable. This will not harm her in the least.
-ccm
Politics was what ever the local Unions wanted done.
The union guys played rough when crossed and in some cases had power over whether or not a person could find a job in the state.
Are you saying don’t look for a stock split in the near future?
The NYT just has to be on our side. They are bound to know by now that the more they go after her, the more they cause people to rally around her.
Yawn. 30 lawyers. Two weeks. And these shmuck reporters still haven't discovered her title is Gov. Palin.
It’s pretty low. But it has to go back up, right? I mean it’s a good buy now isn’t it? Bwahahahahaaaaaw.
Nope, it’s a GOOD-BYE!
many admirers in alaska and some critics. Were those critics other reporters? Ya know Alaska population is very small, your army of lawyers and reporters probably make up 20% of the population
It was on the internet. It must be true!
Maybe the Slimes should have sent the 30 lawyers to look up Elliot Spitzer’s failings. Or how about the current governor of NY. Never happen.
I have a buddy who says that eventually the media will come around, but I don’t think they will.
The MSM remind me of some of those chase scenes on shows like “COPS”, where the hoods start out with a stolen and fully loaded Range Rover, then smash it up driving into everything on the road, accelerate to open roads, blowing the tires and the jackasses still keep pounding the gas peddle, even when they are down to the sparking rims of all 4 tires.
When the car drives no further the hood get out and they all have that same stupid face when they look at the cop. It’s classic!
That’s the NYT and the mainstream media.
It appears that the NY Slimes are not getting the message... Attacking Sarah Palin will not win the election for Obama.
Careful now,...I think the governor may accuse you of being a racist or maybe you have this deep seated hatred for blind people or philanderers.
I loved his whole mea culpa for the press when Spitzer resigned ~ just so you all know, and before taking the oath of office, I cheated on my wife, too,
What a pig!
With the NYT's money quote then:
What a splendid system, we say to ourselves, that takes little-known men, tests them in high office and permits them to grow into statesmen.
While that is true, it is also true that many un-political Americans are subliminally getting negative messages aout Palin through the media. Countering is essential.
I'm saying look for people to split from that stock.
Of particular interest are the two documents on the Library issue.
I consider the NYT to be a journalistic sewer so it fits that the little piggies like Schumer, Clinton(s), Patterson, Spitzer, et. al. enjoy cavorting in it. Pinch Sulzberger (the failure as Chairman) is the sewermaster. It also is not surprising that a patriotic American who is pro-life and possesses strong morals like Sarah Palin would be the arch enemy of the NYT.
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.