Posted on 11/11/2010 1:43:49 PM PST by onyx
McNamara, like most of Palin’s liberal, feminist critics, just can’t stand it that Palin is attractive, has a loving husband, was a governor of a state, and can do all sorts of ballsy things that they can’t do - hunt, fish, kayak, rock-climb, participate in beauty contests, and enjoy life to the fullest. She’s a multi-talented do-er, they are one-dimensional yapper-flappers and scribblers. It is envy and malice, pure and simple. They are jealous of the woman, and MUST put her down.
You diminish her with words, but go on to explain that she is the shrewdest and most effective politician in american history. How do I know that? Word has it that she will be paid $1,000,000 per episode for 8 episodes to produce the greatest campaign ad in the history of politics.
She may be dumb I guess, but I'd rather wrestle a couple of those grizzlies than take her on.
I believe that there are a number of RINO’s in Alaska prisons who know what I'm talking about!
You diminish her with words, but go on to explain that she is the shrewdest and most effective politician in american history. How do I know that? Word has it that she will be paid $1,000,000 per episode for 8 episodes to produce the greatest campaign ad in the history of politics.
She may be dumb I guess, but I'd rather wrestle a couple of those grizzlies than take her on.
I believe that there are a number of RINO’s in Alaska prisons who know what I'm talking about!
Not much more a liberal can do then read the NY Times, buy a 5,000 dollar bike and walk it through central park, while discussing foreign policy with the hot dog vendor.
I can’t believe the LA Times gave a bad review to Sarah Palin’s Alaska...Just can’t believe it!
Looking forward to watching this show. Curiosity as much as anything. When I was a child I lived in Vermont and it was amazing. Alaska reminds me of Vt. If I was single, I think I would move to Alaska. It just looks so beautiful.
Consider all the horrible television and the television critics we can thank for that and then ask yourself if this person is worth 2 minutes of your time.
Snarky and nasty as the LA reviewer is, together with the NYTimes reviewer (slightly less snarky, though inaccurate in her parting shot: http://tv.nytimes.com/2010/11/12/arts/television/12palin.html?hpw) they can’t help but also give Palin and the show credit. They both ultimately see her as savvy for doing the series in support of her political career.
That’s a beautiful family photo. God has indeed Blessed the Palin clan. It’s just too obvious why lazy lying people hate Sarah.
You nailed it, Steve!
And I love your term “yapper-flappers.”
Sarah and family are just beautiful!
Like many lonely, angry and aging feminazis whose ship has passed them by...McNamara’s envy is quite apparent.
You could tell she wanted to hate it, especially the fact that Palin always looked good ("Who has hair and makeup people on a mountain?") and that she has an "exceptionally good-looking husband."
She somehow devines that Palin is "clearly very dependent" on her husband and claims that the Palins are "so white, they make the Bushes look like runaway slaves."
But in the end, she was unable to find real fault with the show or the family. Stasi comes off as a frustrated shrew, who was even denied the opportunity to blast everything about the show.
Linda gets no good-looking husband, no "gorgeous children", no perfect hair, no "private, at-home fully-outfitted TV studio" and no opportunity to go off all MoDowd catty on the show.
Stasi's review really revealed little about the Palin show, and much about Stasi at this late stage in her career.
That is very astute.
For the record, the Wash ComPost gave the show a great review, but attacked Sarah Palin.
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.