Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
And no one thinks Palin, justifiably, deserves to be criticized for her atrocious record and the implicit contradictory manor in which the press chooses to treat her (she can't be questioned by reporters, we can't discuss her qualifications, family values from the party of family values the Republicans is suddenly off the table).
But enough is enough.
Please stop running the SAME front-page story on Palin, do some research, come up with a real story and run that.
P.S. Joan this passive-aggressive editing isn't working. I'm still not feeling bad for Palin. The Governor with the disasterous record (who is part of a party who's spent their entire existence hypocritcially lording it over and making minorities, gay people, women and liberal men feel bad for the same familial indiscretions the Palin's are now struggling with) deserves no sympathy.
But neither does McCain. Ane he's the one at the top of the ticket. Try running a story on that for a change.
Indeed, if the Palin turn-on-your-own pattern continues, McCain will have 6 knives in his back if he gets to be POTUS...delivered by Sarah Barracuda or her extreme right, neo-con henchmen like Rove. He won't see it coming but in the end, the American people will pay dearly.
If people could stop obsessing about how many Palin articles there are on Salon, it seems to me the real reason is that none of us knew a damned thing about her until McCain selected her as his VP. Those who claimed to know she existed are more than likely lying. So whereas we know a lot about the others, she's a fountain of weird stories. What other candidate has witch hunters in their recent past? Or ran the only town in Alaska to charge women for their rape kits? Or fired a guy for... recent excuse... trying to cut domestic abuse & assault in his state?
Palin isn't an attractive woman in my view, neither physically nor personally nor politically. She's an insult to feminists, and to women in general. She's not a great candidate, & the fact the VP debates had to be tailored to her 'inexperience' speaks quite enough for me. However, she is new - and that means, where we've heard about rape kits & witch hunters ... oh, ya... and human footprints in dinosaur fossils... there are undoubtedly 500 MORE weird Palin-related stories out there.
I cannot fault any journalist for digging a little deeper into THIS pile of weirdness.
Hmmm. The mess in the financial sector is going to cost the tax payers $700 billion dollars. Salon's headline piece is: Sarah Palin's political enemies don't think highly of her?! Gasp! Stop the presses!
If Salon doesn't like the whisper campaign against the previous mayor of Wasilla, then it obviously opposed Hillary Clinton's run, I assume? Or have we forgotten Clinton's campaign sending out emails in Iowa saying Obama was really a Muslim, her surrogates suggesting he might have dealt drugs (in South Carolina, iirc), the business with leaking the photo of him in Somali garb, etc, etc. At least she clarified that Obama's really a Christian...as far as she knows.
Palin's camp suggested that Stein and his wife might not have been technically married. Now that's crossing the line.
Basically the article mostly complains that Palin joined the establishment and started disposing of wrong-doers because it was politically expedient to cultivate a reputation of clean government. The curiosity of this article is that it doesn't actually try to defend the people Palin "betrayed" but merely questions Palin's motives for doing so.
Um, what's the alternative? To join the system and go along with the corruption? When did it become such a mortal sin to join the system and fight corruption from the inside? Is it better to complain from the outside and effect nothing of consequence?
I've said this a dozen times; I don't think a McCain administration would be good for the country given their policy stances. However, this constant drumbeat of hit-pieces on Palin diverts from the substantive issues that I'd like to get debated. Moreover, it invites a backfire and helps solidifies her support.
What is wrong with this site?!
The more that is written about Palin, the better.
Google "Sarah Palin" and you get two pages or more of mostly positive, main-stream articles and websites. And even beyond those first pages, there's a lower percentage of critical sites to non-critical.
When an undecided voter searches for more information about this previously unknown politician, wouldn't you want them to find all sides of the picture? That will only happen by putting out as much information as possible for dissemination into the etherstream.
Keep writing about Palin, Salon. This election is too important for America to not know all the truth about McCain's pick.
And for those who bellyache about the number of Palin articles, why don't you just quit reading them?
... Salon continues to pump out its slew of anti-Palin articles. As someone noted on the first page of letters, we get it. Over and over and over.
Is this really what the primary focus of Salon's campaign coverage is going to be about? Sarah Palin? If we're going to have suffer through two thousand word articles on her "meanness" why not offer an occasional update on what's happening with Edwards and his love child. If nothing else, it might make for a more interesting read.
Insert James Carville's most famous maxim here.
on the GOP white trash and put them back on the bridge to hell.
I assume when you sleep at night these days you dream only of Palin.
Done. I will not be visiting Salon until at least Nov. 2.
To all you columnists and editors here at Salon, we get it.
It didn't take long for the readership to see from her history that Sarah Palin is:
* A Fundamentalist and as such, dangerously religious
* Ignorant to the point of embarrassment
* A conniving and vicious "Heather"
* Despicable in her hypocritical views
* "Hot"
* Unintelligent (ergo "Track" and her decision-making-by-proxy)
* A bad municipal manager
* And basically, a failure in almost every respect with the exception of a functional womb.
Can we now return to coverage of topical matters, such as what the Dem candidates are up to and what good they're going to bring to the country when they're elected? I'm getting a little tired of the all-Palin-all-the-time show. I know she's a dangerous loon, and it doesn't take much to express it to others.
How about some progressive talking points now?
Thanks. Looking forward to them.
T
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Salon headlines in your mailbox
