>>It has become a rather grotesque phenomenon to watch the piling on. And any objective person has to ask where the fairness in that lies and where the brutal personal persecution ends...<<
Let me reply to that in Sarah Palin's own words:
huffingtonpost.com
"...Fair or unfair, I think she does herself a disservice to even mention it. You gotta to plow through that. You have to know what you're getting into -- which, I say this with all due respect to Hillary Clinton, and to her experience and to her passion for changing the status quo also -- but when I hear a statement like that coming from a woman candidate with any kind of perceived whine about that excess criticism or you know maybe a sharper microscope put on her, I think, 'man that doesn't do us any good' -- women in politics, women in general wanting to progress this country, I don't think it bodes well for her, a statement like that. Because, again, fair or unfair, it is there, I think that's reality, and I think it's a given. I think people can just accept that she is going to be under the sharper microscope. So be it. I mean, work harder, prove yourself to an even greater degree that you're capable, that you're going to be the best candidate, and that of course is what she wants us to believe at this point. So it bothers me a little bit hearing her bring that attention to herself on that level..."
The "brutal persecution" (poss. transl. the usual media scrutiny of politicians with a national profile) ends when she makes it clear she no longer has ambitions for national office.
Which doesn't yet seem to have happened, as far as I can tell.
Is political discourse uncivil to the extent it borders on unpleasant ?
Absolutely.
Was Palin singled out for 'unfair' treatment ?
I would find that tough to agree with. |
