SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Little Joe who wrote (125243)11/21/2009 9:43:44 AM
From: Suma  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 543632
 
In response to your post that Sarah Palin gets bad press

November 20, 2009

Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
It was all too predictable.
From the moment Sarah Palin was airlifted out of the Alaska hinterlands by John McCain and plopped onto the national stage, she's been telling anyone who will listen how poorly she's been treated by the media, the Democrats, the blogosphere, etc. After she did her part in scuttling McCain's already foundering campaign, she added to her list of personal persecutors the same McCain staffers who made her a household name in the first place. The conservative media have cheered on her personal pity party every step of the way, adamantly refusing to acknowledge that Sarah Palin -- perfect Sarah Palin, conservatism's hockey-mom messiah -- has done anything wrong.
So it was inevitable that when Palin and her ghostwriter teamed up to produce her newly release memoir, Going Rogue: An American Life, it would be anything but a tedious exercise in self-martyrdom. The second half of the book, which recounts her time with McCain and the aftermath of the presidential campaign, is a litany of complaints peppered with absolutions of any errors on her part. Palin's account of her disastrous interviews with CBS anchor Katie Couric consists mainly of attacks on Couric for "badgering" her, "edit[ing] out substantive answers," and trying to "frame a 'gotcha' moment." She chastises McCain campaign staffers for having "no script to begin with," for not following her advice and talking about Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and for nurturing the "wardrobe fairy tale" so they could throw her "under the media bus" after the campaign ended.
When not complaining about how ill-treated she was, Palin wildly revised her own history, showcasing her penchant for falsehoods both big and small. She claims that the media were reporting "lies" about the Bridge to Nowhere, when it was she who, from the very start, lied about her own position on the bridge. She claims that she immediately liked the idea of going on Saturday Night Live, even though internal campaign emails show that she was initially reluctant because of the show's "gross" treatment of her family, going so far as to call the SNL crew "whack." She claims that there is no aerial hunting in Alaska, even though she proposed legislation supporting that very practice. The list goes on and on.
But remember, this is Sarah Palin we're dealing with here, and no matter how self-discrediting and ridiculous her book was, the conservative media would leap to her defense, claiming (once again) that she was the victim of a vicious liberal onslaught. Palin herself got the ball rolling before the book was even released, chastising the Associated Press (which got its hands on a copy prior to the release date) for assigning 11 reporters to fact-check it, saying that their time would be better spent fact-checking "what's going on with Sheik Mohammed's trial." Palin made no attempt to respond to the several factual errors and distortions the AP found, and neither did Fox News, which picked up where Palin left off and ran a breathless segment wondering why, exactly, the AP had assigned so many reporters to the book.
Then there's Rush Limbaugh, Palin's staunchest defender and perhaps the conservative media personality most disconnected from reality -- two traits that are in no way mutually exclusive. On November 13, Rush proclaimed that Going Rogue is "one of the most substantive policy books I've read." He must have received a special unabridged edition, because to every other observer -- even Fox News campaign reporter/operative Carl Cameron -- the book's policy prescriptions are few and far between, and rarely more detailed than "Ronald Reagan was right." In the conservative blogosphere, the adoration was even more comical: John Ziegler, the devoted Palinista who is -- and forgive the indelicate bluntness, but there is no better word -- an idiot, called the book the "greatest literary achievement by a political figure in my lifetime."
Meanwhile, the mainstream press ties itself into knots with their obsessive Palin coverage, trying to explain how it is that a riotously unpopular and ill-informed ex-governor speaks for legions of Americans. Newsweek undercut whatever merit its critical analysis of Palin's role in the political world had by festooning it with sexist Palin imagery. David Brooks continues to vacillate in his opinion of Palin, at various times calling her "smart," "a joke," "courageous and likeable," and a "cancer." PBS' Gwen Ifill said women "will be drawn to her story," even though Palin's popularity among women is in the toilet.
None of this is to say that Palin isn't shrewd. She's figured out that she can say whatever she pleases, lie freely, quit elected office to become a professional Facebook bomb-thrower, cash in on a ridiculous book she didn't even write, and still enjoy the adoration of her conservative fan base, as well as the attentions of the mainstream press.
Other major stories this



To: Little Joe who wrote (125243)11/21/2009 11:50:08 AM
From: Mary Cluney  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 543632
 
<<<I was really asking for your opinion.>>>

I could list his top 50 appointments and then provide their biographies. You undoubtedly can then cherry pick and find fault based on all sorts of ideological grounds.

But the point is the tenor, or themes, implicit in his appointments. It is that everyone is educated, has proven abilities to read and write, has expertise, and has been successful after completing their education.

It starts with Obama himself. He has proven that he knows how to read, write and knowledgeable in a number of subjects.

You can go on down the list:
- Hillary Clinton
- Timothy Geithner
- Eric Holder
- Steven Chu
and on and on.

What do they all have in common?

They have all proven they can read, write, and knowledgeable in some area of knowledge. They all respect education. They all respect diligence and hardwork.

Take Eric Holder as an example. He was accepted and enrolled at Stuyvesant HS in New York City. Entrance to Stuyvesant is entirely based on competitive exam. This is the most sought after public school for smart kids to get into.

After Stuyvesant he was accepted and enrolled at Columbia University. Columbia University is not Harvard, Yale, or Princeton but is on the next level. Kids there are on a mission. They have a reputation for being grinders. In other words they try harder.

Again Holder made the cut and went to the next level. He went o and graduated from Columbia Law School.

By this time, the vast majority of his peer group haven fallen behind Holder. Without going into detail Holder had still to prove himself in the real world through hardwork and diligence.

Again he makes the cut.

Do you see what Obama, Holder, and the other Obama appointments have in common.

Now this is in stark contrast to Sarah Palin and say quite a bit about people who support and admire her. Sarah Palin has not proven she knows how to read or write. She has not shown any persistence in any endeavor. She has not shown she has respect for education.

What happens when your leader does not exhibit those values that civilization values eg education, knowledge, diligence, honesty, hardwork etc, etc.

Notice her kids drop out of HS. They get pregnant before completing HS, etc etc.

Do you see that her example would be devastating if she were ever elected to be our leader.

All this does not mean all of Obama's appointments will succeed but at least they have a chance.

Or am I just wasting my time trying to explain this? In any case, you asked for my opinion.