Jul2 |
 |
The Sarah Palin double standardWe’re six months into the Obama Administration — more than one-tenth of his entire term, incidentally — and political junkies can’t seem to get enough of Sarah Palin bashing. This doesn’t particularly bother me: Her selection as a vice presidential nominee undermined John McCain’s credibility, and the more information that comes out about her shallow and petulant behavior, the less likely it is she’ll be president in 2012 or beyond. I wouldn’t mention it, except for one information that’s come to light: The CBS News story linked above quotes an e-mail from a top McCain advisor to Palin during the campaign about Todd Palin’s membership in the Alaska Independence Party, which was characterized as a secessionist group. Palin’s defenders disputed that characterization and added that the Palins were only loosely associated with it. But here’s the e-mail — written during the campaign — by the McCain advisor, who wanted Sarah Palin to keep quiet about the issue.
Even the McCain campaign knew that Sarah Palin palled around with secessionists. This is worth mentioning at this point for on main reason: There’s no way a liberal could’ve survived such a membership. As one of Steve Benen’s commenters points out:
Right. When liberals express doubts about justice in this country, they’re labeled unpatriotic. The conservative impulse to actually no longer be part of the country is either laughed off or offered as proof of super-duper patriotism. It’s a lovely double standard. |
|
|
The Trouble with Spikol | Make Major Moves | PW Style | Cup o'Joel
Why do you still care about Sarah Palin? Oh, and so Palin’s husband, not her, was supposedly a member of this party. And this all matters … why?
I’m guessing as a distraction.
No distraction – though I was pretty sure this would bring you out, Jim.
In any case, I’m not the one making Sarah Palin a big deal this week. That would be Vanity Fair, Politico and CBS News. I wouldn’t be commenting on her if she wasn’t a hot topic in the political news world. I’m allowed to comment on hot topics, right?
And Bill Ayers, not Barack Obama, was a member of the Weather Underground. Didn’t stop you from harping on those connections. Guilt by association works both ways, dude.
http://blog.infinitemonkeysblog.com/?q=node/5800
Walked right into that one, Jim.
Was Sarah Palin elected president? Or Vice President? And the parallels between Obama’s connections to Ayres and his ilk, his whole adult life, and this phony “controversy” are not equal.
Nice try, though.
Yes, you’re allowed to comment on hot topics. Your news judgment might come to the conclusion that childish score-setting and hit-pieces in Vanity Fair are hardly worth all the trouble.
“And the parallels between Obama’s connections to Ayres and his ilk, his whole adult life, and this phony “controversy” are not equal.”
Right. Double standard. I suspect we’ll continue to disagree on this.
For what it’s worth: I ignored the Vanity Fair piece when it came out. “No need to pile on,” I said to myself. But since the repercussions spilled out into other media — including, I note, conservative media outlets like the Weekly Standard — I don’t think my meager comments are out of bounds.
Comment all you like. The left’s obsession with running down Sarah Palin still strikes me as odd. Perhaps they perceive her as a threat.
I, too, have avoided the Vanity Fair piece — as well as the push-back from the likes of the Weekly Standard. Frankly, that kind of “inside the campaign” score-settling bores the shit out of me.
I have to laugh at this comment by Charles Krauthammer on last night’s “Special Report with Bret Baier.” On Palin failing the “gravitas” test of presidential timber since returning to Alaska:
Ha! Really? Worked for Obama.