Baseball Crank
Covering the Front and Back Pages of the Newspaper
November 10, 2008
POLITICS: Score Another One For The Palin Critics

Palin with Lieberman

Apparently, according to Newsweek, Gov. Palin refused to appear onstage with a New Hampshire Senator and a New Hampshire Senate candidate because they are pro-choice.

Except that the Senator in question, John Sununu, is pro-life.

And except that the other candidate wasn't running for the Senate (Newsweek may have missed this, but Sununu was up for re-election, so there were not two Republicans running for the job this year).

And except that she did do public appearances with both men.

And except that she did make public appearances with other pro-choicers.

But you know, other than getting basically every possible fact wrong, Newsweek's doing OK there.

(H/T).

Posted by Baseball Crank at 7:30 PM | Politics 2008 | Comments (35) | TrackBack (0)
Comments

I'm not a huge fan of Palin, but I do think it's clear that somebody considers her a political threat that needs to be eliminated, more or less regardless of the means.

Posted by: Jerry at November 10, 2008 8:18 PM

John Sununu, appeared on stage - only he was not introduced .

Posted by: dear at November 10, 2008 9:33 PM

HotAir has an even better pic of Palin embracing with Lieberman from a different occasion. The Slander Media slithers on.

Posted by: rhodeymark at November 11, 2008 5:59 AM

I remember when I saw Sarah Palin and her family introduced at the Convention; you could tell they'd been professionally scrubbed and styled. I said to my wife that they went through the same treatment Dorothy and her crew received before meeting the Wizard.

To go back now and gripe about how much was spent on getting her ready for the national stage is beyond petty. Especially considering that Barack Obama spent more on ads per minute than she spent on any clothes.

And whoever is shooting off his or her mouth about any stumbles she may have made behind the scenes is weasel politics at its lowest. How could anyone ever work with that person again, knowing that anything anybody confides in that person will be distorted and leaked almost immediately ?

Sarah Palin is an impressive, charismatic, telegenic personality -- not qualified for the presidency, but a competent first term governor none the less.

My only gripe with her is that she seems to have bought into that whole Newt Gingrich/Karl Rove/Lee Atwater brand of divisive politics. I read one article about how when she first ran for mayor - she turned a small town election where most of the voters knew each other and the candidates into a question of which candidate was the most god-fearing and patriotic? We also saw glimpses of that fear mongering in her recent campaigning.

Fortunately that style of campaigning proved to be dated and fell flat -- so maybe her next makeover will be a political one.

Posted by: Patrick at November 11, 2008 7:39 AM

Loved your earlier quote from Michael Crichton, by the way. It sent me to Google to learn a bit more about the man.

Anyone who values the truth should make it his business to make the mass media pay for their willingness to print lies to favor their chosen points of view. And actually that seems to be happening.

Posted by: dd at November 11, 2008 8:41 AM

Hmm. The Palin bashers are AWOL.

I find it amusing that the same people will a) on one hand say Palin is a joke, stupid, and has no future in national politics; and b) work so hard and invent so much BS to discredit and slander her. What's even more amusing is that these people don't see the humor and irony in what they are doing.

And what is up with Newsweek? Talk about a rag.

Posted by: per14 at November 11, 2008 8:45 AM

Newsweek officially became Sullivan (unreadable, illogical, propagating falsehoods, propaganda, a waste of time for any human) to me when I flipped through one a while back while riding a bike at the gym & a short article on the movie the Golden Compass appeared. I scanned over the article & it was, in short, a "there are rumors about it promoting hatred of God & athiesm, but that's an urban legend, the film is quite safe for kids" puff piece obviously intended to praise the film.

I went home, did a quick search and the first 10 items from google all showed several interviews with the author, who admitted that he was attempting to promote atheism & that he wanted people to disdain the concept of God.

Thus, newsweek became expensive toilet paper, to me.

Why anyone even reads it anymore is beyond my comprehension. I mean, would people read articles by Jayson Blair? If not, then why Newsweek?

Posted by: RW at November 11, 2008 9:09 AM

Mark my words, in a week you'll be reminding the Palin-bashers here that this article in Newsweek is wrong on every count and that they should know that if they don't already. They do know, they don't care, plus what about that interview with Katie Couric?

Shameless, these people are.

Posted by: spongeworthy at November 11, 2008 9:50 AM

Speaking of getting every possible fact wrong, have you heard the clowns talking about how the country is "center-right"?
Yeah right. They just elected a Marxist/ Socialist, who wants to take money from the rich and give it to the poor. And he won handily.
That tells me this country isn't anywhere near "center-right". THANK GOD!

Posted by: Berto at November 11, 2008 11:00 AM

Trenchant analysis, Berto. Attaway to really think the issue through and share your results!

Posted by: spongeworthy at November 11, 2008 11:22 AM

I'm wondering if it was Palin's belief that Sununu was pro-choice and not anti-choice, as truthiness replaces truth to her all the time...either way, it should have been explained, and there should be a correction...if for no other reason than the celebration that phone jamming Sununu got kicked to the curb.

Posted by: AstrosFan at November 11, 2008 12:25 PM

Can't let it go, can you AF? She made appearances with Sununu regardless of what she may have believed about his views. And why would you think she was confused at all? Do you have even a tiny, remote particle of fact to hang your question upon?

And what proof do you have that "truthiness replaces truth to her"? Can you give a single example?

Has it occured to you people that your just switching the focus of your hate from a lame-duck president to Sarah Palin, currently governor of Alaska? You folks have other interests besides hating on people, don't you?

Posted by: spongeworthy at November 11, 2008 1:07 PM

You folks have other interests besides hating on people, don't you?

He/she had me at "anti-choice". That one's up there with "rethuglican".

Posted by: RW at November 11, 2008 1:53 PM

Phone jamming, eh? Kinda like this guy?

Posted by: Crank at November 11, 2008 2:04 PM

http://www.bostonphoenix.com/boston/news_features/this_just_in/documents/02695827.htm

Source checking time...Gore story was denied, and even the reporter who first wrote it would hope that it would go away...It was a joke taken out of context which was then reported as news...try again...

Posted by: AstrosFan at November 11, 2008 4:42 PM

Guess that's what I get for listening to Seth Gitell.

Posted by: Crank at November 11, 2008 4:47 PM

Quick question here for all the Palin fans. On those rare times when she does tell the truth, does she realize she is doing it, or do the owrds just come out of her mouth unimpeded by brain function?

Jerry, trust me, no one on the left is the least worried about Palin.

"In the national Election Day exit poll, fully 60% of voters said they did not consider her qualified to serve as president if necessary, while only 38% thought she would be ready to step in. Those figures were daunting enough, but new calculations from the exit poll provided by the NBC News political unit show that outside of the Republican base skepticism about Palin’s credentials reached even more imposing heights. While 74% of Republicans thought Palin was qualified, just 35% of independents and 9% of Democrats agreed, the figures (first aired on David Gregory’s 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Monday night) showed."

http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2008/11/brownstein_on_t.html

Crank, I anxiously await your abrupt dismissal of this source without addressing the substance.

Posted by: Magrooder at November 11, 2008 9:57 PM

While I give little enough credence to Brownstein, and I think the public perception is mistaken in this case, I don't disagree that there were a lot of people out there who didn't think she was qualified.

That said, experience and qualifications are the easiest things in the world to fix with time. Obama surmounted that hurdle simply by campaigning, without having ever accomplished anything.

Bear in mind, I'm not committed to Palin in 2012. There are other options, and she has things to prove before she can be the #1 on the ticket rather than the #2. But so much of the garbage thrown at her by people who fear her as an opponent is just that.

Posted by: The Crank at November 11, 2008 10:20 PM

We don't fear her, we love having her around as an eaasy target that boils the right wing blood.

Posted by: Magrooder at November 12, 2008 12:16 AM

Palin was the only reason McCain didn't lose by 15 points.

Posted by: maddirishman at November 12, 2008 4:12 AM

"trenchant analysis" = common sense.

Posted by: Berto at November 12, 2008 8:59 AM
Palin was the only reason McCain didn't lose by 15 points.
At least 15. Which is why they DO fear her. Posted by: RW at November 12, 2008 11:57 AM

SULLIVAN NAILS PALIN

"This deluded and delusional woman still doesn't understand what happened to her; still has no self-awareness; and has never been forced to accept her obvious limitations. She cannot keep even the most trivial story straight; she repeats untruths with a ferocity and calm that is reserved only to the clinically unhinged; she has the educational level of a high school drop-out; and regards ignorance as some kind of achievement. It is excruciating to watch her - but more excruciating to watch those who feel obliged to defend her."

IRONY OR TRAGEDY? Discuss.

Posted by: Magrooder at November 12, 2008 2:20 PM

Magrooder, are you sure your not confusing Ms. Palin with Ms. Obama...who can't carry on a conversation in normal tones.

Posted by: maddirishman at November 12, 2008 6:15 PM

Quite sure. The Palinistas should be sure to check the latest from the Alaska Daily News: http://community.adn.com/adn/node/134330

Posted by: Magrooder at November 12, 2008 8:21 PM

My bad. Anchorage Daily News.

Posted by: Magrooder at November 12, 2008 8:28 PM

Magrooder, that's pretty thin gruel. Nothing in there on the central issues of the legal standard and Palin's basis for believing that Wooten should not be a state trooper.

Posted by: The Crank at November 12, 2008 11:42 PM

Magrooder, that isn't even a news story, it is a blog. You know...like Baseball Crank. No offense Crank, but there is a differnt standard of responsability between the two.

Does anyone other than me wonder why you would not want to fire a trooper who had taseredf his own kid?

Posted by: maddirishman at November 13, 2008 4:23 AM

Wow, the proprieter of the "hey, didn't Sarah Palin fake Trig's real birth" house o' delusion is now a quotable resource for something other than derision?

Sullivan's a Trig Truther, Magrooder. Politics aside, he's insane. He's obsessing over Palin because he's trying to make her toxic so that he can point to his over-the-top (waaaay over the top) attacks on her as being justified. Well, I have a penchant for reaching into my drawer of long-term memory cells on occasion and I can guarantee that this lone voter will never - as long as there is breath in my aging lungs - forget that Andrew Sullivan attempted to smear Sarah Palin by implying that she faked her Down Syndrome child's real birth.

How you could approvingly quote a certifiable scumbag (and by scumbag I mean.....bag of scum) without knowing how damaged his credibility is.....

Posted by: RW at November 13, 2008 8:47 AM

RW- What do you mean "attempted," past tense? He's still at it.

I generally try - I don't always succeed, but I generally try - not to psychoanalyze people I disagree with. I make an exception with Sullivan. The man is ill, as his behavior over the past several years has vividly illustrated. He's always been a talented polemicist who wrote with his heart instead of his head, but by this stage he's lost his mind. His total and complete freak-out over a woman who has borne 5 children...you'd need a volume to go thoroughly into Sullivan's neurotic attitude towards women and their reproductive systems (recall that the thing that set him off obsessively about Guantanamo involved threatening to confront detainees with menstrual blood), but the guy, frankly, has problems with the fact that women are capable of bearing children. (This is before we get into his anti-Semitism, his loathing of Christianity, and his complete unwillingness to deal with opposing points of view honestly).

Nobody's asked for biological proof that Obama's daughters are his own (nor should they). Sullivan won't let go of the issue with Palin because he's incapable of dropping it.

Posted by: Crank at November 13, 2008 9:51 AM

Magrooder, etc.,

If you guys won't distance yourself from these trivial (Tasergate) and ridiculous (the Palin parentage flap/request for medical records) issues, then how can you complain when some on the right ask for the long-form of Obama's birth certificate?

If you disclaim the more trivial/ridiculous stuff on your own side, you'll have a lot more credibility when you criticize the same nonsense on the right.

RW - "If not, then why Newsweek?" You mean you don't look forward to reading the occasional pieces by Anna Quindlen?

Posted by: MVH at November 13, 2008 11:19 AM

Newsweek is a joke. The MSM is all a joke--reporting on what they are calling "news". It's a joke really...people think they are catching up on the news by reading a magazine, catching a news show--but really the liberal left wing MSM illuminati has just spent the last 2 years campaigning for Obama, and only reporting stories that would make him look good...even holding back tapes and videos that made him look bad. A joke I tell you.

Posted by: mnotaro at November 13, 2008 12:13 PM
You mean you don't look forward to reading the occasional pieces by Anna Quindlen?
They weren't running two-for-one specials when I took my dog in for neutering. :) Posted by: RW at November 13, 2008 12:25 PM

The obession over Palin's close really makes tha mainstream media illuminati look sickening. When will they move on?

Posted by: Ms. Know at November 13, 2008 12:31 PM

Gosh, you were so close mnotaro.
It's true the MSM is a joke, but not for the reasons you commented on. they are a joke because they carry the water for the rich and powerful in this country.
They let clowns like Robert Litt opine on the pages of the Washington Post about how Obama shouldn't investigate the wrongdoing of the outgoing bush admin, because it's not "post-partisan". The reality is Litt is a defendant of telecom companies and others WHO HAVE BROKEN THE LAW!
it's in his best interest to convince the public that looking into criminal acts and punishing those found guilty is 'partisan politics'.
mnotaro, follow the money. You'll see why the MSM spends time on anything but real news.

Ms Know,
Are you saying that when Fox News carries water for the corporate-side of the GOP they aren't being "fair and balanced"? Welcome to 1996.

Posted by: Berto at November 13, 2008 2:29 PM
Site Meter 250wde_2004WeblogAwards_BestSports.jpg