The Spectacle Blog
Two regular contributors to Fox News took turns mocking Sarah Palin behind the scenes of Sunday’s “Fox News Watch” program, a video released by the network shows.
The video recorded during a commercial break on the program hosted by Jon Scott shows former New York Times reporter Judith Miller and former Washington Times reporter Liz Trotta laughing about negative reviews of Palin’s new TLC documentary series, Sarah Palin’s Alaska.
On the video, Miller, Trotter, Scott, Newsday columnist Ellis Henican and Fox News contributor James Pinkerton are seen preparing to go on the air when Miller says, “Oh, I do have something to say about Palin. I even prepared it. Who’s doing Palin?”
“I am,” Henican says.
“I’ll add,” Miller says.
Trotta then volunteers: “Alessandra Stanley [of the New York Times] had the best line [in her Nov. 11 review]. She said the new [Palin TLC] show was like ‘The Sound of Music’ without the Nazis, without the romance and without the music.”
This provoked laughter from Miller, who said, “Oh, the Washington Post hated it, too” and proceeded to laughingly paraphrase Hank Steuver’s Nov. 10 review, “He said [Palin has] the kind of sound of a voice when warning you to heed the bears - it would actually scare the bears… . He said you just get the sense that all she’s waiting for when she’s looking at this great outdoors is to get back to her SUV for enough bars to send out her latest twitter about the beauty of the environment.”
Video of the Miller-Trotta exchange was uploaded to YouTube by the anti-Palin blog PalinGates, which noted that heavy traffic to the Fox site had caused that video to “overload.” The blogger predicted that Palin “will be mightily [angry] if she sees this clip.”
Palin, the former Alaska governor and 2008 Republican vice-presidential candidate, is also a regular contributor to Fox News. Palin’s TLC show broke viewership records for a series debut that network, with 5 million tuning in for Sunday’s premiere episode.
View all comments (72) | Leave a comment
Related Blog Posts
More Blog Posts by Robert Stacy McCain
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/11/16/fox-news-contributors-mock-sar
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
michael sobieski| 11.16.10 @ 12:17PM
Let them keep up the mocking they will be shocked when it all comes down on them, we will not forget
Chris| 11.16.10 @ 12:22PM
The first artillery barrage by her chief rival for the '12 GOP nomination...establishment favorite Willard Milton Romney.
Cincy| 11.16.10 @ 12:24PM
Judith Miller? Who cares? They only have her and Pemican on Fox News Watch so that Jim Pinkerton and Cal Thomas can humiliate them.
manonthestreet| 11.16.10 @ 12:28PM
I recall they mocked another person in the Bible,that means she is over the target.
Hank| 11.16.10 @ 11:57PM
You're saying that anyone who gets mocked is just like Jesus. I'm having a hard time following your logic here, fella.
Tim*| 11.16.10 @ 12:35PM
There is an orchestrated Media attempt to "Marginalize " , "Smear Up" & " Render Palin Unelectable".
While many Of Us Tea Party Rebels are urging Our Kingmaker Senator Jim DeMint to run for The Presidency in 2012, We are aware & vehemently oppose this Media orchestrated attempt to Destroy Palin .
We are in a Media War.
The Tea Party is now inside The Congress & The GOP.
Carpe Diem.
Joe the Plumber| 11.16.10 @ 11:18PM
With all my heart I hope that Sarah Palin is the Republican nominee for President in 2012 -- because that would be the biggest landslide ever for the Democrats!
I Hate The Stupid Party!| 11.16.10 @ 12:49PM
I knew there was a reason I tuned out Fox News two years ago. This isn't the first time Palin has been ridiculed on Fox News & it won't be the last. Thanks manonthestreet for your post. You hit the nail on the head. The endless mocking & ridiculing of Sarah Palin by her detractors speaks volumes of their fear of her.
BP| 11.18.10 @ 12:13PM
Why would anyone fear an intellectual lightweight who plays on the fear, lack of intellectual curiousity, and underlying racism of people probably like you. You really have to have your head in the sand to not see what a political lightweight she is in terms of policy knowledge, global politics and econonics. I feel for you for being so upset that anyone speaking to your anger and anxiety would blind you of their lack of knowledge where it counts.
mmbr| 12.2.10 @ 11:31AM
Other than "underlying racism" your comments are merely a partisan point of view. The "underlying racism" is a serious charge and I demand that you back it up - NOW!!!
brash| 12.1.10 @ 11:13AM
Which is exactly why we want the same libs to continue to mock and denigrate in public. Even the dumbest Americans can eventually figure out that resorting to classroom taunting simply reveals that the taunters have no rational arguments to put forth about anything.
JD| 11.16.10 @ 12:58PM
Why is this news? I saw last week's "Fox New Watch" and they mocked her during the on-air segments, too. The number of snarky, inaccurate statements dropped about Palin, the House Freshmen, the Tea Party movement and conservatives in general made me think I was watching CNN - or maybe MSDNC. Jim Pnkerton may be considered "conservative" because he's to the right of Chris Matthews (on some issues), but he's still a Ruling Class snob. And Ellis Henican is Alan Colmes in a Charlie Crist mask.
Moderator Jon Scott is worse than useless, he didn't challenge a single one of the more outrageous statements or obvious lies. This was the kind of panel that would have warmed Keith Doberman's heart when they knew they were being watched. I'm not surprised that the claws really came out when they were off the air.
So much for Fox being in the tank for conservatives.
Regards,
Joe
P.S.
When are people going to finally learn to treat all cameras as "rolling" and all mikes as "live" whenever they're in a TV studio? Especially the ones who, you know, make their living hanging out in TV studios?
Susan| 11.16.10 @ 1:17PM
Judith Miller and Liz Trotta faint at the sight of their French poodle's poo on their bed-bug infested Manhattan streets, I doubt their claws are sharp enough to take on the Grizzly Mama.
But lets let them try just for fun.
Jackie| 11.16.10 @ 4:51PM
Ditto Susan -couldn't have said it better. Really -
the New York Times and Washington Times - why would anyone at Fox let anyone from those rags on anything Fox. They don't contribute they
embarrass themselves.
Margie| 11.16.10 @ 1:21PM
Wow. I haven't had t.v. for years and didn't know that that supercilious hack Ellis Henican was on Fox!! Ugh! Has Fox gone the way of PMSNBC?
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (Edmund Burke)
Does Fox really have to allow frauds to run their programs?
Al Adab| 11.16.10 @ 2:38PM
The Left would not approve of Palin if she invented cold fusion or a cure for cancer. Doesn't mean the rest of us have to listen to them. Any girl who can shot, clean and cook her own dinner is OK with me.
BTW I always thought the quote was Tolstoy.
jomo2009| 11.16.10 @ 1:27PM
Time to lock up Judith Miller again. This time, throw away the key.
Conservative_Monster| 11.16.10 @ 2:02PM
Fools Laughter
JeffT| 11.16.10 @ 2:20PM
Let them keep coming. Palin, unlike most of the men in the Republican Party, has a set and isn't afraid to use them. She'll never be president, thanks to Republicans as well as the Dems and the MSM, but she will be an influence for some time. And THAT is what galls her critics, who couldn't climb a set of stairs as fast as she climbs mountains.
Hank| 11.17.10 @ 12:01AM
"She'll never be president, thanks to Republicans," and "Democrats."
You mean, she'd lose the election? I guess you're right. If she didn't get more votes than her opponent, she would not be president. Very true.
JimmyT| 11.16.10 @ 2:36PM
I don't understand the concern about Fox having these libs on their air. If most of you are like me, you don't watch the lib programs. How are you going to know what the opponents are thinking if you don't see them on Fox? I like to know what their strategy is and I wouldn't know that if not for Fox. Do ANY of you really believe that Palin is concerned about what these hacks say about her? She's strong and getting stronger regardless of what they say about her. In fact, they are probably part of the reason she is getting stronger. I, for one, hopes she doesn't run for prez. She can do more good without the restraints of being the prez. She can do and say what she wants without the worry of offending her "base". Like most conservatives, I was very upset with her backing mcCAIN. But, I applauded her loyalty despite the fact I felt like it violated her conservative principles. In short, don't worry about what they say, it just makes her stronger.
JD| 11.16.10 @ 4:06PM
I don't have a problem with Fox having liberals on the air. One of the things that makes Fox so much better than the other cable and broadcast news operations is that they are, well, "fair and balanced". You get a range of opinion and a spirited debate, unlikce the echo chamber of MSDNC or the phony CNN panels where a liberal union rep, a liberal congressman, a liberal pollster and a liberal "moderator" join with the token "conservative" (usually someone like David Gergen) in beating up on actual conservatives from slightly different angles. The panel at the end of "Special Report" or the election night groups on Fox were examples of how to do TV debates right.
But I don't like it when there IS no debate and the Fox liberals are let loose to dump on conservatives without being challenged by the supposed conservatives on the set. And I don't like it when the moderators allow obvious lies to pass unremarked on.
Regards,
Joe
Hank| 11.17.10 @ 12:04AM
Translation:
I do not like listening to people whose opinions differ from my own unless they're in controlled environments in which people whose opinions I share can intimidate or silence them if they attempt to complete a sentence. Marketplace of ideas indeed. We're sorry, President Jefferson.
JD| 11.17.10 @ 11:31AM
"Translation"?
What did you use to translate that, Hank, the "Conservative to Nitwit" decoder ring you got at the Keith Doberman store over at MSDNC? My comments required no translation. I said I prefer genuine debate, but when one side is silent you don't get that. You get - well, MSDNC, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, NPR, WaPo, the New York Times, the LA Times, Boston Globe, et cetera, et cetera, ad nauseum.
No one is talking about "silencing" anyone - just calling them out where they're full of crap. It isn't MY fault that liberals tend to be full of crap and therefore need correcting more than conservatives. One of the reasons I can't watch Bill O'Reilly's show is that he DOES silence people he disagrees with, talks over them, and ignores their valid points. He's a blowhard and a bully, hardly different than Keith O. (The last two times I have watched even five minutes of his show I was flipping around the dial and paused because John Stossel was on. In both instances Stossel was in the process of running logical and factual rings around O'Reilly while Bill dismissed his arguments without engaging them, cut Stossel off repeatedly and then declared the segment over. Why Fox doesn't can O'Reilly and give his time to Stossel is one of the great mysteries of the universe. But at least O'Reilly lets people who disagree with him on the air so they can TRY to get their points across. When's the last time Keith Overthruster tried that?
You description has nothing to do with my post. You must have me confused with an NPR listener, or maybe a Puffington Host reader.
But feel free to troll away. Hereabouts we have no problem with the marketplace of ideas, where bad ones are weeded out and good ones succeed. (See 11/2/2010.)
Regards,
Joe
Fr0sty| 11.16.10 @ 2:43PM
Sour grapes. With 5 million viewers Sarah's laughing all the way to the bank, as is TLC.
Hank| 11.17.10 @ 12:09AM
So is Paris Hilton. What's your point?
PattyMor| 11.16.10 @ 2:54PM
Just some some sneering, snarking from an "inside the Beltway" ruling class. Keep it up, and we in fly over country will quite watching Fox News, too.
canuckistani| 11.16.10 @ 6:33PM
we can only hope....
Barbara| 11.16.10 @ 4:08PM
Aren't these the people who told us how wonderful Obama was? They think we're going to trust their judgment about Palin? I'd be agin her if they liked her! Their hostility only helps Palin.
gammi| 11.17.10 @ 7:45AM
you'd be "agin" her if they liked her? that's your only standard?
frido| 11.16.10 @ 4:36PM
There has always been a certain mystique surrounding a president and his family. People see a president as someone to be revered and held in the highest esteem. Introducing too much personal and private information into the public imagination would diminish the public’s romantic view of the power and prestige of the president. If Sarah Palin’s career aspirations are to one day become president, this show will hurt her image. Sarah Palin is not presented as someone to be revered but as an embarrassingly sillyish, ‘you betcha’, ‘this is flippin’ fun’ beer talking, fishing buddy. The most damaging part of the show which speaks directly to her character is the segment in which she is suspicious and contemptuous of her neighbor who is sitting on his balcony writing. What does this say about Sarah Palin’s character? You cannot build walls in the White House.
Diana| 11.16.10 @ 4:42PM
I disagree totally with this statement. After the cold fish mysterious one who is currently in the White House, people will be starving for what they know for sure, someone who is authentic. The pendulum does swing, you know. Additionally, Ronald Reagan was not mysterious. He was authentic. George Bush was not mysterious. He was authentic. The only mystery is your comment.
frido| 11.16.10 @ 4:52PM
But she is not loner authentic, in my opinion. At one time she may have been but her celebrity has now taken over. I would like to see a strong Republican candidate who will fight for Republican ideals of small government, less taxation, etc. and not one who is motivated by celebrity.
canuckistani| 11.16.10 @ 6:45PM
Your two citations for authenticity only prove it is irrelevant. RR was somewhat more curious about ideas than Junior, and he understood the necessity of dealing with the opposition - even winning them over. Junior had/has no clue.
Palin is not authentic at all. Her hostility is repellant to possible supporters and her willingness to quit for money will bring her down in any prospective campaign.
Whenever she speaks one on one it is a laundry list accounting of populist jargon and zero engagement. Even Junior was willing from time to time to engage on issues he had a debatable opinion about.
She will likely move from Alaska to Cali when her approval ratings there reach Nixonian levels - I'm guessing as soon as Murkowski reaches +1 certified over her boy Miller.
The reality show is another train wreck that we all love to watch and then regret we did moments after.
She is on par with Snooki, not prospective presidents.
gammi| 11.17.10 @ 9:04AM
i have to wonder how old you are and how much attention you pay to the news (both sides). ronald reagan believed in aliens, for god's sake. he and nancy didn't make a move, and changed dates on important events if their psychic advised that they do so. this, of course, they tried to keep hidden from the public because they knew it was
unusual, and the public wouldn't accept it. i don't call that very authentic. he also refused to mention the aids epidemic publicly for 6 years, under-funded programs dealing with aids, and said, "maybe the lord brought down this plague because illicit sex is against the 10 commandants."
finally after his friend rock hudson was found to have aids, he spoke out. of course, if you are a republican that votes against the rights of gays,
this might not offend you. but the sad truth is
that reagan's denial of this disease helped it spread to many more people. he also denied in 1986 that he had been selling arms to iran using the proceeds to fund the contras.
bush was not authentic either. i don't understand how people don't get that going to iraq was totally wrong. i have been listening to W. try to sell his book, all those lightweight interviews, and i am even more convinced now that we should not be iraq. they lied about WMD, if you care to learn about "behind then scenes" information, watch the movie "Fair Game", where they out a CIA agent, Valarie Plame.
i know the democrats aren't perfect either, but
if you want to make statements about your authentic presidents, i'd like to see some facts
that really are facts, not just something that comes from fox news. go to many sources.
JD| 11.17.10 @ 11:36AM
"There has always been a certain mystique surrounding a president and his family"
Really? Is that why Obama has been on every TV show this side of "The Real Housewives of Atlanta" and John Stewart feels comfortable addressing him as "dude" on national television? I think the majesty of the office ship sailed when Bill Clinton a) went on MTV and b) actually answered the "boxers or briefs" question instead of greeting it with stony silence. And Obama has done nothing but relentlessly destroy what was left of it. Unlike George W. Bush, who ignored even the most vicious and personal attacks, Obama has been in non-stop whine mode since he was sworn in, and has done more non-presidential photo ops and stunts than any Chief Executive that I can recall. He's also exploited his family pretty good for a guy who is supposed to be so private.
Sorry, frido, but this dog won't hunt.
Regards,
Joe
Diana| 11.16.10 @ 4:37PM
Do you not think the Palin's knew this would happen? Of course they did. I like what Todd said. "It's okay. We can handle it." I think the more people try to throw water on her, the water will turn to oil and the flame grow bigger so keep it coming.
frido| 11.16.10 @ 4:46PM
If she cannot handle a next door neighbor writing about her comings and goings and built a 14 foot wall, how will she be able to handle intense public scrutiny of the entire national/international community?
CharlieEcho| 11.16.10 @ 5:31PM
How would you handle a fruit loop sitting at his window watching your every move? Yours and your family. She gave him his space and took hers. Good fences make good neighbors. The nut job is looking for fodder for his "books".
frido| 11.17.10 @ 11:41AM
It would be a different story if he was sneaking onto her property trying to capture her movements. Does everyone build 14 foot fences simply because they're neighbor can see their comings and goings? If Sarah Palin cannot handle a next door neighbor peering over at her property from his own balcony and observing her comings and goings, she clearly could not handle intense public/national/international scrutiny.
Susan| 11.16.10 @ 5:37PM
Darling. After the last two years of handling intense public scrutiny of the entire national/international community Sarah Palin handled the intrusive next door neighbor brilliantly.
In building the neighborly fence on her private property she gracefully athwarted any opportunity for snooping snobs the right to violate her family's privacy.
KB| 11.17.10 @ 12:20AM
Yep, she wants to protect her privacy so much she invites a camera crew to follow her every (contrived) move. Murkowski's right, Palin doesn't have nearly as much intellectually curiosity about what it takes to run a country as she does about what it takes to keep her name in the papers. She's a celebrity alright, a celebrated disaster.
JD| 11.17.10 @ 1:22PM
He isn't "a neighbor". He is a declared enemy who moved in next door for the express purpose of spying on Palin, her family and friends in order to dig up dirt for the hatchet job he plans to write about her. In addition to being dirty politics, the whole enterprise is just CREEPY and borders on stalking. If you weren't blinded by partisan hatred you'd see that. But, of course, YOUR side never does anything bad or from bad motives. You are all as pure as the driven Alaska snow.
So I'm sure that if, say, Ann Coulter moved in next door to Nancy Pelosi and announced she was writing a book about "the real Nancy" you'd be scold Nan if she built a fence to block Ann's view. Or would you be the one leading the villagers with pitchforks and torches to drive Coulter away?
As for Palin not being able to handle scrutiny - were you in a coma during 2008. She not only endured scrutiny, she endure libel, slander and mockery, and did so with better humor and better grace than Obama has handled the nearly non-stop adulation of the press.
The comparison to the TLC show is, of course, a red herring. There is a world of difference between letting a documentary crew that is operating under mutually-agreed ground rules follow you around and letting some perv with a pair of binoculars watch your comings and goings while he takes notes for a preplanned piece of character assassination. If you can't tell the difference between the two, then you probably also can't distinguish a press conference from a police interrogation. Similar forms, utterly different circumstances, motives and possible outcomes.
Regards,
Joe
Regards,
Joe
jane| 11.16.10 @ 4:52PM
But this same show would probably whine because Palin won't be on it. Why should she?
Not Chicken Little| 11.16.10 @ 5:52PM
Liberals on display. Snark is all they have to offer - no ideas, no principles, no character. They make Sarah look soooo good in comparison!
canuckistani| 11.16.10 @ 6:52PM
What high character are you attributing to Palin?
ajoopini| 11.20.10 @ 1:52AM
certainly not of libertards and demagogues
jo | 11.16.10 @ 5:53PM
Judith Miller laughing at Palin's voice? has she ever heard herself?.....we hit the mute button everytime her
horrible squeezy voice comes on.......
Charm| 11.16.10 @ 5:58PM
Jealous women are really unpalatable. Add the snarky, elitist snob bit then you're in upchuck territory. Cuda being frightened by a bear? Pulleese. Miller and Trotter? You betcha'.
Occam's Tool| 11.16.10 @ 6:11PM
Let's see, Palin: 1) wants to cut spending. 2) Wants to cut taxes. 3) wants to kill terrorists that want to put my daughter in purdah. 4) Pisses off Tim*. (If she doesn't do that Tim*, you're supporting a lady with a flag of Israel in her Governor's office).5) has concern for people with disabilities.
Check, check, check, check, check. She'll do.
canuckistani| 11.16.10 @ 7:10PM
How do know she will actually do any of these things in office? She quit, remember.
1) Spending: AK is the highest per capita federal teat sucker. Will she start at home?
2) Which ones? For whom?
3) Name a pol that is pro-terrorist?
4) Anything with a vagina pisses off Tim*
5) Just words. Are you suggesting she wants to expand the ADA? What about expansion of education programs and supports for children? It will cost an additional $26B per year to get there. Will it be a federal program or a state-run program?
Reconcile that with #1 and we can have a cogent conversation.
The MSM is making ground with their "name your cut" questioning to the GOP. They look dumbfounded and clearly unprepared for such a simple question.
Palin will be keelhorned when these questions are put to her by outlets other than Faux News.
I want someone with a record of management and a willingness to tackle tough questions head on.
Tim*| 11.16.10 @ 9:16PM
Asked & Answered Obsessive Compulsive RINO-CINO Israel Firster AgendaBoy Tool Job,
We Tea Party Rebels Don't Have A "Litmus Test " For Our Members Or Candidates Regarding Israel, As You Do.
You've Been Told Before To Read Or Mission Statement, Core Values & Philosophy.
Israel is not Mentioned Because We Don't Regard It As A Priority Issue.
You're A Creepy Little Troll.
Honor| 11.17.10 @ 12:00PM
Now, now, Tim. Take a deep breath. No need to get worked up and call people creepy little trolls. Your mission statement, values and philosophy would be more meaningful if you all stuck to them instead of your negative hype.
When's the last time any tea partier put forth an actual idea to fix our problems, other than 'throw the bums out.'? You lack cred. You all sound like a bunch of whiners with not one solution among you, except what you've been bamboozled into believing - the more extreme right-wing you are the better. Did you really think things were that black and white? Well, wake up, they're not. Labeling all people from any one side as evil is a disastrous thing to do. You'll end up being bought and paid for by the other side, who has brilliantly manipulated you. That's where you are now, buddie.
KB | 11.17.10 @ 12:27AM
Let's see, Sarah Palin 1) ran the state that received the highest per capita amount of federal funding 2) also received the most money per capita from the stimulus bill 3) couldn't even pinpoint on a map the two countries we are at war with let alone name the leaders of the nations who are the highest suspects in supporting future attacks 4) Pisses off the bulk of the GOP majority who actually care about making policy 5) cares so much about people with disabilities that she cut funding for special ed in Alaska as governor.
Sorry, writing down what Sarah Palin says is publicizing. Writing down what Sarah Palin does is reporting. Are you her publicists or are you at all interested in FACTS?
gammi| 11.17.10 @ 8:34AM
she didn't care about children with disabilities until she had one of her own. when she was half-gov. she said "no" to funding for a program for children with disabilities.
JD| 11.17.10 @ 11:49AM
Not wanting to fund a government program for a class of people is not the same as "not caring for them". That is the great liberal fallacy.
I give money to private charities that support the causes I want to support. (Which happen to include handicapped children, as I worked professional in a childrens rehab hospital and as a volunteer in an arts program at a school for children with multiple disabilities. The school received no government funding and survived on tuition, grants from private foundations and a few individual donors)
But I don't think I have the right to be as generous with YOUR money as I am with my own. I certainly don't think I should be able to help myself to your money in the form of taxes, which you ultimately pay under threat of prison, to bestow benefits on the groups I think deserve support.
Government should do the jobs that only government CAN do, and tax us only enough to support its own operations. It has no business redistributing income to favored groups, no matter how apparently worthy.
I opposed the Medicare prescription drug benefit, too. Does that mean I don't care about old people? That will come as news to my 81 year old mother. I want taxes on her Social Security income reduced, malpractice tort reform and other changes to the healthcare system that will allow her to pay for her own drugs without picking YOUR pocket. Why do you have a problem with this, or insist on attributing bad motives to people who don't support a GOVERNMENT solution for every problem?
Regards,
Joe
Honor| 11.17.10 @ 12:07PM
'Wants to' and actually having the brains to accomplish anything are NOT the same thing. Palin can be entertaining, she has charisma and a real appeal to many. You've confused that with ability to govern, which she certainly doesn't have. She does better on the sidelines sniping. Defending her because she gets sniped at too is a real laugh.
The Media Lies| 11.16.10 @ 7:54PM
Two years later & all Palin's detractors have on her are their own negative opinions of her. And does she care about those opinions or let those negative opinions of her stop her? No. There's a lesson in that her detractors will never get because they can't get past their own biases against her. Not to mention they allow the idiotic state run media to help shape their negative opinions of her. Anyone who takes the media's opinion of anything seriously at this point is not grounded in reality & should not be taken seriously.
KB| 11.17.10 @ 12:30AM
Well actually her daughters, Willow and Bristol, care about what people think about their family otherwise they wouldn't have gone on a hate-filled homophobic rant against kids who dogged their show. Gee, I wonder where those kids got all that hateful sense of entitlement. Why do REAL CONSERVATIVES feel the need to defend the likes of Palin. Maybe because there are few REAL CONSERVATIVES who call themselves Republicans anymore.
Bea| 11.16.10 @ 7:54PM
Those who giggle and mock are showing their catty fangs; not a nice view of their personalities. Between Palin and that kind of behavior, I'll take Palin. At least she tells you what she thinks for public view, not private mocking.
John Wright| 11.16.10 @ 8:53PM
where's the jobs!
Bo| 11.17.10 @ 11:28AM
How DARE they say anything bad about Queen Sarah! Quick, conservative movement, to the phone lines to keep Bristol on DWTS! We've got to do something between now and the next primary season when we can save the Democrat majority.
frido| 11.17.10 @ 11:42AM
To CharlieEcho: It would be a different story if he was sneaking onto her property trying to capture her movements. Does everyone build 14 foot fences simply because they're neighbor can see their comings and goings? If Sarah Palin cannot handle a next door neighbor peering over at her property from his own balcony and observing her comings and goings, she clearly could not handle intense public/national/international scrutiny.
frido| 11.17.10 @ 11:45AM
Exactly, KB! Well said.
KB| 11.17.10 @ 12:20AM
Yep, she wants to protect her privacy so much she invites a camera crew to follow her every (contrived) move. Murkowski's right, Palin doesn't have nearly as much intellectually curiosity about what it takes to run a country as she does about what it takes to keep her name in the papers. She's a celebrity alright, a celebrated disaster.
frido| 11.17.10 @ 12:01PM
Occam's Tool, I am a Republican supporter. Republicans need a strong presidential candidate to go against Obama. If such a candidate came along, I believe most Americans would vote Republican because most Americans want to see spending cuts, less taxes, smaller, less intrusive government, etc. etc. Sarah Palin is not that person. She’s a sillyish, flighty, defensive, ‘you betcha’ (wink wink), ‘this is flippin’ fun’, beer talking, fishing buddy who is suspicious and contemptuous (paranoid?) of her next door neighbor. That is not someone who can lead an entire country. She and her family would be constantly under the public eye. If she can’t handle the neighbor peering over at her comings and goings from his own balcony, she’d collapse under intense public/national/international scrutiny. I guarantee if she runs against Obama, Republicans WILL LOSE BIG TIME not because Obama would necessarily be their candidate of choice but because the alternative would be a disaster.
frido| 11.17.10 @ 12:07PM
JD| 11.17.10 @ 11:49AM
Not wanting to fund a government program for a class of people is not the same as "not caring for them". That is the great liberal fallacy.
-------------
JD, the point is she did not support a program for children with disabilities (assuming this information is accurate) until she had a disabled child of her own. That speaks volumes about her character.
JD| 11.17.10 @ 6:03PM
"JD, the point is she did not support a program for children with disabilities (assuming this information is accurate) until she had a disabled child of her own. That speaks volumes about her character."
The post I responded to didn't say that. It accused her of not caring about disabled people and cited her opposition to a government program as if that were evidence for this assertion. It isn't.
First, opposition to a government program is not evidence of hostility to its object. I may want the local opera to continue peforming, but not want to spend public money on it. Does that make me anti-opera? If I write a personal check to support the opera does that make me a hypocrite?
Second, one may oppose even legislation whose ends you support if it is bad on other grounds. I may think the Library of Congress should get some new computers and want to support that, but if the bill that funds them also includes money for the Charles Rangel Chair in Ethics at the Naval Academy I'll probably balk. Without specifics such assertions are meaningless and unhelpful.
The other assertion, that she only came to care about disabled people after Trig was born was SEPARATE, and basically an assumption on the part of the original poster based on the flawed logic of "if you don't like the government program, you hate people" - you know, the usual brain-dead liberal line.
This exchange speaks volumes about your reading comprehension, but says nothing about Sarah Palin's character.
Regards,
Joe
frido| 11.17.10 @ 12:16PM
The Media Lies, in answer to your question "And does she care about those opinions or let those negative opinions of her stop her?"...
YOU BETCHA!
She's always goes on the defensive no matter how innocuous the criticism.
frido| 11.18.10 @ 11:25AM
JD, caring and taking action go hand in hand. People who care or have compassion for the needs of others do not sit on their hands and do nothing. They support charitable causes with their dollars or volunteer service. Sarah Palin as governor was in a position to “take action” to introduce a program of funding that would benefit all children with disabilities. She said "no" to funding until she had a disabled child of her own. That speaks VOLUMES about her character. It shows a woman who had little compassion or empathy for the needs of others until her own family became afflicted. She cannot be trusted to implement programs that would benefit others. TRY TO COMPREHEND the deeper underlying issue rather than simply scrape the surface. Character matters!
frido| 11.18.10 @ 12:19PM
JD, you need to look up the definition of “mystique”. Obama can be on every TV show in the land, every day, 365 1/4 days out of the year. He’s the president. But he does not talk about his personal and private life. He does not put his wife and children on public display. He divulges only that which would be a matter of public record; i.e. children going to a private school, children getting a dog, etc.
frido| 11.18.10 @ 12:40PM
P.S. Being president is not JUST about cutting taxes, spending, etc. Did you watch Sarah Palin’s THOROUGHLY EMBARRASSING interview with Barbara Walters? Here’s a good analysis of how TOTALLY CLUELESS Sarah Palin is on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, Afghanistan, etc. Please take a few minutes to watch it. It is VERY SCARY to think anyone would vote for this woman if she ran for the presidency.
P.S. Being president is not JUST about cutting taxes, spending, etc. Did you watch Sarah Palin’s THOROUGHLY EMBARRASSING interview with Barbara Walters? Here’s a good analysis of how TOTALLY CLUELESS Sarah Palin is on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, Afghanistan, etc. Please take a few minutes to watch it. It is VERY SCARY to think anyone would vote for this woman if she ran for the presidency.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXuBIyJsbCE
frito| 11.18.10 @ 1:41PM
Correction: By most accounts, Sarah Palin cut special needs spending by 62% when she took office as governor in 2007.