Sarah Palin stepping down as Governor

Remove all ads!

DR, I'd only ask you to support the "it's not for her family" position, but I get the feeling that's just a gut feeling for you. Not to bash gut feelings, it's all we have to go on for a number of issues, but I think it quite possible that she never expected the kind of hatred and vitrol that's been spewed at her family during all this (I can't think of any other candidate that's gotten that kind of attention for their kids), and she's backing out now. I mean, questioning a candidates past relationships is one thing, even insinuating (s)he did drugs or held a no-show, family position, but joking about raping children on national TV(and I get that that may have just been an unfortunate case of lack of information, but it's gotta hurt anyway), or accusing one of secretly adopting one's daughter's illegitimate child is something else.

 

First of all, I think you know perfectly well Lettermen wasn't talking about anyone raping anyone when he made that joke. This has already been hashed out in another thread, so I'll leave that there.

Second, I would be happy to support the "doing it for my family" reason, if I thought her past behavior warranted believing that. She didn't have to thrust her family into the spotlight the way that she did. You may find it ok to trot around a downs-syndrome baby as a photo-op prop, but I happen to think it's despicable. The amount of time Palin spent putting those kids and their family drama front-and-center does not belie a desire to protect one's family from the spotlight. If she'd made a concerted effort to keep the focus on herself and left her family at home while hitting the campaign trail, and the press stalked her family and dug up dirt anyway, you'd have a point. But she didn't do that. She was the "hockey mom" candidate, and a volunteer to be so.

A lot of what has been said about Palin's family has been unfair and unacceptable, I agree. But she issued press releases specifically discussing her family business. She forced her teenage daughter into a sham shot-gun wedding that quickly disintegrated once the heat was off. She made so many contradictory statements during the campaign that she made further scrutiny inevitable. In short, she has acted in a manner contradictory to every protective mother I've ever known. Basically, I think Sarah Palin is the Britney Spears of politics.

As for the "hatred" thrown her way, when you run around claiming your opponent pals around with terrorists, and that his supporters aren't "real Americans," and you get caught in a remarkable amount (considering how short a time she's been on the national stage) of lies and corruption allegations in such a short time, you're no angel. It really shouldn't be a surprise when people start dishing dirt back your way. I have no problem with people wanting to defend Sarah Palin because they like her, but please don't pretend she was a helpless victim in all this.

 

Or an airport restroom, surely.

 

Wrong thread, that belongs in one of the homosexuality threads.

Back on topic.

I've been thinking with Palin out of the spotlight (for the immediate future) I"m curious as to which female (Republican or Democrat) will be brave enough to go up against the Obama smear machine. I was disappointed with the way Hilliary (who I don't like at all) and Palin were shredded in the primaries and general election. I was very suprised that it didn't backfire on Obama and cost him the female vote.

 

The smear what now? Would you care to elaborate Snook?

 

I think it is possible that she's telling the truth. I don't think it's likely at all, given her prior conduct, but it is possible.

I'm not very sure what you mean. No doubt, there have been some fairly rabid Obama supporters who have thrown everything, kitchen sink included, at Hillary for running against him. Hey, for a while she got worse from Keith Olbermann than from Bill O'Reilly, and that's quite an achievement. Sarah Palin, who was often quite hostile to Obama and, indirectly, to most liberals, was not treated very well either (though I think that if her last name was Clinton she'd be drawn, quartered and fed to the pigs). However, to claim there was an Obama smear machine is quite the stretch. Most of the Hillary and Palin denouncers, iirc, were not directly affiliated with Obama. Plus, the big O himself has been fairly careful to not show any disrespect towards Clinton or Palin, despite at times getting some pretty nasty attacks - remember the "palling around with terrorists" moment? If he had said something like that towards either Palin or Clinton, then maybe he would have a problem with the female vote, but as it were there was very little reason for the traditionally pro-Democratic female voters to switch sides. Besides, I'm not sure how many women identified themselves that much with Palin anyway.

 

Would you care to elaborate on which "smears" you're referring to? You can trace them directly back to Obama too, I presume?

 

There's justification to both sides, and I fully believe that Lettermen just didn't really think that joke through too much, but still, that's gotta hurt anyway.

Tell me, how did Palin put her family in the spot light in any way Obama didn't? What do you think would have happened if reporters had dug up trash on Obama's wife, or daughters? Yes, the political arena is a risky one, and no, I don't think family is inherrantly off-limits, especially for a family-candidate, but the media was vicious to Palin's family.

I didn't see any press releases covering Palin's family business until the Media had already brought it up. Then again, I'm not the most attentive news watcher. The sham-shotgun wedding was both worrysome and inappropriate, I agree, but it was the result of media attacks, not the cause of them.

That explains hatred for her, sure, but not for her husband or children.

Simple, it wasn't the direct Obama machine that did it, it was the media in general. They did the job for him.

 

If one of Obama's daughters was having similar personal troubles, and Obama ran for President anyway, amplifying said personal problems by an order of magnitude, I'd have just as much disdain for Obama's parenting skills as I do for Palin's. The difference between the two is, in the case of Obama's wife and daughters, there is no dirt. Had there been any, I don't think Obama would have run. And if he had, and if it'd all gone south the way Levi and Bristol have, I don't think Obama would have participated in the Jerry Springer-style back-and-forth trash talking on talk shows and radio the way the Palin family has toward Levi. I'd like to think he and his family have a modicum of self-respect.

Press released discussing the Bristol "situation" were being issued by Palin's people the day after she was announced as the VP candidate.

I disagree completely that the shot-gun wedding was the result of media attacks; it was (to me) obviously forced on two dumb kids who obviously weren't in love or ready for marriage so that a conservative "abstinance-only"-advocating hockey mom would save face. THAT is why it failed, and it was always doomed to fail, because you can't force that on anyone and expect it to work out. The media attention likely made a bad situation worse, I agree - but that just goes back to my original point: Palin didn't have to run for VP right now, did she.

Todd Palin was criticized for being a 7-year member of the Alaska Independence Party, a group whose primary stated goal is the official secession of Alaska from the United States. This made him look like just a wee bit of a hypocrite when he and his wife went around questioning other people's patriotism, don't you think? Is this not reasonable grounds to criticize him on?

 

There is an old expression "The buck stops here". Anything that benefitted Obama he ends up being responsible for. Any political attack that went after Hilliary or Sarah had the implicit support of the Obama campaign. To think that the campagin didn't know what was being done was and is foolish. At any time the man in charge could have put a stop to it.

 

But what attacks? I followed the campaigns quite closely and I saw a lot of dirty campaigning by both the Clintons and McCain. My perception is that one of the reasons Obama got both the nomination and the presidency was that he stood above that.

What dirt was being tossed at Hillary? The only "dirt" I saw being tossed at her was complaints about the "dirt" her camp allegedly threw around. As for Palin, if your image is of a superconservative abstinence advocating supermom the fact that your teenage daughter is pregnant is rather relevant is it? It shows if not a huge level of hypocrasy at least a massive failure of parenting. Still I actually thought Palin got off awfully easy on that one if that had been Chelsea Clinton during the 90's or any other non-Republican politician the media drive would have been relentless and the entire American right would have stood up and denounced the person as an immoral, hedonistic slimeball.

I am still interested to see what smears you are thinking of Snook and where they originate from.

 

Yes, there is an old expression "The buck stops here."

Newflash: Obama is not responsible for Sarah Palin having zero foreign and domestic policy knowledge, forcing her to "cram" before a debate. Obama has not prevented her from gaining said knowledge in the time since. Obama is not responsible for Palin's family circus. Obama is not responsible for turning the entire Alaska legislature against its governer. Obama doesn't stand behind Sarah Palin with his hand up her butt make her give idiotic answers to simple, non-gotcha interview questions. Obama didn't make Sarah Palin question his patriotism and accuse him of terrorism. Don't even get me started on all the things Hillary did wrong that Obama is also NOT responsible for.

Stop blaming Obama for everything. The buck stops with Sarah Palin, and she owns her own damn failure. You wish she were President right now, yet can't hold her responsible for anything. How does that work?

As an aside: doesn't it give you pause that your Obama hatred is so irrational you are actually defending Hillary Clinton? Shouldn't you be having what alcoholics refer to as "a moment of clarity" right about now?

I'm still waiting for anyone to be specific about the vicious smearing Sarah Palin took at the hands of "the Obama smear machine." Vague assertions of "implicit support" is remarkably weak.

EDIT: Even Fox News can see the writing on the wall.

 

Umm, this is your idea of "out of the spotlight?"

 

In answer to the person who negative repped me 9 points on this one, I will attempt to answer their question (although I have to guess). I would have done it through PM, but they didn't leave their name (big surprise)

If you were asking me about homosexuality thread, that was in response to the fear of meeting Martaug in an airport restroom. I took that as a reminder of Republican senator Larry Craig who was arrested for tapping his feet in an airport men's room as an attempt to soliciate gay sex.

If you were asking me about the perception of Hilliary and Sarah being treated unfairly in the primaries and/or general election a quick Google turned up this from the Chicago Tribune

Spoiler

by Laura Olson

A majority of American women voted for President-elect Barack Obama, but that doesn't mean they liked how the female candidates were treated during the 2008 campaign.

Women surveyed in a poll released this morning by Lifetime Networks as a part of its "Every Woman Counts" campaign said they feel coverage of Republican Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin was too negative and focused excessively on her looks and wardrobe.

That goes for coverage of her female counterpart on the Democratic side, Sen. Hillary Clinton, as well.

"It was a post-gender election in terms of women looking beyond their gender as voters, but not in how women believe that male and female candidates were treated differently," said pollster Kellyanne Conway of WomanTrend.

Pollsters from Lake Research Partners and WomanTrend, a division of the polling company, inc., spoke with 600 women across the U.S. between November 21 and 24, asking about the impact of the recent economic downturn as well as their impressions of the presidential election.


According to the survey data, 64 percent said they felt coverage of Palin was more negative than that of any other candidate. When asked about Clinton's coverage, 31 percent felt hers too was relatively more negative.

About half said they would have liked to see more discussion of Palin's policy stances.

These women told pollsters they remain optimistic about women in politics. Clinton's and Palin's presence in the race was a "step forward" for women, and it provided encouragement that a woman would earn one of the top offices within their lifetimes.

But on issues of being taken seriously by voters and by the media, they said women still lag behind dramatically. Results showed 79 percent saying it is easier for a male candidate to be taken seriously by voters, while only 5 percent believe it is easier for a female candidate.

Even so, as Obama continued to build his Cabinet, 67 percent said he should only consider qualifications, not gender, when selecting his incoming secretaries - thought Clinton's placement as Secretary of State earned strong support from survey participants.

Women in the poll were also asked to look to their next first lady, Michelle Obama, and their expectations for her. When asked about how women would like to see her role take shape, 49 percent supported her getting involved in several issues, such as education, work-life balance and health care.

Another 38 percent said they think she should focus on her role as a wife and mother, which Obama has said she'd like to do doing her first year.

I hope that helps.

 

How does this relate to your comment about the "Obama smear machine"?

 

Well, she appears to be trying to get out of the spotlight. I don't believe she has done anything since she made her resignation speech to focus the spotlight on her (I may be uninformed). Eventually, the media will move on.

---------- Added 0 hours, 3 minutes and 18 seconds later... ----------

I thought I covered this, the man in charge is in charge and responsible for what his supporters do.

 

So Obama was in charge of the general media coverage even before he was president? That is pretty impressive.

 

Funny you should mention that:

The evidence on this is somewhat mixed. But would you care to place bets if she WANTS the media spotlight to continue, especially after those comments?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31756939/ns/politics-more_politics/

 

I think that the swing voters will crucify her. She is a fool for trying this. And if the RNC lets her, they too are fools.