“Attacking Palin became an industry, and when she fought back she was blamed. The derangement started the day she was designated by John McCain as the VP nominee, and it continues to this day from small people like David Frum. Palin didn’t bring it on herself, but having found herself in the cross-hairs, she fought back. Good on her.”- JP
“I have won the BIG office pool. Here at the BIGS, we all picked squares to back up our prediction of who would be the first member of the MSM to compare the upcoming Sarah Palin documentary ‘The Undefeated’ to Leni Riefenstahl’s infamous pro-Nazi propaganda film. ‘Triumph of the Will.’ Personally, my gut told me this person would have to be uncommonly angry and cruel; someone willing to stoop to a level of partisan inhumanity where few fear to tread, someone so despicably desperate to destroy another they would use a political figure’s own children as weapons of attack. Well… Ladies and gents, Mr. Andrew Sullivan...”- JP
Hypocrisy is that old time liberal religion
Reagan/Palin Appreciation Month and All Palin February They are so addicted to "the politics of personal destruction" that they can't stop themselves from sticking the needle in their arms for another dose of hate-smack. Like some hapless character in one of their Hollyweird propaganda films -- call this one "Brokeback Boycott" -- they just can't quit her.Milbank backfired so loudly, it seems, it was even heard all the way across the Atlantic Ocean, where The Telegraph's Tony Harnden rejected it out of hand, preferring the novel (for times like these) approach of balanced reporting instead:
Rather than sneering fascination or a haughty boycott, how about a middle way in which what she does and what she says is reported on and analysed on its merits?Pouring salt in Milbank's wounds, a number of conservative bloggers have declared February "Reagan/Palin Appreciation Month":
To this end, Telegraph Blogs has declared February “Sarah Palin Month”. Our US correspondents will cover the former Alaska governor throughout February in the fashion she deserves – and, moreover, other bloggers will make sure that Mrs Palin is mentioned every day, favourably or otherwise.
During February, as we celebrate President Reagan’s legacy and Governor Palin’s accomplishments, the Palin-friendly blogs that participate in Reagan/Palin Appreciation Month will be ramping up their coverage of all things Sarah Palin in a show of support for Governor Palin. We are asking all Sarah Palin supporters to sign the Reagan/Palin Appreciation Month Proclamation. Palin-friendly blogs that want to participate in this celebration can request to be added as sponsors of the Proclamation by using the Contact Petition Sponsor button on the petition website after signing the Proclamation.Activist website Organize 4 Palin has also ramped up its efforts to get the boots on the ground in motion:
Two weeks ago the Un-Holy alliance between the Lame Stream Media and Team Obama led an all out assault on Sarah Palin, the Tea Party, and you.Lest one get the impression that the post-Tuscon attacks on Gov. Palin and "Milbank's Folly" have only ignited the Palin-specific blogging community into action, think again. Irreverent conservative blog iOwnTheWorld recently announced its own initiative in response to Milbank's grandstanding:
The majority of regular Americans were gleefully and devilishly called Murderers in a futile attempt to: Stop the Message and destroy the Messenger.
We won’t be stopped. We won’t be silenced. We are united, and we are silent no more.
This is 2008 all over again. Anyone who thinks the Lame Stream Dinosaur Media is not going to do anything, say anything, pervert anything to get Obama re-elected is either naive or lying.
Going into 2012 let’s be on offense...
In response to Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank’s suggestion of a moratorium on media Palin stories for the month of February, we came up with a little idea of our own!As for ourselves, we want to take a moment to thank Dana Milbank and his hive-minded fellow PDS-inflicted Palinoics. It is they, after all, who made all this possible.“All Palin February”
We here at iOTW will have at least one Sarah Palin item a day throughout the entire month of February, but we need your help. So, send in your favorite Palin stories, quotes, pictures, poems, etc., so that we can fight the main stream media bias against former Governor Palin and all conservatives.[...]
We are also asking that all bloggers, writers, commenters, talk show hosts, conservative journalists and fair minded people stand up to the biased reporting and Palin bashing by the main stream media! Please join iOTW as we celebrate “All Palin February”!
All but three of our presidents in the last hundred years graduated from elite universities, often with law degrees. Truman did not attend college. Ike graduated from West Point, and Reagan graduated from Eureka College in Illinois. Those three are considered among the best of presidents by most. Reagan and Truman were thought stupid by some. Is it that Palin did not graduate from an elite university that causes some conservative pundits to reject her as unintelligent?Not if we refuse to let the left and its media hounds choose our candidates for us, Doc.
[...]
It seems unlikely that her performance as mayor of Wasilla, cutting taxes while expanding the town’s facilities so that it could grow, would be anything but a plus. Just so her role as a member of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission. She outed two corrupt officials, one of whom was chairman of the state Republican Party.
Was she wrong in running for governor to oust a corrupt and wasteful officer of her own political party? Was it lack of wisdom which led her to sell the state plane, cut expenses of her office by 75 percent and pass a bipartisan ethics bill? Was she impolite in chasing away the oil company lobbyists so that she could start work on a stalled pipeline for natural gas? Not likely.
President Obama was elected because he appeared to be extraordinary. His academic pedigree and soaring rhetoric shielded from voters his appalling lack of real-world experience and complete lack of substantial accomplishments. His presidency is struggling.
By contrast, Sarah Palin, despite her talents and obvious achievements, seems very ordinary. Americans, believing the smears and punditry, will likely reject Palin without really getting to know her. Once again the nod will go to a member of the cultural elite, a group which has routinely failed to govern well.
[More]
The most astonishing thing about Sarah Palin’s career, since the conclusion of the 2008 presidential campaign, is how frequently the Left breaks itself to pieces against the sunny rocks of her good humor.- JP
[...]
Every time Palin closes her eyes and holds out her sword, a hundred liberals race up to impale themselves upon it. They’ve tried to gin up some kind of weird conspiracy theory about Bristol Palin’s success on “Dancing With The Stars.” David Letterman nearly ended his career (and it should have ended) by making rape jokes about Palin’s youngest daughter. Tina Fey got famous by lampooning Palin, who was a good enough sport about it to appear on Saturday Night Live in person… but [Fey] recently made headlines by launching into a vicious anti-Palin tirade – complete with tired and discredited smears – during a comedy award ceremony. The audience was left to fidget nervously, while an embarrassed PBS edited the worst of the garbage from its broadcast. Andrew Sullivan of The Atlantic twisted himself into a laughingstock whose continued presence disgraces the magazine, by obsessively peddling conspiracy theories about the true parentage of Palin’s son Trig. Liberals wrote her “death panels” Facebook post into the pages of history by screaming themselves hoarse over it.
What’s going on here? Is the Left simply out of their minds with hatred for Sarah Palin? That’s part of what motivates them, but the reason she keeps getting the better of them is because they’re slavishly devoted to following an outdated playbook. They think they almost got her with the “stupid, ignorant chill-billy” meme during the 2008 campaign, and they’re determined to twist that knife until they hit a vital organ. Along with their complete lack of understanding for her enduring appeal, it leads them to consistently underestimate her.
[...]
The Left can’t help underestimating Palin. Their world-view will not permit serious engagement with someone they have formally ruled beneath their notice, championing ideas they try very hard not to think about. She’s not just arguing for minor adjustments to the system liberals have constructed over the past century. She questions its very existence, alongside a Tea Party movement that gets the same treatment she does. They’re also very sensitive about threats to their cultural dominance, which Palin threatens with her easygoing charm… frequently broadcast through Fox News, which has already done irreparable damage to leftist media control.
The Left drew some blood from Palin during the 2008 campaign, hitting her hard when she was still learning how to handle a national audience, and getting precious little help from the McCain campaign. She survived, and liberals who try to dismiss her with casual slander increasingly find themselves sneering at each other across a media space the general public has long since vacated. If she runs for office again, Democrat political operatives would be wise to consider what she’s actually saying, not Tina Fey’s fevered opinion of it, and understand that the number of people willing to completely ignore her is not going to increase. The public will not have a difficult time choosing between a pleasant lady with a winning sense of humor and some serious ideas to discuss, and the bitter scolds who think they can drown her out, if they can just put enough spittle behind calling her an idiot.
[More]
Law permits those under 21 to be inside such establishments if they're accompanied by a parent, spouse or legal guardian over age 21 and are there to eat.Bristol, and the other Palin offspring, had better be careful to only cross the streets within the borders of painted crosswalks, lest the PDS-afflicted run to the police and demand that they be charged with jaywalking. It seems that they would also be advised to check their pillows and make sure that no tags have been removed. That's a federal crime, you know.
Board Director Shirley Gifford says Palin was with an older guardian, drinking only water and eating nachos and chicken strips. She says there was nothing to indicate any law was broken.
At leftist, pro-Obama CNN, the PDS-afflicted Jack Cafferty's Sarah Palin obsession has not abated. Cafferty is CNN's curmudgeon-in-residence, and we expect him to snap any day now and go into full Howard Beale mode. NewsBuster Matthew Balan reports that Beale... er, Cafferty has expanded his Zone of Hatred to include not just Sarah Palin, but Christine O'Donnell as well:On Wednesday's Situation Room, CNN's Jack Cafferty revisited his anti-Sarah Palin obsession and somewhat predictably, grouped U.S. Senate candidate Christine O'Donnell with the former Alaska governor, stating it "feels like Sarah Palin all over again....O'Donnell has some big question marks on her resume, just like...Palin." Most of the viewer e-mails Cafferty read bashed the two politicians.Matthew Balan's full NewsBusters blog post is here.
The commentator devoted his 5 pm Eastern hour commentary to the two Republican women. After his "feels like Sarah Palin all over again" line, Cafferty recounted O'Donnell's emergence on the national political scene, and wasted little time in outlining her negative similarities to Palin: "Suddenly, everybody can't seem to get enough of her. This is despite the fact that O'Donnell has some big question marks on her resume, just like Sarah Palin. She's come under fire for allegedly misusing campaign funds for personal expenses-just like Sarah Palin."
[...]
Cafferty concluded the segment with his "Question of the Hour" on the two women: "So here's the question: why do people like Sarah Palin and Christine O'Donnell attract so much attention? Go to CNN.com/CaffertyFile, and please enlighten me, because I don't have a clue." Unsurprisingly, only two of the viewer replies which he read just before the top of the 6 pm Eastern hour could be characterized as leaning neutral, with the rest going in full liberal rage mode against the politicians. The CNN personality, along with anchor Wolf Blitzer, also made light of O'Donnell's witchcraft remarks after he concluded reading the replies.
[...]
The CNN commentator has targeted Sarah Palin since the autumn of 2008, devoting 35% of his Cafferty Files segments over a month period to bashing the former governor. Since then, Cafferty has derided Palin as "lame" and referred to her as "Caribou Barbie." Just over two months ago, he hypothesized that the Republican's popularity was a good omen for Democrats: "If anything could overcome the increasingly sour view of the Obama presidency, it might be this. Why, the Democrats should be positively euphoric."
"Michael Joseph Gross, the author of the recent Vanity Fair hit piece on Sarah Palin, does not seem to be able to tell the truth. In a new attempt to 'shoot the messenger' (me) rather than admit that his story is concocted, he tries to turn the tables and call my credibility into question. The problem–there are witnesses and logistical impossibilities that expose further problems with his story."Northern Exposer at Conservative Jedi:
"Michael Gross's 'profile' on Sarah Palin is drawing more and more detractors... Why? Oh, I don't know. Perhaps because it's pure, unadulterated crap!?"Peter at Bayou Renaissance Man:
"The author of [the Vanity Fair hit-piece against Sarah Palin] has since stated... that 'the worst stuff isn't even in there', and that 'she lies about everything'... I spent several weeks in Alaska last year... During that time I spoke with more than a few people who knew Sarah Palin personally, both her supporters and her opponents... The story from those people is radically different from what's portrayed about Ms. Palin in the mainstream media. Even her political opponents grudgingly conceded to me, in conversation, that she was a very genuine person, who said what she believed and stuck to it. She had their respect as an honest politician, even if they disagreed with her... She simply is not the person the mainstream media want to portray her as being."Tom Faranda:
"I still haven't read the full [Vanity Fair piece], but Imus, who doesn't like Palin, did. On the radio Tuesday he said it was a hatchet job."Stacy McCain at The Other McCain:
"Vanity Fair’s Michael Gross today lashed out at his critics and claimed, among other things, that Gina Loudon is lying about him. That’s so unfair, isn’t it, Michael? You have a conversation with someone, then they tell their side of the story in a way that makes you look bad, and . . . well, it just feels kind of wrong, doesn’t it? ... As I said before, every liberal journalist with any influence or ambition is either now writing an anti-Palin book or is trying to hustle a deal for an anti-Palin book. The fact that Sarah Palin isn’t cooperating with writers like Gross (i.e., she’s not helping him get paid to trash her) indicates that she’s not quite as stupid as he thinks she is."Sally Paradise:
"I am always astounded when the left’s bigotry and smugness is hailed as intellectualism. Vanity Fair, if you want to write about hate and anger then look to the left."jonjayray at Dissecting Leftism Backup:
"In reading Vanity Fair’s bill of particulars, we wonder, 'Compared to what?' Is Ms. Palin making any more money than the aggregate $100 million collected by good ol’ boy Bill Clinton — as he jetted his way around the globe between 2001 and 2009, offering his 'aw shucks' global initiatives to any creepy foreign thug who would pony up the near-million-dollar fee? Are the now-orphaned Palin children missing their careerist mother more than, say, the Obama children missed their absentee father huckstering on the campaign trail for two years in 2007–2008? And is Ms. Palin really less of a game-eating shooter than the duck-hunting camouflaged John Kerry was in 2004?"Richard Cochrane at Hypocrisy Reigns Supreme:
"Vanity Fair regurgitated all over Sarah Palin in a nasty 18-page attack in last week’s issue... its article felt purposefully petty, trivial with a streak of hysteria. Frankly I am confused by its neurotic delirium..."Doug Brady at Conservatives 4 Palin:
"As more people get to know Governor Palin through real, unscripted moments... it will be increasingly difficult, if not impossible, for liberals and their allies in the media to caricature Governor Palin as some bendy-straw demanding diva. The near-universal denunciation of the ridiculously fictitious Vanity Fair hit-piece is evidence that this is already happening. The more people get to know the real Governor Palin, the less traction these outrageous hit pieces will receive (outside of MSNBC and their ilk, that is). Time is on her side, not on theirs. The Left knows this and that is why their attacks are becoming increasingly hysterical, as the Vanity Fair piece demonstrates."Larry Johnson at No Quarter:
"Passing judgment... seems to be the theme for the week with Vanity Fair publishing the worst kind of baseless smear masquerading as an article by Michael Gross on Sarah Palin, using anonymous sources, and operating from the most misogynistic point of view."Hillbuzz:
"We’re going to tell you all something, and we want this to be abundantly clear — we stand with Governor Palin in all that she does, all that she hopes to do, so long as we believe she has the best interests of this country in her heart and she continues to fight for Americans in every way she knows how... Governor Palin has consistently stood up for the rights and liberties of all her constituents during her time in elected office — and yes, even the gay ones — and we see her on peer with former Vice President Dick Cheney as one of the Republicans we trust most when it comes to defending gay people against all bullies, wherever they may be found (hint: they’re usually on the Left, funded by the DNC, and not on the Right where state media tells you they are…Fred Phelps, the most gay-hating closet case in the known universe is a Democrat)."Katrina Trinko at NRO's The Corner:
"While Vanity Fair writer Michael Joseph Gross has admitted he erred... he still hasn’t retracted any of the other inaccuracies in his Sarah Palin piece. And there are plenty."Mark Whittington at Associated Content:
"In the wake of the now infamous Vanity Fair hit piece, of which now even the author is admitting may have some errors in it, Sarah Palin's acerbic reaction to the piece is now being spun into a manufactured controversy... Sarah Palin is now being accused of gay bashing... Imagine whatever prurient imagery you would like. Palin was not attacking Gross's sexual preference. She was attacking his writing ability, his journalistic ethics, and his virility, the last especially treasured by any man no matter who or what he prefers to sleep with."Jackie:
"You know it's bad for Vanity Fair when even liberals like Ben Smith, Dave Weigel, and Kirsten Powers are defending Governor Palin and conceding that the Vanity Fair Hit Piece is questionable."Patrick S. Adams at Patrick's World USA:
"You can't take the kinds of punches Sarah Palin has taken for the past two years and still be standing - and standing even stronger and taller than you were before you took the punches - unless there is something really weak with the attacker, something really strong about the punch taker or a combination of both... While the smears against Sarah Palin will continue (the smear campaign against Ronald Reagan continued throughout his entire presidency), you can mark this down: the Vanity Fair 18 page empty shell will come to symbolize the moment when the smear campaign became impotent and limp... The smears the Left passed around to each other like syphilis may have once created a false apprehension in the less astute reader, voter, independent or moderate; but ultimately even these people will find that Palin is more palatable than they've been led to believe, especially if they are suffering 'buyer's remorse' over Obama."- JP
"I’ve read [the VF hit piece] and it’s simply the worst excuse for journalism – oh wait, we’ve already seen some of the worst excuses. In short then, it’s nothing more than a hatchet job. It is character assassination to the highest degree... No one in the public arena, in this nation has ever been roasted, toasted and trashed like Sarah Palin. Until Sarah Palin, I never believed that Americans could be so unkind or so cruel. The attacks on this woman and her family have been heartless and brutal, regardless of whether you like her or not. No one deserves the abuse she has endured and it makes everyone who has done her so unkindly, a much lesser person."Nathan Burchfiel at NewsBusters:
"A 10,600-word article in the October issue of Vanity Fair reads like the rambling diaries of a spurned middle school student."Tea Party at Perrysburg:
"Why did the Vanity Fair author (Gross), who was told repeatedly that the child did not belong to Palin, confuse the Down Syndrome child with Palin's? Because he was looking for a story that he had already written... The truth is that the Vanity Fair was a despicable hit piece, meant to totally destroy Sarah Palin, if she should decide to run for the presidency."Jim Treacher at the DC Trawler:
"The other day, Vanity Fair published a 10,000-word hatchet job about how Sarah Palin is history’s greatest monster. It was so bad, so shoddy and error-filled, even Palin-haters are bashing it. Even Palin-haters who helped the VF writer with his story are bashing it!"Rich Crowther at Conservatives 4 Palin:
"Anyone reviewing the latest Vanity Fair article about Governor Palin should at least do so armed with an awareness of the words of Mary Hargrove, a former editor and investigative reporter for the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 'When I go to Washington and I see a proliferation of anonymous sources used daily, I don't believe it myself even when I know the authors... I think, Can't you take that extra step? It's just cheap shot heaven.' This, of course, is something which appears lost on Michael Joseph Gross..."Richard at Hyscience:
"Liberal feminists finally defending Sarah Palin? Pigs must be flying!"Brooke Dunbar at Examiner.com:
"So what did we learn from Vanity Fair's Sarah Palin roast? Apparently, women are supposed to be Mommies and nothing else, whose job it is to simply look pretty and be the sole caretaker for the children. Apparently, any other choice means that they are bad mothers... Criticize her politics all you want, but until I see an 18-page article about Barack Obama or any other male politician's parenting choices and wardrobe, I'm going to stand by the reprimand. Shame on you, Vanity Fair for the damage you've done to the women's liberation movement."Political Numbness:
"The mainstream media will eviscerate whomever they perceive to be the greatest threat to their 'progressive' agenda, and since 2008 that has been Sarah Palin."Jamie Jeffords at Eye of Polyphemus:
"The entire blogosphere is buzzing about the Vanity Fair hit piece... Make no mistake -- it is such a brutal piece of no facts personal attacks that even the progressives who hate Sarah Palin with a passion... -- are aghast. For my part, I am wondering exactly how much further journalism can sink into the toilet before everyone stops paying attention. What are they teaching in journalism schools [these days]? One thing the article does settle for me is Palin is the real deal and the progressives know it."Christina at Is This What You Voted For?:
"[CNN gives] credibility to profanity-laced ANONYMOUS quotes to smear Sarah Palin and her family... It is no wonder [their] numbers are in the dumpster!"David Duff at Duff & Nonsense!:
"The most you can say for Mr. Gross's effort is that it is, well, long. I was about to write 'comprehensive' but that implies some sort of worthwhile knowledge or insight. Instead what we get is an eye-stabbingly boring list of Palin ephemera... Perhaps the clincher in persuading me that Mr. Gross would be better employed writing about pop stars and celebs, which he has done, is that he implies with many a wink and a nod that the people of Alaska, or at least [Wasilla]... heartily dislike her, and yet, only a week ago the incumbent Senator, the daughter of one of the most powerful Republican families in the State, was ousted by a total unknown - who was backed and endorsed by the very same 'hated' Mrs. Palin. "Noel Sheppard at NewsBusters:
"Gross has admitted making a mistake in his piece... He regrets the error? No he doesn't. He regrets getting caught..."Sissy Willis at Liberty Pundits:
"Speaking truth to power is scary, isn't it, Howard Kurtz... 'I agree with Palin on overuse of unnamed sources, but calling reporters impotent and limp? Did she have to go there?' twittered a wimpering Howard Kurtz yesterday afternoon. Truth to power is scary, especially when the shoe is on the other foot. Meanwhile the New York Times was trying to breathe new life into the hoary tale of the Hatfields and McCoys of The Last Frontier."John Sexton at Big Journalism:
"The fact that Gross doesn’t see fit to mention any of his liberal baggage when he appears on TV suggests that he’s not being very honest. I think the real motivations come through in his work."Chairman Christopher R. Barron of GOProud:
"Referring to a recent article in Vanity Fair written by gay journalist Michael Joseph Gross, The Advocate... accuses former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin of ‘gay-baiting....’ It is The Advocate, not Sarah Palin, who is guilty of ‘gay-baiting.’ I don’t think most people associate the words ‘impotent,’ ‘limp,’ or ‘gutless’ with being gay – I know I certainly don’t. If the folks at The Advocate think these words are euphemisms for being gay or lesbian then I think that speaks volumes about their own internalized homophobia. Governor Palin was absolutely right to use the words she chose to describe the pathetic hatchet job penned by Mr. Gross."- JP
I thought I might share another point about those “impotent, limp and gutless” reporters: It’s not really hard to do what they do. A pro-Palin friend e-mailed me:- JPThe root of the VF-style hit pieces can be found with a handful of Alaska characters. A journalist on assignment to write a hit piece will ring up Shannyn Moore, and she’ll put this person in touch with a slate of people who have an obvious axe to grind . . . or just a tenuous connection to Sarah Palin. We can always tell who the “anonymous” sources are.Exactly: “The Real, Hidden Scary TRUTH About Sarah Palin” is a color-by-numbers exercise that has been done to death by now.
[...]
Some people in the journalism racket really need to re-consider their career strategies. Being a dime-a-dozen cliché-peddler just isn’t very smart in the long term.
"Vanity Fair has unleashed a ten thousand word hit piece on Sarah Palin in the latest issue based largely on anonymous sources that has already begun to fall apart under close scrutiny by reporters who actually check facts... If it was the intent of the Vanity Fair hit piece to tarnish Sarah Palin, it seems to have backfired... Ben Smith thinks Sarah Palin is partly to blame, as she tends to avoid contact with the mainstream media, sticking to friendlier venues in the conservative press. But, really, if people are going to write things like the Vanity Fair piece, can she be blamed for not wanting to help them do it?"Da Techguy:
"Perhaps if 'feminists' [had listened] to her in 2008 they wouldn’t have to defend Palin in 2010."Malia Sutton:
"This entire Gross piece is nothing more than a gross exaggeration and embellishment. And I doubt this Gross guy took the time to interview people with different stories and varying experiences with Sarah Palin. But what really galls me the most is the way the mainstream press is not calling him to task on this. On CNN this morning, while this Gross guy sat there in the studio, before millions of people, and put on a fake-somber expression and a deep serious tone to promote his Gross piece on Sarah Palin, not one of those anchor boobs on CNN had the inclination to question him about his sources or the integrity of the piece."Nathan Burchfiel at NewsBusters:
"For someone so supposedly enamored with Palin, Gross sure turned quickly."Adrienne Ross at Motivation Truth:
"This article is actually filled with lies that nobody who has ever met the real Governor Palin--or anyone with an ounce of discernment--would ever embrace, but facts don't seem to matter to loons who are obsessed with running her into the ground. Isn't it something how these things seem to get uglier and uglier as she does more and more damage to the liberal agenda? It's no surprise that after this latest round of endorsees' victories, this comes out. The latest, of course, is the 'Miracle on Ice,' Joe Miller's defeat of Lisa Murkowski in the battle for the U.S. Senate."Alarming News:
"The article is just garbage, thin, weak, and factually incorrect all over the place."D. B. Light at Light Seeking Light:
"The Vanity Fair hit piece on Sarah Palin is so bad that even liberal columnist Ben Smith cannot stomach it. Of course he blames all the hostile and dishonest reportage and commentary on Sarah, saying that it is because she won't give interviews to unfriendly journalists [like Ben Smith]. He seems to think that if she gave lots of such interviews the hostility would abate. Yeah, sure... Smith is not the only one protesting the hit piece. Other liberals, feminists, and even Palin haters are protesting the piece."M. Joseph Sheppard at Recovering Liberal:
"The irony of the whole Palin situation is that a person who holds no elective office... and who communicates by Facebook and Twitter is not only impervious to the leftist attacks, but is assisting the radical left to destroy itself."Frank Ross at big Journalism:
"The mighty Sarah Palin, not in any political office but who somehow nonetheless rules the world from her Facebook page, clearly terrifies this pathetic little man, Michael Joseph Gross, who was all over the media today to promote his largely unsourced hatchet job on Sarah Palin. Yes, that’s right: Sarah is so terrifying that no one would speak of her on the record, which is why Gross had to, um, quote unidentified sources about her martial relations, her shopping habits, and other such things crucial to our understanding of her as a politician."William A. Jacobson at Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion:
"Most Surprising Fact In Vanity Fair Palin Hit Piece... That Vanity Fair still exists."Ron Devito at US for Palin:
"Every time Gov. Palin scores a significant accomplishment, the leftist media spin machine has their hit piece ready to roll. Vanity Fair has a... history of running hit pieces against Gov. Palin, and 'Sarah Palin the Sound and the Fury' is the latest in that publication’s line-up... Every supporter of Gov. Palin is spoken of negatively. Those who don’t like her are portrayed as victims of a sinister Palin-controlled Mafioso type network running roughshod through Wasilla clamping down with an iron fist on those who would say anything negative about her."Ben Hart at EscapeTyranny.com:
"The article does more damage to VANITY FAIR than to Palin..."Kim Linton at Associated Content:
"Although he has denied the charges, Gross reveals a bias against Palin early in his article titled, 'Sarah Palin the Sound and the Fury.' The Vanity Fair writer manages to paint a picture not so much about the sins of Palin, but his desire to make her look bad at any cost... What follows [the first paragraph] is a series of assumptions and hearsay backed only by anonymous sources... Even though the piece is mostly fluff and vivid storytelling, one disturbing part of the article is the author's attempt to demean Palin's faith."Dan Cleary:
"CNN: We Got Nuthin' on Sarah Palin, So Let's Chat With This Vanity Fair Creep For a Few Minutes about His Brainless Hit Piece..."Holdren at Two Kids and Some Babies:
"Vanity Fair posts some garbage article taking pot shots at Sarah Palin... Is this what now passes for journalism in this country? No fact checking? No scrutinizing of news sources? The entire VF article can be summarized as: 'I don’t like Sarah Palin. Here’s a bunch of people (I can’t tell you who they are), who knew Sarah Palin (in some unspecified capacity), who told me, at some time, some mean things about her. So you should stop liking her.' Really? That’s it? No names? Dates? Places? FACTS? We’re just making stuff up now? There are liberal websites who are RUNNING with the quotes from this article like it’s the gospel. I can understand not liking someone on the other side of the political spectrum, and trying to convince folks on their side to jump ship. But, can we at least pretend to verify our smears before we publish them in a nationally-read magazine? For crying out loud..."- JP
Remember Vanity Fair (you know–the stale, old magazine that no one buys unless they are on the cover or they are wishing they were, like Joy Behar)? The recent hit piece on Sarah Palin by Michael Joseph Gross reveals that they must be as desperate as the rest of the MSM for sales/ratings, because they have lost all credibility, if they ever had any.Please go to Big Journalism and read Dr. Loudon's complete refudiation of the Grossly disingenuous Vanity Fail hatchet piece.
Reading his tripe was excruciating. Some 90% of the hard accusations are attributed to anonymous “sources.” This is billed as a profile piece, not exactly Watergate. You have to do better than attributing everything to an anonymous “Deep Throat.”
I have read a lot of MSM slime over the years, but never, ever have I felt subjected to a more jealous, petty, sophomoric, disturbed piece of ragslime than I do after reading this latest on Sarah Palin. Gross left nothing alone. He attacked her beauty, intelligence, marriage, parents, friends, family, children, ability, sincerity, honesty, faith, state, husband, home, shoes, speeches, pastor, book, job, cooking, hunting skills, supporters, church, weight, undergarments… the list goes on. I honestly cannot think of anything about her that he did not attack.
Sarah Palin doesn’t need me, or anyone else to defend her. She is strong, self assured, and she has heard all of this unoriginal slime before now. The only thing new in his story is the new depth of utter disregard for professionalism in journalism. Here is an excerpt:“When …Piper Palin turns around, she sees her parents thronged by admirers, and the crowd rolling toward her and the baby, her brother Trig, born with Down syndrome in 2008. Sarah Palin and her husband, Todd, bend down and give a moment to the children; a woman, perhaps a nanny, whisks the boy away; and Todd hands Sarah her speech and walks her to the stage.”Unfortunately for Mr. Gross, it happens that I shared the stage with Sarah Palin at that event... and I remember it well.
As I stood backstage with the Palins I remember a reporter asking me if I were “Trig’s Nanny” with a hint of something I didn’t trust in his eyes. I coldly retorted, “no, I am Samuel’s mother.” He looked confused, and had more questions to follow. In his VF story, he said that no one is willing to speak about Sarah “on the record” unless they are paid by her, or afraid. I was one of the people you interviewed Mr. Gross. I am not paid, or afraid. But since you opted not to print what I told you, here is the rest of the story: Since the first time the Governor saw my son Samuel (who also has Down syndrome), she bolts across the room to greet him every time she sees him. She nuzzles him like a mother who loves children with Down syndrome does.
[...]
After I explained which children were Todd and Sarah’s, and which were mine and my husband’s, Mr. Gross moved into a sinister line of questioning. I let him know that I was surprised that he believed the baloney written about her during her 2008 race with John McCain. I told of my work on Governor Palin’s “advance team” and that I was there when the whole St. Louis “story” about her alleged expensive taste became more important to some writers than her stellar performance in the debate. I told him the Governor I know was always polite, always a lady, even behind the scenes in her darkest moments.
[...]
I told Mr. Gross that the Palin family is so real, it is unreal. What you saw in front of the cameras is precisely what you saw behind the scenes. I have known a lot of politicians. The interesting thing about the Palins is how grounded they are, despite their astonishing success. Mr. Gross says he talked to her hairdressers, makeup artists, waiters, and clerks at the Independence, Mo., event, and he tells of scandal, self absorption, and power slinging. But he never mentions talking to me, or to others I heard echoing the sentiments I offered to him. One of the most endearing components of the Palin family is their ability to point out, and laugh at their flaws. The Palins were gracious enough to let Mr. Gross follow them for months backstage, behind the scenes, and in their private moments around their staff and friends and family, and this is how he thanks them?
Here is petty, but further evidence of Mr. Gross’ slander. Sarah is a size 4. She is tiny. So when you try to hit the woman in the place that would really hurt, and accuse her of spending $3,000 of campaign money on her underwear, namely Spanx girdles, it tells your readers so much about you.
[...]
One more thing among your errors: “the boy” in the excerpted quote above, was not Trig Palin. That was my Samuel, also a beautiful boy with Down syndrome. No “nanny whisk(ed) the boy away.” I am his mother. I took my son, Samuel from Sarah before she went on stage. I told Mr. Gross that fact, but he didn’t let that divert him from his pathetic narrative.
That is not journalism. That is just gross.
So here’s where we’re at. Yesterday the piece dropped, and immediately even left-leaning reporters like Ben Smith and Dave Weigel started challenging it. Today Smith came back with another reason to question its accuracy; meanwhile, lefty feminists (including KP, whose criticism of Vanity Fair almost but not quite atones for her recent “Republicans are racist” op-ed) are unloading on VF for attacking Palin over alleged behavior that’s par for the course for male politicians. And now, as a coup de grace, here’s renowned Palin-hater Shannyn Moore telling Weigel that she’s filled with heartache at what a supposedly unethical hack the VF author has turned out to be.Read the rest here.I don’t give a rip what you said about me – though it was so completely wrong, and put me in such a completely inaccurate and unfavorable light people are mad on my behalf.[...]
Fine thanks for Alaskan hospitality. I have extended the Alaska Spirit to dozens of journalists and visitors, and I will continue to do so. It’s on YOU, not me, as you are the only one who has broken agreements with sources you promised complete anonymity.
I’m sure you’re thrilled to be on TV now. Just know, like Sarah, Alaskans paid a price for it. Specifically, a 79-year old woman, with failing health, who spoke to you under anonymity who hopes her adult children will speak to her again.
Peter Hamby at CNN tweets:“I was w/ Palin for entire VP bid. never got a hint that she ‘lashed out at the slightest provocation’”All of which brings me to a question: If, like Vanity Fair, you’re in the business of churning out occasional hit pieces on Palin to take her down and/or convince your readers that she’s every bit the demon they believe she is, wouldn’t you want to make extra, extra sure that the details are perfectly accurate? You know her supporters will allege media bias; the only counterargument is to present an airtight factual case. As it is, they’ve managed to turn this into Exhibit A in her argument for just how lame the “lamestream media” is. Amazing.
I have to say, I’m a bit surprised that the liberal feminists who have taken every opportunity they could to attack Sarah Palin have now come out to defend her from the disgusting Vanity Fair article that was released yesterday...We share Curt's skepticism. And what Moore is upset about is not VF author Gross' hatchet job on Gov. Palin. Moore slimes the governor and tells as many lies about her in one day as Gross did in one hatchet job. And Moore it does every day of the year, sometimes several times a day. No, what has Moore's knickers in a knot is that Gross outed Moore's friends, sources he had agreed to cover for, not his bearing of false witness against Sarah Palin. Make no mistake here -- Gross, Moore and most of the other leftist women who lost their mud over this article share a common goal, and that is to drive Sarah Palin's poll numbers down and ultimately destroy her politically. And if Sarah's husband, children, friends or supporters get wounded in the process, well they're simply casualties of war, from the leftist POV. These leftists still believe like Alinsky and Lenin that the ends justify the means. This is war, after all. C'est la guerre.
[...]
How bad was this article? So bad that Shannyn Moore, a liberal Palin hater like no other, attacked the writer of the Vanity Fair hit piece:I don’t give a rip what you said about me – though it was so completely wrong, and put me in such a completely inaccurate and unfavorable light people are mad on my behalf.[...]
Fine thanks for Alaskan hospitality. I have extended the Alaska Spirit to dozens of journalists and visitors, and I will continue to do so. It’s on YOU, not me, as you are the only one who has broken agreements with sources you promised complete anonymity.
I’m sure you’re thrilled to be on TV now. Just know, like Sarah, Alaskans paid a price for it. Specifically, a 79-year old woman, with failing health, who spoke to you under anonymity who hopes her adult children will speak to her again.
Shame on you. You’re not a writer…you’re a climber.
With no respect,
Shannyn Moore
While I find it heartening that these liberals are backing Sarah regarding this article, I find it a bit hard to feel sorry for them being used the way they were. These same people were not so worried about the truth vs. fiction regarding Sarah way back when. Trig not the baby of Sarah…Sarah spending too much on clothes…Sarah baaaaad.
But now that they have been treated the same way, they are now upset.
I don’t think I have ever seen these “feminists” back Sarah against these unfair attacks before so color me skeptical that they have now seen the light.
