Charles Krauthammer is his usual awesome self here during a segment on PBS in which he points out how the show he is visiting, and liberals in general, are simple obsessed…mind-numbingly, compulsively obsessed with Sarah Palin:
I know none of you need any evidence of this obsession since we see it daily, but here is just one very recent example. “Comedian” Sandra Bernhard laying into Sarah and her daughter, calling Bristol a hooker: (h/t Newbusters)
What a nasty bunch that was. Strong symbols for feminism they are not.
I always find it humorous how the left insists that Sarah Palin has no credibility, as a person or a politician, but freak out, I mean just FREAK out with any Sarah news nugget. Whether it comes from Todd, their kids, or Sarah herself.
If she has no credibility then what the hell are they worried about?
What a sick demented bunch these liberal’s afflicted with PDS are.
See author page
@Tom:
Nope…you brought it up and, if you think you’ve got a valid, provable point, then you should post it for all to see.
Aye, slow down there, buddy. This is a two way street, no? I’ve been patiently responding to your little series of crumb trail questions leading to the inevitable gotcha trap you’ve cooked up. ( No need to fret: we’ll get there all in good time.) During this question and answer session with you, I completely forgot about the numerous questions that I’ve asked which remain unanswered. For the sake of fairness and good faith (and novelty), can I perhaps have a few questions answered, and then we’ll get back to yours?
To recap, I posted my take on Sarah Palin and the attention she receives. For that, I was the grateful recipient of some classy, creative descriptions of my mental capabilities, yet not much in the way of actual discussion. Two people, Missy and Mata, responded in good faith, yet seem hung up on the Palin children aspect of the story, which, at this point, we’ve turned over and over to death. No one has responded to my calls for discussion of “the liberal obsession with Sarah Palin”, the ostensible subject of this post. I would like to hear why it’s wrong for the media and liberals to focus on Sarah Palin. Can that be arranged?
“Gotcha trap”?
Nah…As long as you tell the truth there will be no “gotcha”.
I have no problem with the media and liberals, sorry to be repetitive there, focusing on Sarah Palin as long as they are fair and honest…applying to her the same standards that they apply to politicians / public figures on the Leftist side of the aisle.
Of course, the absence of that fundamental fairness, decency, even-handedness, and truthfulness is the genesis of this post as well as this one.
In a blow to moonbats, Krugman unintentionally concedes Palin was right about the Death Panels. In fact, HE even calls them Death Panels.
@Tom, all I can say to the linked comment here is, you really did lose months of your life… specifically the months where Palin was picked by McCain in late summer, all thru the election. How were those drugs, BTW? How else can you lose the news in an entire POTUS election season?
You are an absolutely blithering idiot if you assume the casual references to only a few of the stories by well known, high profiles pundits, and highly publicized events are the meat and/or the extent of it all. You are playing stupid and disingenuous. So I shall treat you the same as you attempt to portray for debate gain… stupid and disingenuous.
You attempt to parse sentences and specific referenced events as the minimum and only events … just to sidestep your own assertation that the lib/prog mouthpieces are not on record for the lowest of the low presidential campaign fodder.
Let me remind you of the debate between, at least, you and I. You suggest that the GOP has never stooped as low the the lib/progs in 2008. I have asked you a very simple question to redeem yourself. Apples to apples. Not the candidates, but the families. Yet you say “that’s *your* guidelines”. No, that’s the subject of how low the debate is. So I’ll repeat it, “loud” enough for even someone as base in intelligence for you to decipher…
TELL US OF A GOP/MEDIA CAMPAIGN THAT PERSONALLY ATTACKS A CANDIDATE’S FAMILY ANYWHERE IN HISTORY AT THE LEVEL IT DID THE PALIN’s IN 2008.
No, bozo… that’s the absolute apples to apples in the “PhDs of slime” debate. We’ve provided proof of the low, sleazy, “PhDs of slime” blows in 2008.. and are also available in our FA archives and the simplest of Google searches by the most politically ignorant.
But we’re still waiting for your proof that the GOP stooped lower, dude. That is the end goal of the “PhDs of slime” debate. Do you get it yet?
zzzzzzzzz… snort… gee, wake me when you can come up with an answer that isn’t anything but a dodge.
But no… you play the “let’s parse words instead” game. Why? Because you can’t come up with a GOP campaign that has ever stooped lower than the lib/progs did in 2008.
Nice try, you lazy SOB. Very disappointing. I’ve actually given your POVs consideration in the past. Apparently, I’ve overestimated your abilities and historical knowledge.
Consider yourself duly informed. You’ve been triaged down as a lesser opponent for the future. I shall address you with the (lack of) respect and (lack of) knowledge you’ve freely demonstrated here in this particular debate. You don’t answer direct questions. You dodge the specifics, ignore even recent easily documented historic events, and then pretend that history is only what we lightly touched upon.
You are either one who prefers to debate assuming you have amoebae on the other end, or you are an amoeba yourself.
….in other words, ta ta, dude. You’ve moved to the “skip over this comment by an imbecile” file for me. ta ta, au revoir, see ya, and all that jazz. Whatever you recognize as a serious brush off in the debate world.
Speaking of piss poor attempts at redemption, or even a cogent response… Billy Bob, you’ve even hit a new low yourself. Most of which you can see my response to Tom above. Do you assume that this thread is the only exposure we’ve had to you? You’ve got to be joking me.
The archives are full of Billy Bob “over the top” ‘isms. I don’t need to link any, or all of them, here for the regulars. For those that are new, they need only search “B-Rob” in the blog search engine and get there themselves.
But “nice attempt at changing the subject” yourself…. oops. NOT. Again, another piss poor attempt at redemption, assuming that either regulars have no memory, or that lurkers are unable to utilize a search engine.
But boy… don’t it look good to yourself when you re’read your own BS comment over and over? 😯
But, unlike you, I will answer a direct question.
Do I want to see Palin head the 2012 ticket? No.
Would I vote for a Palin/anyone VEEP 2012 ticket over Obama/anyone VEEP else in 2012?
IN A HEARTBEAT!
Since no President is “an island”, so to speak, I can say that Palin has demonstrated infinitely superior taste over Obama, INRE a founding father constitutional direction of our country, and surrounding herself with company that believes the same about our principles of governance and freedoms. And since no POTUS operates without advisors, I will trust Palin’s choice of advisors over the big Zero’s any day.
Next question?
Tom, you incredible idiot, Show me where Chelsea Clinton was called a hooker and some one obsessed over her uterus for years! Show me where The two Obama girls have been called hookers and bitches. Demonstrate for us how Pelosi’s daughter was villified.
Tom, show me where reporters have rented the house next door to Reid’s house in order to spy on his day to day activities in order to write a book.
Show us all, Tom!
You cannot do it. You excuse the behaviour of your mates on the left by trying to say, “Everybody does it” but you need to pull your head out of the sand. No one does this but the whiny, screaming, hate-filled leftists you defend.
Whoa, well said reckless! Liberals either engage in the hate or excuse others who do it. But they embrace no personal accountability so I am not shocked.
That’s one way to avoid providing proof of that Democratic conspiracy you alluded to.
Did that feel better after that?
————————————————————————–
Well what a waste of time engaging on this issue turned out to be. It would have been interesting to hear why the 1st Amendment doesn’t apply to Sarah Plain. Of course I didn’t realize “Sarah Palin’s family was the victim of a Democratic Media campaign” had entered into the cannon of conservative principles, nestled right there between small government and low taxes. There is no need for proof, because the proof is just having been alive during 2008, ya kinda just knew it, deep in your gut. Sheepishly, I now join the ranks of the enlightened. It’s a simple concept: if anyone writes anything critical about Sarah Palin, it’s the Democratic Media apparatus behind it (right up to Obama I assume). Not, mind you, a member of the media who happens to have liberal bias; or someone who just doesn’t agree with her; or a late night comedian who enters into a mutually beneficial public spat with Palin, that both milk as long as possible. We’re not talking about individuals having individual reasons for disliking one of the most divisive people in modern politics. We’re talking about an organized group of “lib/prog mouthpieces” who take their marching orders from on high. Conspiracy stuff. Light on proof, some might argue. Well, doesn’t matter, because this is Principle now.
The only moral and logical response is that no one should criticize Sarah Palin. It doesn’t matter that she daily begs for attention through social media, is constantly on the lookout for a new ‘liberal enemy’ to zing to everyone’s delight, and publicity is her oxygen. It doesn’t matter that she left government to use her celebrity to make millions. By criticizing Sarah Palin you merely reinforce the Sarah Palin Principle and the righteousness of whatever it was you took issue with.
And the corollary to “thou shall not criticize’ is “thou shall not question (without proper vetting by her handlers)”. We all know you’re implicitly criticizing Sarah Palin if you have the gumption to ask her a question she doesn’t like, anything that begins with, “can you explain your position in detail on ______”; or, Lord forbid, a question she can’t answer, the name of a newspaper, GWB’s basic approach to foreign policy, etc. When you do that, you’re merely reinforcing the Sarah Palin Principle.
——————————————–
Very deep stuff. Perfectly verifiable, I’m sure. I recommend reading it in the voice of a five year old, or Sarah Palin, for the proper effect.
We already provided proof, bozo. You, on the other hand, slept thru Aug to Nov of 2008 and wear blinders to the easily accessible archives all over the MSM. You figure if you close your eyes, and sing “LALALALA” loud enough, the reality goes away?
You are an idiot, Tom. I gave you every opportunity to back up your absurd whitewash, and all you did was make a fool of yourself.
Then you attempt to back track, saying it’s all us and we’re hypersensitive to Palin criticism.
What part about a very direct question – what GOP/media assisted campaign assaulted any Dem candidate’s family the way it did the Palin’s – is beyond your comprehension?
Or could it be you need to do the shuck and jive dance because there is no answer that redeems your convenient lack of memory?
Doesn’t much matter to me, Tom. As I said…. you’ve been triaged into the imbecile file.
Well that didn’t last very long.
Where? Where have you responded to my multiple civil requests for proof that there is and/or was a Democratic conspiracy against Palin? If it’s so obvious, it should be easy enough for you to provide that proof.
On a personal note, it’s sad to see such a respected figure decend into DrJohn territory, letting the ideology (and in this case, idolatry) get so far out in front of the intellectual component of the argument. The evasion and the insults aren’t very becoming, Mata. And confused, angry ranting rarely flatters the source. You have been asked politely to provide proof of what you’ve claimed and you’ve refused. You also could of walked away, as you said you would, and we would have been left to draw our own conclusions from that, but instead it’s just more insults. The path you’ve chosen is perplexing one to me, to say the least.
I suggest you peep your head out of that far-right pup tent and see the rest of the world as it is. The notion that it would take a conspiracy for media or non-media types to be critical of Sarah Palin, or even to cross the line into bad behavior, is not a difficult one to fathom. She is not as popular in the population at large as she is here, after all, and she works at dividing people into her notion of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ camps, which can be quite annoying frankly. There are also many serious people who have serious questions about her qualifications as a political pundit or candidate, and she does little to sate that curiosity, since she won’t talk to anyone.
But where you’ve really got it wrong Mata, is in your notion that ‘attacks’ against Palin somehow harm her and help Democrats. It’s quite the opposite, in fact. All the drama, all the cause for rallying to her defense, is what she thrives on. She likes to play at being an underdog and the victim of ‘elites’. The MSM’s alleged animus towards her has given her a dream excuse for not having to answer tough questions. So now she can sit back and send out her taunting tweets, hoping one will stick enough to draw a retort, get the base all fired up, provide more fuel for the fire. That ridiculous Facebook message aimed at Obama was practically begging for a response. I think people have figured this out, so I fully expect her childish baiting to just get more desperate.
“…. confused, angry ranting…”
BWAHAHAHA. Really now, Tom. You’re into the desperate territory now.
One more time, and for the last time.
What GOP/media assisted campaign attacked a candidate’s family such as was orchestrated against the Palins in 2008?
In can only be tough for those that blissfully slept, unaware, from late Aug to Nov 2008. In which case you weren’t even informed enough to cast an intelligent vote.
Not even discussing Palin’s “harm” INRE you lib/progs, frothing at the mouth at the mere mention of the family name. None of that appears in my comments here. But then, that’ s to be expected from someone who simply is unable to read.
Last chance, Tom. Answer the simple question above… just what Dem candidate’s family waspersonally assailed by the GOP and media like the family of Sarah Palin?
Dodge it again, and you’ve forever banished to ignore’dom. So, perhaps I should bid you a permanent farewell now?
oops….
No clue. Never said any did.
Now will you answer my question?
Thus you concede Mata’s original point that the libs/progs have the PhD in slime.
Thanks for playing.
Don’t be a child. You people are so tedious. For the last time, post the proof of systematic Democratic party involvment in tbe MSM ‘mean things’ written about the Palin children, or you’re both exposed as liars and, truthfully, clowns. Your choice.
Instant replay of the pertinents, folks: for the asleep at the wheel voter, Tom, who apparently missed months of Palin family bashing on MSNBC, CNN, HuffPo, DailyKOs, Mudflats, Air America and most other left stream media:
duh wuh…. Of course not. That now ends the debate , proving that the lib/progs in the Democrats are indeed the winners of the PhDs in slime political award.
Since our resident imbecile played Rip Van Winkle and slept thru the 2008 POTUS election campaign – evidenced by his support of the loser in chief temporarily occupying the people’s house maybe a few of you will take pity and educate him to what he missed.
Like Bristol Palin’s pregnancy became a Dem talking point issue about how well Sarah, herself, was vetted…
Because her daughter was pregnant?
The widely read Talking Points Memo called it a Palin Meltdown at extraordinary speed.
Because her daughter was pregnant??
Even Obama, himself, said he heard about the Bristol pregnancy on the news (not likely the back door, peanuts bloggers like us… LOL), and made it a point tosay leave her out of the campaign. But then, he can easily say that while he tells his grassroots to “get in their face”, right? His hands are clean, and he transfers responsibilities elsewhere, as he always does. More on that from Jawa below.
The rumors about Trig, Palin’s own son, popped up so fast on the internet by lib/prog bloggers and the “grassroots” campaigners that even Snopes had to step in to clarify the rumor of Trig’s fatherhood. Engaging with regularity on these lies were DemocraticUnderground and DailyKOs. Even the leftist darlings, HuffPo, jumped on the Trig father bandwagon.
The NY Post began their story about the Bristol pregnancy, with the lead line saying it was “..a revelation the Alaska governor made public today to refute rumors spread by liberal bloggers that she had faked her own pregnancy to cover up for her daughter’s earlier one.”
Reuters came up with the same line.
Mainstream enough of a rumor to make the 1st line of a major media newspaper in the Big Apple, and one of the most major news syndicates around?
uh… .where was Tom Van Winkle? I mean really… were it just a few, small time underground bloggers, why is it necessary for major media to discuss the same? Did they exonerate the parentage? Or just throw it out there to tease and get the rumor going further?
Buzznet decided to pile on, claiming it had photos of an underage Bristol, drinking.
The Sacramento Bee’s Anita Creamer accused Palin of exploiting Bristol for political gain.
All this has what to do with Palin’s Veep candidacy?
How coincidental that Obama’s campaign relied and prided itself on grassroots momentum, so the Jawa did the yeoman’s work on tracking where some of these Palin attack rumors were coming from.
And of course, only a political Rip Van Winkle can classify Andrew Sullivan as a mere “blogger”, and not the senior editor of The Atlantic Mag, and an author of five novels.
Don’t know if anyone else wants to educate poor ol’ sleepy Tom here, but I’m done doing his homework.
But I’m quite satisifed to get the answer to the question from him… FINALLY! Nope, he says. No GOP or media has ever waged such a sleazy campaign as the lib/progs and their grassroots did on the Palin family. The PhD of slime award is officially rewarded.
I rest my case.
Aye and Mata Both of you know I have the highest respect for your principled conservative viewpoints.
I do not believe the Dem.Party orchestrated a negative campaign against the Palin children.Is this what you are saying? If so,proof please.
As far as Sarah is concerned her bashing by MSM,Dems and Repubs like Rove and others has been well documented and well earned.IMHO she is competing with the Kardashians for most overhyped person in our country.They’ve certainly all made millions.
If she runs,she’ll get some tough competion in the primaries.I’ll be suprised but happy if she wins.
Unless unemployment is over 8% in 11/2012( in which case BHO deserves to lose),she will get clobbered.
On a more positive note I talked with Patvann whose Marine son is home from Afghan and all had a joyous Thanksgiving.
Semper Fi RJW
Yo… imbecile. No one ever said “democratic party”.
I.. not anyone else… said lib/progs. But then, I can see why you’d read “lib/progs” and automatically insert “Democratic party” in your singular brain cell.
But I see that even rich wheeler doesn’t get it. You play the game switch, parse words, ignore the reality, divert from the original question and answer, and still manage to confuse the easily confused. But not here.
The conversation is replayed. The lib/progs, accompanied by a willing media, played the slam Bristol and Trig game. No GOP campaign has ever stooped that low… by your own admission.
Your proof is above. Think you know how to click and read?
Now kindly address your future comments to others. You’ve taxed my time and patience enough with your game playing and pollyanna presesntation. If you weren’t around to read and hear what is noted above, you really do fall into the too stupid to vote category.
@ Mata 68
This is a joke, right? I don’t give a rat’s ass that that the East Shitwater town blog posted about Bristol Palin underage drinking. This pathetic list is proof of a national conspiracy? WHERE IS THE PROOF???
Are you trying to weasel out of on your claim? Is that it, Mata? Are you a weasel?
Bullying and bullshit didn’t work. Your little buddy, Aye, couldn’t save you. Do you have anything?
For the last time, where is the proof that the Democratic party/Obama campaign was involved with and orchestrating a smear campaign about the Palin family?
So you choose to try and weasel out, even though it’s been clear for many, many posts that we have clearly been talking about the Democratic party. Let’s take a trip down memory lane
Here’s me on post 46,
Reading comprehension problems, perhaps? I reiterated on post 61
and on 63
and on 67
And if you missed all those posts, if you’re claiming you never accepted the basis of my argument (I.e. that it was about party involvement, based on your “mouthpiece” insinuation), why did you ask me, several times, to respond in kind, specific to the GOP?
You can’t weasel out of this, Mata. Who do you think you’re fooling?
Exit question: who is the “idiot” now?
Au Revoir!
Well, imbecile, thank you for your three examples of you, fully admitting you are inserting (or desperately attempting to, anyway…) “dim party” into the “lib/prog” slot. That goes a long way to proving that you remain too stupid to vote.
Tell you what, we’ll let you try again, with your own rules, attempting to save what little face you think you have left here. I was, if you realize, one of the last on this site to give your comments any semi-serious courtesy.
What conservatives and bloggers have waged an election campaign personal assault on the family members of a Dim candidate, as did the lib/progs in 2008 on the Palin family?
Feel better? We’re all waiting for the answer…..
Attempt to dodge it, now that you think you’ve “won” by reframing the question, you will only get one response from me, over and over. A repeat of the question.
Interesting that out of all of the links… including to Fox News, NY Post, Reuters, etc… , you choose only to focus on the underage drinking pile on by the mainstream Hollywood rag. Desperate. But I’m sure your determination to remain tunnel-visioned provides great amusement for many here.
Oh yeah, since I know your retention for facts and events ain’t all that… let me repeat:
What conservatives and bloggers have waged an election campaign personal assault on the family members of a Dim candidate, as did the lib/progs in 2008 on the Palin family?
Oh yes, imbecile. Here’s another revelation for you. Clinton was not running for office in 1998, therefore McCain’s single two line, bad joke in a speech (he never was good at jokes…) is not a concerted slam campaign against a candidate’s family for political gain.
Exit question, as Aye likes to say.
What conservatives and bloggers have waged an election campaign personal assault on the family members of a Dim candidate, as did the lib/progs in 2008 on the Palin family?
Oh Tom….
Dayum dood! That’s gonna leave a mark.
“You could of [sic] walked away…and we would have been left to draw our own conclusions from that, but instead it’s just more insults and confused, angry ranting [which] rarely flatters the source.”
AYE CHIHUAHUA; MATA; gez that’s what the invaders of the 3rd kind does when some of us sleep peacefully,
you sure can put them in their place ,but them getting together in a group, is low as they can get. THE FORCE IS GETTING TOGETHER TO SPIT FIRE, BUT THEY CAN GET BACK IN THEIR HOLE FAST WHEN THEY CHALLENGE THE RIGHT OPPONANTS.
BYE
And we send it out live now to Stew, who is standing with our new champion. Stew?
Stew: Well, Champ, what a display of grit, what a show of will and determination, to come in here, in front of a hostile crowd, against an old legend, and come away with a convincing, yet stunning, victory. To what do you attribute your success?
Champ: You know, Stew, it’s just preparation. It’s all the work I put in during the offseason. The training, the film sessions. And when I get here, I just run my stuff. I stick with the game plan, and tonight it paid off. I just grinded this one out.
Stew: Champ, can you talk a little about the crowd? They were really all over you tonight.
Champ: Well, Stew, that’s what you expect. You come into a hostile environment; the crowd is going to get on you. And some of these people…. Boy, some of these people. You’d think they sprung em from a NASCAR drunk tank. But I don’t let it bother me. I thrive on the adversity, to be honest.
Stew: There was a lot of talk tonight about some of your opponent’s tactics. Do you care to comment?
Champ: Nah. You know me. The most important thing to me is how I play the game. How I respect the game and my opponent. I can’t control what the other side does.
Stew: Can you tell me exactly when you seized the momentum tonight?
Champ: Stew, clearly it was post 46. I just kept running that play after that. They couldn’t stop it, so you stick with what works.
Stew: Any plans for your future you can share with us?
Champ: Stew, I’m going to keep working on my game. You can’t ever relax or be satisfied, even after you’ve won. But first, I’m going to take a little time off to do some charity work with my Foundation and spend some time with my family. Stuff like that.
Stew: and the rumor you’ve been invited to appear on Dancing with the Stars?
Champ: Stew, I can’t comment on that now. Sorry.
Stew: One final thing. Did you hear that one of your biggest fans just tweeted congratulations?
Champ: No. Who?
Stew: Sarah Palin. She tweets: “Joy 2 U, Champ! U showed em how thirsty tree of liberty is quenched! Great victory over Lame-Stream-MataAye!”
Mata Is it agreed no evidence shown of Dem or Repub. PARTY’S Pres./Veep campaign efforts to insult or demean candidate’s kids?
As to conservervatives and bloggers concerted Campaign efforts;not shown.However, as recently as June, we remember both Limbaugh and Beck smeared and derided Malia on their shows.Beck,.to his credit, later apologized.
Not enough time or space to comment on the crass commentary of Limbaugh. In 2004 he called Chesea “The White House dog.” My personal favorite is when he suggested hungry children should “dumpster dive” Real class act that guy.
Tom #77 Howard would have got a laugh.
@rich wheeler:
Details please.
Oh, really?
Details please.
@Tom:
I notice that, even with the newly framed premise, you still sidestepped the question.
Here it is again:
What conservatives and bloggers have waged an election campaign personal assault on the family members of a Dim candidate, as did the lib/progs in 2008 on the Palin family?
Oh for crying out loud. Rich you are rehashing a long disproven lie and to make things worse, you don’t even get it right. Rush NEVER called Chelsea a dog.
A picture of Chelsea was supposed to come up on the screen, instead the family dog did. Rush immediately stated it should have been Chelsea’s pic and explained it was an error and not a slam. I don’t recall if he apologized, but why should he? There was no intent to insult as it was a mistake by his staff.
Any other leftist lies you want to trot out?
Surprise, surprise.
I Googled “he called Chesea “The White House dog.” Sure enough the most rabid, loony left sites have THAT EXACT line on their sites. I’m talking Mother Jones, Lying Liar, Radio Left, and Media Matters. Yeah, what credible sources you use Tom.
Hard Right We agree Rush put up a picture of Chelsea when referencing the W.H. dog.Mistake?
On 4/28/2010 Beck on his radio show mockingly affected Malia’s voice and her professed concern for B.P. oil spill.On 6/16/2010 Rush on his show took a cue from Glenn and mocked and imitated Malia’s voice.I’ve heard replays of both.I’m sure you guys have as well.
rich wheeler; you guys from the left like to play in dirty water, WHO SAID WHAT
AND WHAT WHO SAID, DON’T YOU GUYS LOOK IN THE FUTURE TO FIND NICE THINGS TO SAY?
LIKE 2012 TO THE CONSERVATIVES, who will fix the problems y’all responsible for doing,
rich wheeler
81Reply to this comment
Hard Right We agree Rush put up a picture of Chelsea when referencing the W.H. dog.Mistake?
On 4/28/2010 Beck on his radio show mockingly affected Malia’s voice and her professed concern for B.P. oil spill.On 6/16/2010 Rush on his show took a cue from Glenn and mocked and imitated Malia’s voice.I’ve heard replays of both.I’m sure you guys have as well.
rich w,
I think it is 180 degrees different when a politician puts his own child out there to make points than if the media uses the youngster on its own.
People really did back off on Chelsea.
And for the most part people treated the Bush twins OK.
But look at what Michelle and Barak did to their own daughters….
They called them ”obese.”
They made fun of their grades.
They allowed one of the girls to wear a political statement on clothing on foreign soil.
They shared confidential medial information about the illnesses of their girls.
They shared private conversations between themselves and their girls.
The media has been invited by these acts to share them and expand on them.
Don’t blame the media.
The parents asked for it.
My post was about the lie Tom tried to spread about the Chelsea/dog incident. It is a lie and you know it. I have seen the transcript AND the video of what happened. You are a douchebag…well maybe not. They are useful, unlike you.
Haven’t heard of the “Malia” story.
@rich wheeler:
Dig out the details of this old saw so that we can discuss it.
I’m eager to see if you are able to get to the truth of the matter. (I asked your good buddy Tom for details but he was wise enough not to wade into the quicksand.)
Details please.
Links?
@Nan G:
Nan, I have to disagree with you on that one.
Don’t you remember how those girls were treated?
Don’t you remember how the media went wild with nasty stuff when they got into trouble for underage drinking?
Don’t you remember how Olbermann went on and on and on about how they were supposedly thrown out of Argentina when the story had no factual backing whatsoever?
Don’t you remember how the Leftists demanded that the Bush daughters be forced into military service and sent into combat?
There’s much more too…
And I remember all of it.
Hard Right The Clinton story. We may give Rush the benefit of the doubt(friend corrected me it was picture of Millie put up when ref. new kid in W.H.) However his body of work speaks for itself.Your personal attacks never cease to bring amusement.
Nan Your point is taken.I agree pols should keep kids out of media glare.That said,I think Obama’s are doing a great job of raising two smart and beautiful girls.
Rich, I have seen the video and the transcript of what happened. He apologized immediately and a day or two later for the error. YOU ARE A LIAR. I don’t need to give him the “benefit of the doubt” as he has the truth on his side. You do not.
It’s clear you know jack about “his body of work” other than the dog squeeze that fills your head courtesy of DUNG, DKOS, and Huffpo.
Why don’t you post the vid? Prove me wrong. Come on, do it.
Nan, Aye is right. I also recall how the Bush daughters were attacked by the liberals. Even Brad Pitt and Jennifer Anniston got in on it. One of the daughters was an intern at a studio and Brad made it a point to make fun of her about her drinking-it wasn’t in a nice way either. Jen said she loved seeing him do that to her. Rich W shows the same lack of class or decency.
Hey, I had forgotten about all of the stories about the Bush’s daughters.
Bill Clinton was well out of office before his daughter went wild.
The photos of her so drunk she couldn’t stand were embarrassing to her more than to her parents by then.
It seems she is doing fine now though.
And the Bush daughters are as well.
But as for the Obama’s girls, the proof will be seen only after they are grown as to how well their parents raised them.
They are beautiful, to be sure.
Aye Pls go to Media Matters Echoing Beck Rush Limbaugh mocks Malia Obama.Thanks
I think the point is still being missed. There will always be pundits and pols, on both sides of the political aisle, that somewhere – at some time – may make an uncalled for reference to another politician’s children.
However the slime award still belongs to the lib progs for using children as a negative election campaign waged on Sarah Palin for political gain.
Was Clinton running for office during the Chelsea/dog brew haha? No. Was it a regularly running rumor to reflect Clinton, himself, in a negative fashion? No.
The same with the rest of the comments about others… including the Bush girls. It wasn’t campaign fodder to portray Dubya in a negative light. That’s the point of the new slime low that has been established in the 2008 election by the left and their grassroots/Alinsky form of battles.
No Rich… it is not, actually. If you read the summary of the conversation, the FA imbecile got up in arms when I suggested that the lib/progs had the trophy for slime. I did not say the Democrat Party. He’s basing that on my return question of classifying conservatives as GOP (which is sort of an oxymoron, granted)
However the thrust of the entire characterization is that no one has sunk as low as the lib/prog, Obama supporters in waging a filthy, slime’y campaign, using the children of a candidate to discredit the candidate.
Now, the imbecile feels triumph parsing words. So I’ve reworded the same question for him to answer… and I’ll repeat it for you as well. Feel free to jump in an aid him, because he’s sunk as low as he can here on this thread.
What conservatives and bloggers have waged an election campaign personal assault on the family members of a Dim candidate, as did the lib/progs in 2008 on the Palin family? And, in fact, what major media has helped carry it to national news status?
We’re all waiting….
As far as whether the grassroots who fed this slime campaign to national level originated in the Obama campaign strategy backrooms? Who knows. As the Jawa Report shows, the campaign on classifying Palin as a secessionist did come from their political camp. But that video op was dumb enough to leave a trail and get caught.
Is it possible that Obama’s order to his grassroots to “get in their faces” stoop this low? But of course it’s possible. It it is the centerpiece to the Alinsky grassroots movement. But that was still never my question. I said the lib/progs, not the Dim party. The return question is the same, whether it uses the GOP/media, or whether it uses conservatives and bloggers (as well as right leaning media). The answer also remains the same…
… no one has sunk as low as the lib/progs in 2008… And that is my original statement. Proven as true, and uncontestable.
Media Matters? I say find the FULL video elsewhere and Media Matters is not a reliable source.
Aye and Nan G. —
Other than stories about their legal issues (drinking under age with fake IDs, ditching their Secret Service detail), what other stories do you recall concerning the Bush twins? The most recent other story I remember is the Bush girls giving the Obama girls tours of the WH, showing them how to slide down a banisters, etc., and the one daughter’s wedding. Nothing else that I recall.
The Palin kids are treated differently because they ACT DIFFERENTLY. Willow is featured in a reality TV show trying to sneak a boy into her bedroom. A week later, she does a public Facebook post calling someone a “f*ggot” and “gay”. His crime? He wrote that he hoped the show failed.
Bristol comes to our attention because, while she was pregnant and a teenager, her mother decided to run for the vice presidency. No Palin vice presidency, no one knows who she is. Bristol then gets in a nasty and very public custody dispute with her baby daddy; then does a very public story about their engagement; then breaks up with him (and issues a press release about it); then becomes a public speaker asking $20,000 a pop to speak; then becomes a most ironic spokesperson for an abstinence; then goes on Dancing With the Stars . . . as a “star”, of course.
Do you ever hear anything about Track Palin? No, because, up until this new show, he has kept to himself. The baby is a baby and no one writes anything about him.
Contrast the Palin girls with the Bush girls and the Obama girls and what stands out? They are TRYING to get attention and be celebrities; the Bush twins and the Obama girls, in contrast, are out of the spotlight and do not seek it out. The day Malia takes to Facebook and calls someone a f*ggot or gets knocked up, you will surely hear about it, though.
BTW.. my mind flashed back to more lib/progs… this time direct from the mouths of candidates and several very liberal media pundits… using a candidate’s child in their political gain. Mary Cheney, Cokie Roberts, Gwen Ifill, John Kerry, and both John & Elizabeth Edwards.
In 2000, Lynne Cheney put Cokie Roberts in her place when she attempted to bring up Mary and her sexuality as a political campaign issue.
While Mary Cheney never attempted to conceal her personal sexual preferences, nor were they to be considered fair game for political campaign fodder. And the Cheney’s make this quite clear through both the 2000 and 2004 election campaigns.
i.e., in the Oct 2004 VP debate between Cheney and Edwards… moderator Gwen Ifill’s attempts to bring Cheney’s family into a debate question about same sex marriage:
Cheney ignored the personal reference and simply answered the question without utilizing his daughter…. or offering her up for ensuing counter points.
Then it was Edwards turn… who wasted no time in echoing Ifill’s attempts to again reference Mary Cheney. In fact, he opened the question’s answer with the Cheney’s personal life.
When Ifill returned to Cheney for further comments, he merely said:
Again, the Cheney’s made it quite clear that their daughter’s sexual orientation was not fodder for a political campaign.
But some never learn… and in their efforts to keep a taboo subject going, end up putting their feet in their mouths.
John Kerry, in a presidential debate with Bush (moderated by Bob Schieffer), decided to bring it up himself to answer a question whether he considered homosexuality “a choice”. Personally, it’s an odd question to put to a candidate running for POTUS. What could his opinions INRE whether it’s biological or a choice have to do with holding the most powerful position in the free world? Was it a Schieffer set up, to again bring Mary Cheney into the political mix?
Well, if it wasn’t, Kerry took that line, and ran with it… complete with sinker.
This unsolicted reference to his daughter, after years of making it quite plain this was not for political consumption, riled both Dick and Lynne Cheney.
But wait… if Kerry, who attempted to back peddle within hours of the faux pas, wasn’t sleazy enough, John Edwards had to pile on. And right on the heels of ol’ John boy, was wife Elizabeth… who suggested that the Cheney’s anger must be they are “ashamed” of their daughter Lynne.
Well, that brought out the fury in sister, Liz… who said:
Naturally, both Kerry and Edwards were given a pass by most of the media. To their way of thinking, if Mary Cheney didn’t conceal her sexual orientation, why couldn’t she be the subject of debates?
Obviously, moderators could ask all four candidates their opinions on same sex marriage, without personally dragging in the Cheney daughter. But that didn’t stop either Cokie Roberts or Gwen Ifill. And Schieffer’s open door question was seized on by the Dem candidate, Kerry, himself. And that damage compounded by both John and Elizabeth Edwards… now accusing them of being “ashamed” because the Cheney’s continually proved they wanted their daughter’s privacy respected.
So… rich and the imbecile. Now you have both the lib/progs grassroots Obama supporters, and aided by the media, assault the Palin children as a campaign issue. And now you have the same coming from the Democrat Party… via both their Presidential and Veep candidates… in 2004.
Suggest you stuff your pipe, and start smoking, Tom. You must have slept thru that election cycle as well.
This has what to do with the 2008 campaign, and the slime campaign by the lib/progs, Billy Bob? The reality show did not commence until two years later… after the entire family has been regularly dragged thru the mud. This assaults came when no one knew anything about the family. In fact all of the events you mention are post Nov 2008 election. Your point?
Trig being “Bristol’s” baby? Or Bristol’s pregnancy? What does any of this have to do with a Veep’s qualifications? Are perfect children the pre’requisite? And where do those “perfect children” reside?
So let me see if I get this straight… it’s okay to wage a smear campaign against a candidate by using their children, as long as you don’t like their children?
@ Aye – 79
Ah, so you freely admit that my original premise had to be re-framed, as it were, thus proving my point that my question was evaded, never answered, and then replaced. Thank you for being so gracious in defeat.
@ Mata 91
Wow, you have no idea how ridiculous that sounds, do you? I almost feel bad now. almost. You’re so desperate to prove some simplistic binary notion that your side = ‘good’ and my side = ‘bad’ that you actually took the time to craft this tortured litmus test? And you’re serious? Okay…. how does this work now? It has to have happened in an election year. It has to be an attack on children between the ages of 5 and (calculating Bristol Palin’s age in 2008) 18. If you can’t answer, we win! Could you possibly reverse-engineer a question more specific, Mata? Please, take you time. Do some more research, just to be sure you’ve asked the most self-serving question possible. Feel free to attach a few more conditions before I answer. Should the children be from Alaska? Sure, that seems fair. Oh, did someone bring up an example of the exact same thing happening, but it happened in 1998. DENIED. Silly, Liberal, that doesn’t count.
Nope. The question was always quite plain to those with even an elementary reading level. I said lib/progs are the lowest of the low. You insisted that had to mean “the Democratic Party” because I call conservatives GOP. Who’s problem is that? Yours, of course. So I replaced GOP with the word conservative, and still you are stymied.
You still cannot come up with a GOP and or conservative election campaign of smear leveled at the children of candidates. And yet, we’ve come up with both.
You think we’re “gracious in defeat”? Dang, you must have some powerful smoke….
I see you still can’t answer the question. Now you want to parse some more to dodge it? It says, quite plainly, in every instance, that it’s an election campaign tactic. Perhaps we should keep our sentences confined to K1 grade level for you.
Tom, you became the quintessential imbecile on this thread, forever dodging the obvious because you are oblivious.
@Hard Right: #80
Oh for crying out loud.
You’re showing your age, man. I ain’t heard that term for many many years.
I think I got one! The 2000 right wing smear campaign against John McCain in South Carolina. Involved his children? check. Took place in an election year? check. The child was from Alaska? DENIED.
Back to the drawing board.
Mata Point of clarity pls. Are lib./progs. part of Dem.Party?
Are conservs. part of Repub. Party?
Elaborate if you’d like. Thanks RJW
Yes
Yes
Now, is every dem a progressive? No. Blue Dogs, or moderate/conservative Dems aren’t progressives.
Is every GOP a conservative. Nope. Have the same center flavor there too
Which is why I said it was a lib/prog lowest of the low. Boy, you and the imbecile are working overtime, trying to figure out a way to dodge reality. And neither of you can point to a GOP, conservative, or right wing cooperative media that smears a Dim candidates children for political gain.
Mata, I already won with the Right Wing smear campaign against McCain (unless you’re enforcing the Alaska condition). Not only was it far more heinous than anything you’ve sited, it was done in support (and possibly with the knowledge) of the eventual Republican President. Not pretty stuff. 2-0, baby!
Oh, does it have to be the child of a ‘Dim’? There goes that extra condition. You thought of everything.
Mata —
Personally, I do not give a damn about Palin’s family. But you will recall that the first anyone outside Alaska (the smallest state in the union, population-wise) heard about Palin was:
1) She just had a kid with Down’s
2) She hid her pregnancy from the public AND HER KIDS until she was seven or eight months along, and
3) Because of that, and her “family lifestyle” (including Bristol not attending school for several months. . . odd that . . .), there was some speculation IN ALASKA that Palin’s kid was actually Bristol’s biological kid and Palin just adopted the kid.
Remember also that Palin told the “odd” story about her water breaking in Texas and then flying several hours back to Alaska to have the kid. This implausibility just fed the speculation that her Trig story was not truthful. And less than four days after most of America had heard anything about this woman, as questions start coming about the birth of Trig, she announces (to the surprise of the McCain campaign) that Bristol was pregnant and was going to marry the baby daddy — another teenager who happened to have lived in the family house BEFORE Bristol got pregnant.
It is the height of silliness to think that the fact that a vice presidential candidate’s teenage daughter was knocked up out of wedlock would be a non-issue. This was a very odd family foisted upon us.
I don’t recall any other stories about any of the other Palin kids. Except . . . that she took Willow out of school and she traveled with Palin throughout her campaign. Again, kinda odd that a school aged kid is not in school; the Obama’s did not take their kids out of school and neither did George W. when he was running in 1999 and 2000. Then someone chose to spend $50,000 buying her family clothes. Again, the odd decisions fed the questions.
Palin and her kids got so much scrutiny because of the family’s weird lifestyle — the non-attendence at school, the live in boyfriend, the pregnancy, the Down’s syndrome issue. The McCain kids, the Obama kids, the Bush twins, John Kerry’s kids . . . none of them had a fraction of the drama that the Palin kids had. And, again, we were JUST MEETING THEM when we found out what they were all about.
I notice you do not even bother to address all the Palin family post-election activities, activities that have kept them on the cover of People magazine and OK for the last two years straight. And yet we get Sarah Palin whining about how the family is “attacked” when Willow’s bigoted Facebook comments come out?
Face facts — the whole Palin family has “gone Hollywood.” They seek out attention wherever they can get it. Speaking deals, book deals, two TV shows . . . they are celebrities and now get the same kind of scrutiny as the Kardashians or Lindsay Lohan’s dysfunctional family.
MATA You’re saying left wing of Dem Party has been naughty and right wing of Repub. Party has been nice.So simple Merry Christmas Hope Santa is good to all.
What right wing smear campaign against McCain’s children – one of their own 😆 – for political gain would you be speaking of, imbecile? Perhaps you’d like to link to the pertinents, and tell us how anyone was using McCain’s children to portray him in a negative light?
As I said, I’m done doing your homework. And nothing from your keyboard has a lick of credibility.