• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Palin: Media going easier on Kennedy because of class

She's not throwing a tantrum, but she's complaining about something that just a short 5 months ago, advised Hillary (and I paraphrase), "to suck it up, and work hard."
Sorry MG, your decision to pretend that Palin agreeing being in the public eye does intensify attention and is expected, is not Palin saying “oh yeah go after my kids” in the press. A point about which Mrs. Clinton is on record as agreeing with Palin on. It does not sopeak well of you that you have chosen to mangle that basic and really simplistic truth to fit your spin-phrasing. Just a basic fact, unless you really want to try to argue otherwise. Go right ahead.
 
Last edited:
Sorry MG, your decision to pretend that Palin agreeing being in the public eye does intensify attention and is expected, is not Palin saying “oh yeah go after my kids” in the press. A point about which Mrs. Clinton is on record as agreeing with Palin on. It does not sopeak well of you that you have chosen to mangle that basic and really simplistic truth to fit your spin-phrasing. Just a basic fact, unless you really want to try to argue otherwise. Go right ahead.

Palin is solely not complaining about how the press trerated her family. She's complaining about how they've treated her, no?
 
In a way. Couric basically asked her questions about presidential trivia and then pounded on her for not knowing all the answers.

I didn't see all of the interview, so I did not see this. Do you have a link?

Also, what did Couric do that you consider pounding? You think she set her up?
 
Palin is solely not complaining about how the press trerated her family. She's complaining about how they've treated her, no?
So you have now gotten your own “Mama bear” comments and those post in this thread?

By the way, nor does your Palin quote signal she says that just because you are in the public eye you can be slandered and libeled or lied about. Again another point Mrs. Clinton is on public record as agreeing with.:doh
 
Last edited:
It's rather humorous watching a bunch on anoymous internet posters ragging on a woman who is far more accomplished than any of them are or will ever be.

Sure, it's easy to criticize a woman who went from being AK Guv to VP selection for not speaking with specificity and from expertise. And it's easy to point and laugh at her gaffes.

But that's how most of these people work. They read their favorite writers to find out what they think and then, thinking they know preisely how to talk about an issue, pounce on politicial figures they disagree with or just want to make fun of.

I see no problem with much of the criticism aimed at Palin as many times her responses demonstrated that she was unprepared to speak about those issues. However, the personal hatred being directed at her is unbelievable. The nonsense that she was just a bimbo who had no business being slected as VP is just that, nonsense.

Especially when compared to the Obama nomination. Well, except if you're an Obama-slappy.
 
In a way. Couric basically asked her questions about presidential trivia and then pounded on her for not knowing all the answers.


Couric: What newspapers did John Adams read?

:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl
 
So you have now gotten your own “Mama bear” comments and those post in this thread?

By the way, nor does your Palin quote signal she says that just because you are in the public eye you can be slandered and libeled or lied about. Again another point Mrs. Clinton is on public record as agreeing with.:doh


I'm not sure I'm getting you, so I just want to clarify your position. Are you saying her sole complaint about the media is how they treated her family?
 
I see no problem with much of the criticism aimed at Palin as many times her responses demonstrated that she was unprepared to speak about those issues.

That's exactly how I feel, or "get" her. I never thought--nor think (though I think this interview does not serve her well)--that she is stupid. She is not. I basically think that she was not ready for this on an experience level.

However, the personal hatred being directed at her is unbelievable. The nonsense that she was just a bimbo who had no business being slected as VP is just that, nonsense.

I can say the same about Hillary and Obama. They were both "hated" by the right media, and there was a lot of crap thrown at them. When you're a public figure, it happens all of the time, and they should be prepared to handle the bull that comes with it. Not saying it's right. But people will make judgements, unfortunately, that may be far from reality.

Especially when compared to the Obama nomination. Well, except if you're an Obama-slappy.

And here you go, making judgements based-on the "information" that you chose to read. :roll:
 
Yeah it is an ad hom to note you assume. So you are interested in useful comments? GREAT! You can start being useful by detailing how the interview is "so hypocritical it's sick" and move along to your really important points. Or you can try to press your ad hom tack, you'll find me taped up and ready to spar. Let us hope you are better at this than aps or MG and wise enough not to illustrate the absurdity of your argument by making your signature about it. Despite the contextual inaccuracies therein. By all means, get on with your bad self!:boxer
I don't have to "spar" because the clip speaks for itself. The fact that you are in opposition to that notion pretty much proves it's truth. :2wave:
 
I didn't see all of the interview, so I did not see this. Do you have a link?

Also, what did Couric do that you consider pounding? You think she set her up?
In my perspective, Couric was simply focusing on liberal hot-button issues instead of trying to show what the candidate knows about issues that are important to her. It was a disservice to the public more than anything else.

This is Palin's response in a nutshell:
Palin added, "In those Katie Couric interviews I did feel that there were a lot of things that she was missing in terms of an opportunity to ask what a vice presidential candidate stands for -- what the values are represented in our ticket. I wanted to talk about Barack Obama increasing taxes, which would lead to killing jobs, wanted to talk about his proposal to increase government spending by another trillion dollars. Some of his comments that he has made about the war that I think may, in my world, disqualifies someone from consideration as the next commander in chief. ... I wanted to talk about things like that. So, I guess I have to apologize about being a little annoyed, but that is also an indication of being outside that Washington elite, outside of the media elite, also, and just wanted to talk to Americans without the filter and let them know what we stand for.
" Political Punch: Do Over! Palin Answers Katie Couric's Questions ... to Fox News' Carl Cameron (She Reads The Economist, She Says)
 
I'm not sure I'm getting you, so I just want to clarify your position. Are you saying her sole complaint about the media is how they treated her family?
Nope, I’m saying the quote you submitted earlier, which you are now using as your signature, does not equate Palin saying that some of the disgusting stories and reports about her and and her baby (that is “not really hers”) and going after her children and family are OK, fair or acceptable. Period.

So far on this topic you have been woefully uninformed about a great deal you brought up. From the NEWSPAPERS that were carrying these types of stories (that you knew nothing about and hence you claimed it was only blogs) and the reporting saying she is stupid uniformed and uneducated (which is pretty much what most folks like you have been trying to do with the Couric interview) to repeating stories gleamed from internet blogs as hard news. Your shuck jive now is that your highlighted quote means Palin has no right to respond to questions about the same or offer her opinion on that kind of crap. This leaves you defending yellow dog crap journalism as OK since it is aimed at Palin because you don’t like her. As your excuse for this rationale you have tried to suggest that since Palin said the things she did in your highlighted quote, she has somehow given up her right to criticize or comment or respond honestly to questions about that kind of reporting. According to your premise since she made the quote you are parading as your signature, she (unlike all other politcal figures) should just shut up, say nothing and somehow you have equated this to mean she somehow "gave up" her rights to have an opinion on these matters. Which is as absurd as it is dumb. :shock:
 
Last edited:
Nope, I’m saying the quote you submitted earlier, which you are now using as your signature, does not equate Palin saying that some of the disgusting stories and reports about her and and her baby (that is “not really hers”) and going after her children and family are OK, fair or acceptable. Period.

I guess you missed the disgusting **** said about Hillary, the woman that Sarah was "advising," to take it as it comes and work hard. Oh, please!

Let me add that both Bill and Chelsey were not exempt for the media's contempt. ;-)

I'll say it once again, and I'm not sure it's getting across. Palin is not the first to be picked on by the media, and she will not be the last.

So far on this topic you have been woefully uninformed about a great deal you brought up.


In your opinion. I would tend to disagree. ;-)


From the NEWSPAPERS that were carrying these types of stories (that you knew nothing about and hence you claimed it was only blogs) and the reporting saying she is stupid uniformed and uneducated (which is pretty much what most folks like you have been trying to do with the Couric interview) to repeating stories gleamed from internet blogs as hard news.


I have NO idea where that came from!

I never claimed that I was aware of everything that was published about Sarah. In fact, in THIS thread, I asked, "What MAJOR newspapers published the story that Trig was not her son? I genuinely do not know, and nobody bothered to respond. And, if any did, then they're nothing but rags, IMO.

As for the other comments in "the media" directed at her--rightly or wrongly--it's a part of public life. It sucks, but that's the way it is. Words get misinterpreted all of the time. Just look at how far off you are with your conclusions about how I feel about this issue. ;-)

And for the record--one more time!--I don't think she's dumb. In fact, I think she's intelligent. I just don't think this was her time. She doesn't have the experience and knowledge needed for the postion she was nominated for, IMO. That's all. Nothing agaimst Sarah, she just has some work to do.

And I didn't get this conclusion from one article. I've read a bunch. I've also seen numerous TV interviews--from Katie Couric to Larry King-- and I'm sorry, I was not overly impressed. Nor am I impressed with her complaints now. While I do understand her frustration--especially regarding the treatment of her family--pissing and moaning about it will not do a damn thing but make her look like a whiner.

The acticle that best explains my sentiments was written by Kathleen Parker. I think she hit the nail on the head.

Palin Problem by Kathleen Parker on National Review Online
 
I guess you missed the disgusting **** said about Hillary, the woman that Sarah was "advising," to take it as it comes and work hard. Oh, please!

Let me add that both Bill and Chelsey were not exempt for the media's contempt. ;-)

I'll say it once again, and I'm not sure it's getting across. Palin is not the first to be picked on by the media, and she will not be the last.
Great, now that has what to do with the price of tea in China, since nobody is arguing that with you. How creative of you to pretend otherwise.:roll:
I have NO idea where that came from!
I have no idea how you think ANYONE has given up their right to comment on bad/negative/unfair press, regardless of who they are and what their position is. And you clearly can’t explain how your argument that others have received the same treatment as Palin means she or any of them should just shut up and not speak about it when questioned. But there you are doing so all the same.


And God knows Mrs. Clinton never spoke in the same way as Palin has about just the same kind of matters. :shock:
I never claimed that I was aware of everything that was published about Sarah. In fact, in THIS thread, I asked, "What MAJOR newspapers published the story that Trig was not her son? I genuinely do not know, and nobody bothered to respond. And, if any did, then they're nothing but rags, IMO.
Except all the spots in this thread where you claim you did your homework here. Which you also seem to think means that Palin (unlike everyone else you have named) should not be able to comment on this type of “reporting” as it makes her a hypocrite somehow, according to the “signature” you trotted out shortly after having this argument in this thread. Chuckle.
As for the other comments in "the media" directed at her--rightly or wrongly--it's a part of public life. It sucks, but that's the way it is. Words get misinterpreted all of the time. Just look at how far off you are with your conclusions about how I feel about this issue. ;-)
Yeah it is just that I am misunderstanding you. That’s the ticket.
And for the record--one more time!--I don't think she's dumb. In fact, I think she's intelligent. I just don't think this was her time. She doesn't have the experience and knowledge needed for the postion she was nominated for, IMO. That's all. Nothing agaimst Sarah, she just has some work to do.

And I didn't get this conclusion from one article. I've read a bunch. I've also seen numerous TV interviews--from Katie Couric to Larry King-- and I'm sorry, I was not overly impressed. Nor am I impressed with her complaints now. While I do understand her frustration--especially regarding the treatment of her family--pissing and moaning about it will not do a damn thing but make her look like a whiner.
Not one person is arguing with you here about if she is ready or not. Please follow the typed up English that has been directed at you. It will be easier for you to stay on topic if you do that.

You see I took you at your word the first time you spoke up about the Couric interview. “It's that interview that did allow me to form an opinion of her. I was floored by it, actually.”

But sure you did not reach that conclusion from one article or interview. You read a “bunch” and just accidentally said the above. Right.

So now what? Palin is a hypocrite or deserving of the same kind of crap you point out happened to others, but you enjoy seeing Plain go through, because she is in the public eye and because of the quote you comically are featuring as your signature? Or what exactly is it you are arguing now?
 
Last edited:
For me it's because she is self-made, coming from nowhere, took on corruption within her own party and triumphed, as well as espouses traditional conservative values. The fact that she can do this while being genuinely feminine makes her attractive to women voters who may otherwise lean towards the Democrat Party.

Were you paying attention on November 4th? Seriously? Women voters were most definitely NOT voting for her side. Know why? Here's a hint: There were insulted.

Insulted? By Sarah? Gee, I guess they don't consider her as accomplished as you. It might be because they have actually looked into her record. There's quite a bit of make believe you listed in her stack of accomplishments.
 
Were you paying attention on November 4th? Seriously? Women voters were most definitely NOT voting for her side. Know why? Here's a hint: There were insulted.

Insulted? By Sarah? Gee, I guess they don't consider her as accomplished as you. It might be because they have actually looked into her record. There's quite a bit of make believe you listed in her stack of accomplishments.
Not the women that I know. They were insulted with the prospect of a Hillary Clinton presidency, who got there simply because she married Bill and put up with him all those years. *shrug*
 
It's rather humorous watching a bunch on anoymous internet posters ragging on a woman who is far more accomplished than any of them are or will ever be.

Sure, it's easy to criticize a woman who went from being AK Guv to VP selection for not speaking with specificity and from expertise. And it's easy to point and laugh at her gaffes.

But that's how most of these people work. They read their favorite writers to find out what they think and then, thinking they know preisely how to talk about an issue, pounce on politicial figures they disagree with or just want to make fun of.

I see no problem with much of the criticism aimed at Palin as many times her responses demonstrated that she was unprepared to speak about those issues. However, the personal hatred being directed at her is unbelievable. The nonsense that she was just a bimbo who had no business being slected as VP is just that, nonsense.

Especially when compared to the Obama nomination. Well, except if you're an Obama-slappy.
Being elected the governor of Alaska, the way she did it and in those circumstances is no great achievement. I would say that I have a better resume of accomplishments and achievements than she so you're wrong in your first statement.

As to the rest of it... come on, we all know why she was picked and it wasn't because of her political acumen or intelligence.
 
In my perspective, Couric was simply focusing on liberal hot-button issues instead of trying to show what the candidate knows about issues that are important to her. It was a disservice to the public more than anything else.

This is Palin's response in a nutshell: " Political Punch: Do Over! Palin Answers Katie Couric's Questions ... to Fox News' Carl Cameron (She Reads The Economist, She Says)
There ya go, waaaaaah, she didn't ask me the questions I prepared for, she didn't ask me the questions I could answer, she asked questions that made me look stupid... :rofl
 
Okay, it's the 13th page. I have to ask.

Is Palin saying that Kennedy has more class than her? :confused:
 
Back
Top Bottom