Comments on: MEDIA MALPRACTICE: SARAH PALIN

By: Jeremy Williamson

Jeremy Williamson — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 06:53:26 +0000

The factcheck link posted by McInnes purports to debunk “dubious Internet postings and mass e-mail messages making claims about McCain’s running mate, Gov. Palin,” and as such it only tangentially addresses media mistakes concurrent with the McCain-Palin campaign. Many media errors mentioned in the article occurred well before 2008. Factcheck can cite only one “mainstream news source” claiming that Palin cut funding for special needs kids. Factcheck cites no news source that claiming that Palin banned books and no news source claiming that Palin actively pushed for legislation promoting a creationist agenda (although Factcheck does acknowledge that the Boston Globe correctly reported that Palin “supports teaching creationism alongside evolution” and it praises the AP’s coverage of the topic). This does not add up to a grand media conspiracy to “chase Palin out of politics” as McInnes would like his readers to believe. Palin’s most outspoken critics in the media were her fellow conservatives (Peggy Noonan, George Will, David Brooks, David Frum and Kathleen Parker), which doesn’t square with the prevailing conservative role of victimhood at the hands of the liberal media (which is oddly, inexplicably owned by transnational corporations like General Electric).

It is now clear that McInnes knows nothing about this topic and doesn’t want to think about it too hard — or at least, not hard enough to discern between mainstream media and “dubious Internet postings and mass e-mail messages.” It is likely that his kindest bud forwarded him a link to the “Media Malpractice” video and it totally blew his mind brah, so he posted it on his blog just as many liberals did when their kindest buds sent them links to “Loose Change.”

By: Max

Max — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 06:01:59 +0000

Do what you want to do, say what you need to say. Cover me black, while I spread with the color with understanding. Dawg.

By: Kennedy

Kennedy — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 05:05:39 +0000

Sneaky Christopher.

By: Gavin

Gavin — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 19:53:55 +0000

“I bet he thinks all the comments means he’s really shaking things up, too.” Um, as far as this website goes? Yes, that’s PRECISELY what I think.
Here’s a better link than that op-ed everyone’s so mad about.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_palin.html

-didn’t cut funding for special needs kids
-didn’t ban books
-never pushed creationism

By: ^^^^

^^^^ — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 18:26:05 +0000

The Biden example is easily the best way to totally prove that the media isn’t all up on Palin’s dick. You a genius

By: Michael2

Michael2 — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 14:26:07 +0000

So people who criticize Gavin McInnes’ political views are conspiracy nuts, eh? Yes, there’s something “very suspicious” about people disliking Sarah Palin. It’s not like she gave anyone reason for that, it’s all the liberal media MAKING YOU THINK THAT WAY. And they don’t talk about Joe Biden for some reason, holy shit that proves everything!

I bet he thinks all the comments means he’s really shaking things up, too.

Dude should really just stick to drugs & fashion, it’s all he’s qualified for.

By: Mark

Mark — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 19:45:51 +0000

Q. How many Sarah Palin’s does it take to change a light bulb.

A. That’s not fair! Sarah hasn’t been adequately prepped for a discussion about electricity.

By: Dork

Dork — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 18:36:01 +0000

tinyfrogs, ever heard of a loan? That’s how folks buy houses. It is done all the time!

By: Jeremy Williamson

Jeremy Williamson — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 18:20:14 +0000

As to whether another pursuit for national office, as when she joined Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., in the race for the White House less than a year ago, would result in the same political blood sport, Palin said there was a difference between the White House and what she had experienced in Alaska. If she were in the White House, she said, the “department of law” would protect her from baseless ethical allegations.

“I think on a national level, your department of law there in the White House would look at some of the things that we’ve been charged with and automatically throw them out,” she said.

[Troll repellent: I know there's a Department of Law in Alaska, but there's no such thing in D.C. Even if she's referring to the Department of Justice, it's not "in the White House," and you can find plenty of examples of the DoJ not protecting presidential candidates, or even presidents, from all allegations.]

By: Failure

Failure — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 17:35:41 +0000

Take a listen Sarah Palin’s conversation with “French President Sarkozy”

youtube.com/watch?v=iNhA9W9IgFc

Then let’s talk about Palin’s intelligence.

It’s not just that she or her people are too naive or uninformed to realize that she is being made fun of – it’s also the quality of her responses to the man she believes to be Sarkozy, and the way she allows this man to speak to her, that indicates that she lacks the knowledge and intelligence required to run our country.