Posted on 07/02/2011 7:24:41 PM PDT by curth
Nothing is quite so damaging to the mainstream media as publishing their own words in context. In her new book, Bring Her Down: How the American Media Tried to Destroy Sarah Palin, conservative author and C4Per Gina Dalfonzo does just that – in chilling fashion.
Ever wanted to compare ABC News anchor Charles Gibson’s fawning interview with Obama to his condescending inquisition of Palin? Dalfonzo has it for you. Here’s a fair representation of the questions which Dalfonzo has in longer form … I can’t think of a better way to illustrate liberal media bias than this.
Gibson to Obama:
What are your feelings about winning the nomination? Has it sunk in yet?
What did your grandmother say?
Do you ever say to yourself: ‘Son of a gun, I’ve done this?’
Did you truly, in your gut, think that a black man could win the nomination of a major party to be president of the United States?
[...]
Gibson to Palin:
You in favor of putting Georgia and Ukraine into NATO?
And under the NATO treaty, wouldn’t we then have to go to war if Russian went into Georgia?
Let me turn to Iran. Do you consider a nuclear Iran to be a threat to Israel?
Do you agree with the Bush Doctrine?
Aside from the strikingly different tone, notice all the open-ended questions to Obama, giving him a chance to speak in a relaxed, reflective manner. Nobody has a problem per se with the questions Gibson posed to Palin, aside from the false insinuation that there is actually one definitive Bush Doctrine, or when he took Palin’s prayer for the troops out of context to suggest she was a holy warrior. What was troubling is that Gibson showed far less concern about the worldview that had shaped the man running for president, than he did in quizzing Palin. Not once did Gibson ask Palin what her relatives thought of her historic nomination to the vice presidency. ABC also deliberately edited out key parts of Palin’s interview, where she elaborated on her foreign policy worldview. Dalfonzo has the edited vs. unedited transcript.
The beauty of what Dalfonzo has done is that she has taken the time to research all the hideous examples of media malpractice that we have encountered over the last three years, including the JournoList scandal, and the ridiculously unhinged coverage of Palin’s resignation. And she has put it into chronological order and context, attempting to explain why it happened. She has written the book I wish I had the patience to produce. I would have given up in despair after pouring through the unedited version of the six-hour Katie Couric interview. I probably would have broken out into a satiric fit.
Bring Her Down: How the American Media Tried to Destroy Sarah Palin should be required reading for any Palin supporter. It should be in your home or Kindle library as a reference and reminder of what the media is capable of doing. It’s a who’s who list of repeat offenders. While some of the stories will be familiar to anyone who has followed Governor Palin, the level of detail offered in the book is priceless. Even I was surprised by some of the background Dalfonzo digs up on the various Palin rumors such as Troopergate, Trig Trutherism, the “Kill Him” urban legend, the book banning myth, the wardrobe malfunction, and the creationism-abstinence-only lies.
I was especially touched by the chapter in which Dalfonzo documents the hateful comments by liberal women, and her effort to explain why Sarah Palin is such a threat to the liberal feminist establishment. She reminds us that liberals have always been about symbolism, and they rely on clueless Republicans to ignore symbolism. Dalfonzo adroitly points out how George W. Bush signed the partial-birth abortion ban surrounded by eight white men, the legislators who worked on the legislation. Unfortunately, the left was able to spin this until the cows came home – ignoring the substance and inherent decency of what Bush did, and focusing on the bad optics.
So when Sarah Palin came along with symbolism AND substance, the Left was apoplectic. They had no choice but to BRING HER DOWN. Of course, the left was aided and abetted by backstabbers within the Republican Party. Dalfonzo documents the “friendly fire” quite well also, as well as the despicable tactics of the Alaska Mafia, the bloggers who have been at the heart of nearly every false accusation against Governor Palin.
Gina Dalfonzo has added to the conservative canon with a well-researched history of media bias, illustrating how the growing confluence between news and entertainment served to create a caricature of a dynamic, young female leader. Fortunately, Dalfonzo also points the way to victory in 2012 … She reminds us that Sarah Palin has chosen to go around the corrupt media and take her message directly to the people.
Wouldn’t it be great if Sarah Palin could interview Charles Gibson right about now?
What are your feelings about becoming irrelevant?
Has it sunk in yet?
I can recall that very thing being blindingly apparent to me, during the 2008 campaign. Obama was getting nothing but softballs from the media, while Palin was being drilled with complex policy questions.
Even worse, the media didn't even give that level of scrutiny to McCain!
Anyone watching, who possessed a scintilla of intelligence, could plainly see that the media were trying their best to demolish Palin in the public eye. In another age, I think those hateful monsters would have pulled real knives on her.
For years my brother alerted me to the bias in the media. I had a hard time seeing it. Even after I began to see it, I still had a hard time because they were so subtle and crafty in hiding it.
They aren’t subtle any more. They aren’t even trying to put up a pretense of objectivity anymore. They are transparent. Anybody who today can’t see the extreme left bias in the US media is willfully blind to it. No othe reason. None.
I know what you mean. I grew up in the '60s and '70s and was unaware that there were people with certain viewpoints who received all the media attention, while others were ignored or villified.
I think if someone checked, you would find more negative column inches written about Sarah Palin than there was ever written about Adolf Hitler.
If the woman is supposed to be so vacuous then why this unholy, psychopathic hatred? If she is an empty suit then why do they dedicate their lives to destroying her? If no one is voting for her than why the endless,intense coverage of her every move?
What happened to Palin’s family actually outdid the hideous assault on Judge Bork and his family, it used to be “Borked”, now it is “Palinized”!
Very few of the Palin criticisms actually were valid. There were gaffes, but Biden and Obama have plenty of them. These long drawn out attacks from the likes of Andrew Sullivan and people of his ilk have gone no where. Frankly - they were made up or exaggerated, and never got any purchase. Tina Fey did more damage, at the end of the day.
They read 24,000 emails and found NOTHING! I wouldn’t want someone reading 24,000 of my emails!
Well done, I will have to get this book.
She’s still standing proud- after taking the abuse. She took it straight to the enemy all though this, from the days after the election to right now. Most conservative men were ducking for cover for the first year.
You can’t kill her message. She may not be the most polished, or the most “credentialed” or the most conventional-machine oriented, but she has the Truth on her side.
1 COR 1:27
But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
Gibson should have asked 0bama: “In the 2000 election cycle the Democrats said we needed someone with ‘gravitas.’ In the 2004 election cycle the Democrats said we needed a veteran, a war hero. You have neither qualification and your opponent has both. Will you now give John McCain your endorsement for president and ask all other Democrats to do the same?”
I do not see a lot of Republicans defending her. Where’s the GOP?
The audacity of dopes.
Good question. She has more spunk than 98% of the Rep. men.
Well said.
I always say, “I voted for Palin”.
This is something that’s bothered me for awhile. Specifically, where are the MEN in the GOP? These pantywaists never defend conservative women who are attacked by the media. I’m not suggesting that women can’t take care of themselves, but I’ve got to believe if the men presented a united front against the press when the press employs this kind of tactic, this crap would stop.
Wake up. The GOPS are part of the problem. The logic of what you say should be self evident. They are in Cahoots with the RATS. I bet Sarah goes 3rd party.
I agree that Sarah is a special case and the GOP wants to see her destroyed as much as the Rats, but what about other conservative women? The press seems to think it is OK to declare open season on any outspoken conservative woman. And what is the response of GOP men.....(crickets chirping)? Are they just a bunch of spineless, gutless wonders who have no sense of chivalry? Are they afraid defending a conservative might negatively affect their own pathetic political careers? What’s your explanation for this?
By the way, starting your comment with “wake up” is rather rude. I was asking for your input on a question that has been bothering me. No need to be insulting.
Whups. Sorry. My explanation is simple. The GOP is collaborating with the RATS. Your premise is wrong. You think the GOP is something they are not and can not understand why they do the things they do. Does that explain it? In other words you are expecting them to be something they are not. Sorry if I offended. I did not intend to.
>> Ever wanted to compare ABC News anchor Charles Gibson’s fawning interview with Obama to his condescending inquisition of Palin?
No. The dick defined his character without necessity of comparison.
I hate what the media has become. It wasn’t always this way. Its about power and money and corruption. Idealism and agenda are what moved the news—not the truth.
Same here.I think back on the half-assed opinions I held of people like Reagan and get steamed thinking of the crap we were fed here in Oz about him.I've since woken up somewhat but still get steamed reading articles like the above.
If the media there hate Sarah that much (and they sure as hell seem to!) then she has got to be good for your country! I've got to get me that book.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.