Posted on 09/02/2008 4:29:31 PM PDT by cdchik123
Rick Klein, from ABC’s The Note, reports: Let’s say you don’t read The New York Times or The Washington Post (or The Note, for that matter). Let’s say you don’t follow the big political blogs and you’re not obsessed with every turn of the screw of this fascinating presidential race.
Let’s say, instead, like millions ofworking-class Americans, you get your “news” on the political race from the supermarket aisle. Let’s say you’re -- I don’t know, a “hockey mom” -- and you’re intrigued by this Sarah Palin person you’ve been hearing so much about since Friday.
So you’re shopping this week -- and what do you see on the cover of US Weekly? That esteemed journalistic institution is taking it right to John McCain’s running mate -- with a hard-hitting piece that details the “scandal” involving her daughter’s pregnancy.
“BABIES, LIES & SCANDAL,” screams the headline on the cover, with a picture of a smiling Palin holding her fifth child, 4-month-old Trig.
Inside is a collection of Palin lowlights -- from her daughter’s now well-known pregnancy; to Internet rumors that the governor pretended to be pregnant to cover for her daughter; to “troopergate”; to her onetime support for the “bridge to nowhere”; to a radio appearance where she giggled while shock jocks called a political rival a “bitch” and a “cancer.”
-snip-
But this, to me, is the clearest evidence yet that the McCain-Palin campaign is losing the battle over Palin’s image. US Weekly readers are the voters her selection was designed to attract. There’s not much to like in this early take -- and not much to indicate that the next round will be much better.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.abcnews.com ...
I sent this out to everyone on my email list.
Shameful of what CNN, ABC, NBC, and MSNBC have done. It makes me ashamed of the media in my country.
That is why the left HATES Fox News... because they don’t have them totally, just 50%.
my reply to all three:
You all, as employees, staff, decision makers, editors, etc., of this magazine should be ashamed to the core of your souls for what you are doing to this fine, upstanding woman, all in the interest of getting your liberal agenda shoved down the throats of the American people. I know you’ve all been thinking ‘wow! We are really going to sell magazines with this little tidbit of news!!’ Guess what? Your magazine will fail miserably. You don’t represent the majority of thinking in this country; you represent the wiles of Satan and his minions.
Where were you on John Edwards cheating on his dying wife?
Where ARE you with Barack Obama’s EXTREMELY QUESTIONABLE past and associations, such as the US bomber Bill Ayers or the white-hating Jeremiah Wright or the convicted felon Tony Rezko? I could absolutely go on and on with the pathetic history and resume’ of this man that you and your ilk refuse to cover. It’s a sad day when the fear rolls off the media in a wretched stink that they will NOT get their evil empire after all.
Wrong. Her selection was meant to cement the base and draw Reagan Dems. All of whom are the types who are aghast at the attacks on Palin and her family.
Because they are crackpots, I do not think that it was necessary to address that question.
Very much like those who believe that Hillary is a lesbian that had affairs with Web Hubble and Vince Foster.
So, you think that if Bristol had shown up at the announcement rally 9 months pregnant the nutroots would still have claimed she was Trig's mom?
Does not compute.
I knew yesterday what was to be on the cover today, but had no other details.
Appreciated.
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.