.
.
Posted on 09/14/2011 4:01:25 PM PDT by freespirited
.
.
Two weeks in a row two actually legit articles about Sarah Palin..and from the New York Slimes..holy cow, I am stunned! McGinnis is a major pervert though, he used to peer into the bedroom of Piper Palin, how sick is that!! I wouldn’t let little kids around that guy
All I can think of is that sound bite Rush used to play all the time
“We’re fierce, we’re feminists, and we’re in your face”
________________
See his famous controversy with Janet Malcolm.
She wrote:
Every journalist who is not too stupid or too full of himself to notice what is going on knows that what he does is morally indefensible. He is a kind of confidence man, preying on people's vanity, ignorance or loneliness, gaining their trust and betraying them without remorse. Like the credulous widow who wakes up one day to find the charming young man and all her savings gone, so the consenting subject of a piece of nonfiction learns—when the article or book appears—his hard lesson. Journalists justify their treachery in various ways according to their temperaments. The more pompous talk about freedom of speech and "the public's right to know"; the least talented talk about Art; the seemliest murmur about earning a living.
A lot of journalists weighed in on one side or the other.
It’s the whole feminist thing.
Ms. (pronounced mzzzz) was introduced in the 60s or 70s (I think) in order to eliminate the identifications of marriage, which anonymity the men already had through the ubiquitous Mr. (pronounced mister)
Previously there was Miss. (pronounced like you didn’t hit something you missed it) and Mrs. (pronounced like you didn’t hit something multiple times misses)
If Ms. predates the 60s then it must have been unfavored in usage and feminists just used it to get their point across.
It’s nice in business if your writing to a female and your unsure of here marital status you don’t have to make any assumptions.
The Slimes has decided to take out an insurance policy.
The NYT slamming an anti-Palin book??? A week after giving her a ‘somewhat’ positive review of her speech? Hmm, any ulterior motives? Maybe, maybe not.
Actually, in some ways Palin has been treated ‘ever-so-slightly’ better in certain elite liberal media quarters since those E-mails were released. That was such a grotesque, embarrassing frenzy, and the media just KNEW the e-mails would be full of horrid, petty stuff to pound her with. But when they read them, they were deflated, discovering she was actually an exceptionally honest and conscientious leader, going out of her way for transparency and clean government. I think it left them a bit addled, somehow learning that she was not at all the vile cartoon they had long framed her as, and thus, expected her to be. They were really that immersed in the false cartoon/caracature.
Needless to say, they will still always despise her for a whole variety of reasons, but I think the e-mails really knocked them off their feet a bit.
I think people are growing tired of this sort of nonsense. Some lefties will revel in this crap for a week or so, but I think even most of them have moved on and found new targets for their hate. The book is going to bomb and be forgotten very quickly. Personally attacking Governor Palin with this sort of trashy gossip is just tired and boring now. It’s been done, we’ve heard it all before, it’s just not interesting anymore for pretty much anyone.
Meh, the Times and the leftist mainstream media never opposed her for any legitimate reasons. The emails didn't impress them. The Reagan dairies and writings that were released clearly showed he was brilliant but didn't move the needle for these people, they still think Reagan was stupid.
Palin hate is just getting old. It's not interesting anymore. Palin's negatives are high, they don't think she is running, and feel liberated to say something marginally nice about her because they don't feel as threatened and it's a good excuse to prove they are fair.
It's all BS. If Palin actually ran for President and looked like she could be competitive, the likes of the NY Times would go right back to savaging her. As is, they just don't worry about her as much right now.
Yep. It’s called the blowback effect. The Times is outing the guy because he came up with nothing new or credible. This will energize Palin supporters and perhaps create new ones simply because they don’t like the way she’s being treated.
I don’t think even the Palin haters will buy this piece of trash.
SSSSSSHHHHHHH....
McGinnis is a Palin plant and his book is Palin strategy to gain sympathy!
There's no end to their hatred for Sarah and her family.
LLS
At least two FULL, and I mean full, threads this morning were devoted to the “Sarah slept with a black man meme.” It was sickening and disgusting. And now we have this from the NTeT that shows NOTHING of the sort happened. When does “respectful” equate to “sex”? Especially the kind of one night stand they were trying to make it out to be courtesy of The National Enquirer? Where are all the slimeballs and “good Christians” who reveled and wallowed in this this morning to retract their trashtalk and apologize to a very decent lady who never did them any harm?
Nah, people are bored of it. At this point it just looks like haters piling on. The book will get a week of attention and fade away quickly.
It was written by a metrosexual castroti.
LLS
Crap book on Wednesday.
Sarah announce on Thursday or Friday? Talk about timing. . . or Saturday the 17th!
"Constitution Day is September 17, 2011, to be observed and celebrated on September 16, 2011."
Run Sarah, RUN!
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.