Lessons from Frank Bailey's Tell-All Sarah Palin Book [zotworthy leftist garbage]

U.S.News & World Report ^ | 2/25/11 | Susan Milligan

[FTJM]

What have we learned recently from a couple of embarrassing disclosures recently involving elected officials?

Put down the BlackBerry. Move gently away from the keyboard. At least, for heaven’s sake, think before you hit “send.”

Former Rep. Chris Lee learned this when a woman decided to forward to a gossip website messages and a shirtless photo the married former congressman had sent. The motivations of the woman, who cowardly remained anonymous until the Washington Post outed her, were overshadowed by the impact on the congressman, who quickly resigned.

And now we have Sarah Palin, the subject of a gossipy tell-all book in the works by a former aide, Frank Bailey. The Daily Beast obtained a manuscript of the book, which relies partly on E-mails Bailey exchanged with Palin. One can’t deny that the E-mails are revealing--including the one in which Palin describes her role in politics as a “divine calling.” But revealing other private matters, such as an E-mail in which Palin allegedly alludes to some marital troubles, reflects real indiscretion from someone who supposedly had Palin’s trust. [See photos of Palin and her family.]

By the way, the marital troubles are discussed in an E-mail in which Palin tells Bailey she thought her husband was working behind her back on the Troopergate matter. “We’re not like other couples, Frank. We don’t talk,” Palin reportedly wrote to Bailey (cue laughter from longtime couples at the idea that not talking makes the Palins unique). [See a roundup of political cartoons on Palin.]

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

I saw it aqain on FOX, they looked so incredibly childish. They threw tantrums, kicked things, threw papers and generally trashed their chamber. The whole while, for the entire nation (Who watch FOX anyway) to see.

I wonder if the other networks will show that?

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

You were right, the term is Four-flushing which means to be dishonest, stems from card playing and bluffing, not a good term.

Thanks for inspiring me to look into it. So my description of Romney still stands! (I guess my old version worked for Romney also)

[miss marmelstein]

So funny!

Is there anybody you think should be prez? I’d be interested in hearing.

[Polybius]

You know the Left insanely hates and are horribly terrified of a person when they offer untold riches to entice close friends of that person to betray that person.

1. If some one writes or collaborates on a "tell all" book about you, that person was never your "close friend" to begin with ... Even if you slept with that person.

James Hewitt, a former British household cavalry officer in the British Army, had an affair with Diana, Princess of Wales for five years.He received extensive media coverage after revealing details of the affair.

2. Greed was not invented by the Left or the Right. If you are a public figure that the People Magazine crowd wants juicy gossip about, you are guaranteed to be the subject of a book or tabloid headline if you were careless about airing your dirty laundry to the wrong people.

The Politician: An Insider's Account of John Edwards's Pursuit of the Presidency and the Scandal That Brought Him Down

3. Just because you are the subject of a "tell all" book does not mean that anybody "fears" you. It just means that selling your dirty laundry makes the author and the publisher money.

Lindsay Lohan's Assistant Offered Tell-All Book Deal

I kind of like anti-Palin posts... her defenders far outnumber her critics here

The operative word is "here".

Does it really matter that Ralph Nader is wildly popular among his own, adoring Fan Club but crashes and burns when he runs for President every four years when everybody else outside of the adoring Fan Club gets to vote?

Outside of the Echo Chamber of the Sarah Palin Fan Club threads on Free Republic, such as Pissant's critical threads, things are different. Outside of Free Republic altogether, the situation is drastically different.

FOX News Poll (February 7-9, 2011)

Question 3: I am going to read you a list of names. Tell me if you think that person would make a good President or not.

Sarah Palin:

...............YES.........NO.......DK.....Never heard of

All .............23%.......72%.......4%.......1%

Dem ............7%.......87%........5%.......1%

Rep ...........40%.......56%.......3%.......1%

Ind ...........25%........69%.......3%.......1%

My main concern is ensuring that Barrack Hussein Obama is NOT reelected President in 2012.

Since a guaranteed way to get Barrack Hussein Obama reelected President in 2012 is for Republicans to be so foolish as to nominate a person that 72% of ALL voters believe would NOT make a good President, I tried to instill some degree of reality into the uncritical and irrational worship of Sarah Palin.

"Palin couldn't explain why North Korea and South Korea were separate nations. ..... Asked to identify the enemy that her son would be fighting in Iraq, she drew a blank. Later, on the plane, Palin said to her team: 'I wish I'd paid more attention to this stuff'."

[miss marmelstein]

Like all my intellectual pursuits, I derived my knowledge of “four-flushing” from Abbott and Costello movies. Thanks for doing the homework.

I’ve enjoyed sparring with you!

[don-o]

Lot of that going around lately. We got us a whole passel of obsessives over a half term Governor.

I love her message, but President? Not this time.

[Happy Rain]

Thought it was “four flusher” as in someone bluffed at Stud Poker by a hand that is one “hole” card shy of a true “Flush.”
Who would bet against FOUR spades/hearts/diamonds/clubs showing without a really good hand?
Getting “four flushed” in the Old West caused a lot of gunfire.

[DoughtyOne]

Hey, I’ve had the same thoughts. And on top of that, who picked those t-shirts? Orange?

I didn’t see the print, but I didn’t have to.

It had to have read, “I helped shut down WI government, but all I got was this lousy t-shirt!”

Okay, okay... to long.

It could also have said, “I’m with stupid!”

That would have worked for every one of them.

[upsdriver]

One can’t deny that the E-mails are revealing--including the one in which Palin describes her role in politics as a “divine calling.

As in "being led by the Lord"? Yeah, that's really an odd and revealing thing for a Christian to believe./sarc

[Happy Rain]

Thank you—you have supplied added evidence to my original hypothesis.

There is no difference between pithy and verbose PDS spin— only levels of mendacity.

Thank you again.

[dirtboy]

Nothing like linking to a hit piece in a liberal magazine - citing moronic McCain campaign advisors - to try and close out your point.

And I wonder what polling for Ronald Reagan as a potential president would have looked like in, say, 1975 or so?

Oh, and I have my own concerns about Palin, I am in no way a true believer. I just know that normal FReepers post liberal talking points on FR for target practice, not to try and buttress their arguments.

[dirtboy]

Even better, here is a snippet about polling in 1979:

http://articles.cnn.com/2007-11-06/politics/schneider.one.year_1_republican-polls-democratic-field-democratic-front-runner?_s=PM:POLITICS

The year-before polls got it wrong twice. In 1979, the polls predicted Carter would beat Reagan.

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

And I appreciate your gracious demeanor.

To answer your question about who I support? I am still out on that. “None of the above” is the best I can come up with at this point.

I have always liked Sarah Palin, as I said during ‘08. I know she is capable of good things, and she has a solid moral backing.

I watched her perform in Palmer Alaska when she was running for Miss Alaska. (State Fair) She also won the “Miss Congeniality” award at the pageant. She comes from a solid family and represents all the good things that most Americans have lost touch with.

My concerns are mostly with the damage the media will do to her as a candidate. 2008 was an example of that ruthless personal destruction they pride themselves on to this day.

This will not stop this time around. It will be much worse if it is allowed to happen. And we all know what to expect.

[miss marmelstein]

I’m amazed you saw her in Alaska when she was running for Miss Alaska. How cool is that?

Yes, it’s too early to predict. I’m not really feeling too confident about 2012 but stranger things have happeened. The msm is determined to get this creep reelected. I have so many fears. Islamism! Corruption! Hatred of America by my fellow Americans! Woman hatred! Sharia Law! Obama! The King’s Speech winning the Oscar!

[Ole Okie]

We have never talked a lot and we have been happily married for 45 years.

Maybe that's why you've been married 45 years.

My beautiful first wife and I were happily married for 53 years. I never understood why she put up with me, but it may have been because we didn't talk a lot, either.

[alstewartfan]

PF, EVERYONE will be subjected to ruthless personal attack the minute they threaten B.O.Punk’s power. Palin/Rubio ‘12! Bob

[rob777]

"That any idiot can write a supposed ‘tell-all’ book and even more idiots will believe everything in them, without critical thinking."


The question is not whether the persons involved are a credible source, but it would be too easy to refute a claim to have access to such e-mails by simply producing the originals. It is just too easy to verify their validity by tracking them. If I was going to make up a story like this to smear someone, I would not claim to have e-mails if I didn't have any. The claim could too easily be disproved and I would be discredited. It would be far more effective to claim the source came from personal conversations. That could neither be proved or disproved. Some doubt would linger in the minds of those who heard the allegations. I just do not see anybody with even a little bit of savvy making claims that can so easily be disproven. I could understand her political opponents being deceitful and vindictive, but am less likely to believe that they would be so foolish. They could be making this whole thing up, but I suspect that they are a little more savvy than that.

[ReneeLynn]

I don’t. Emails can be faked. And he has not provided them for observation, so...

[Grampa Dave]

P>"Palin’s electability can be reckoned as an inverse function of the virulent campaign intent on her delegitimation. ! The greater the fury … she is met with, the greater the likelihood that she poses a genuine threat! One does not raise a mallet to crush an ant.”

The reality of what Sarah Palin does to liberals, maggot infected gays posing as journalists/writers, lesbians, abortion queens, and of course the kind and gentle Rinos is shown below: