Interesting article on Sarah Palin
- Thread starter aztecknight
- Start date
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
"Sarah Palin is a Big Poopy Head"
NYT just shot their October Surprise wad. Nice hit piece, hatchet job. Interview everyone you can find that hates her. Clever. Not. After all, it's not unexpected that after going to war with her own party, some of them might turn on her. Duh.
Remind me how many times Obama's opposed his own party?
And in a small town how do you not hire friends?
If anything, this article shows her to be powerful and effective, taking no prisoners. Go Sarah!
Too bad she doesn't govern like a former New York Governor.
Sure does explain Palin's 80% approval rating with Alaskans.
Keep firing, New York Times! You're helping McCain!
NYT just shot their October Surprise wad. Nice hit piece, hatchet job. Interview everyone you can find that hates her. Clever. Not. After all, it's not unexpected that after going to war with her own party, some of them might turn on her. Duh.
Remind me how many times Obama's opposed his own party?
And in a small town how do you not hire friends?
If anything, this article shows her to be powerful and effective, taking no prisoners. Go Sarah!
Too bad she doesn't govern like a former New York Governor.
Sure does explain Palin's 80% approval rating with Alaskans.
Keep firing, New York Times! You're helping McCain!
I do agree with that point. The election doesnt seem to be focused on McCain and Obama or the issues anymore. Its seemingly all about Palin and whether she's fit.
Distraction and misdirection at its finest, and the democrats seem to be falling for it.
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
I havent decided yet. It doesnt really matter, Illinois will go to Obama anyway.
aztecknight
Active LVC Member
"Sarah Palin is a Big Poopy Head"
NYT just shot their October Surprise wad. Nice hit piece, hatchet job. Interview everyone you can find that hates her. Clever. Not. After all, it's not unexpected that after going to war with her own party, some of them might turn on her. Duh.
Remind me how many times Obama's opposed his own party?
And in a small town how do you not hire friends?
If anything, this article shows her to be powerful and effective, taking no prisoners. Go Sarah!
Too bad she doesn't govern like a former New York Governor.
Sure does explain Palin's 80% approval rating with Alaskans.
Keep firing, New York Times! You're helping McCain!
Where should we start with the fallacies. Appeal to ridicule and 3 red herrings.
Regardless, to be fair they did ask Palin for an interview and she declined. I'll put the conservative spin here "SHE MUST BE HIDING SOMETHING." They interviewed those that would or could be interviewed. Again, some people are/were told not to give interviews.
As for hiring friends in a small town, well its called nepotism. Especially bad when the individuals you hire aren't qualified... see Brown and FEMA. This would be debatable if the individuals were qualified, but I don't think they were in all cases.
I did notice the same thing you did though, it is amazing she has an 80% rating. Seems counterintuitive.
There are parallels with how she runs her administration to that of 'W'.
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
Ad hominem...
Biased sample and hasty generalization...Why should she give an interview to a hack newspaper that is clearly bent on finding every little bit of dirt on her? You might as well bemoan her lack of interest in talking to the Enquirer.
Nepotism is hiring family or relatives.
Brown and FEMA conflates with Palin and Wasilla? Talk about a red herring.
Appeal to authority and burden of proof...Link or slink...
Based on what, the Times' one-sided, anecdotal evidence? Poisoning the well...
And finally, guilt by association.
Obviously a great majority of people in Alaska approve of the way Palen wields power.
What the small minority find dark and disturbing the majority find strong and decisive.
She has the right to appoint whom she wishes even friends
(a practice known as cronyism, not nepotism)
And besides, no one is saying her appointments have led to incompetence, malfeacense, corruption or scandal.
This is the usual charge leveled against cronyism ie putting incompetents in place where they screw up.
However I haven't read anything to that effect so the cronyism charge is simply a red herring.
What the small minority find dark and disturbing the majority find strong and decisive.
She has the right to appoint whom she wishes even friends
(a practice known as cronyism, not nepotism)
And besides, no one is saying her appointments have led to incompetence, malfeacense, corruption or scandal.
This is the usual charge leveled against cronyism ie putting incompetents in place where they screw up.
However I haven't read anything to that effect so the cronyism charge is simply a red herring.
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
I'm confused. How is there even a decision to be made here?
If Hillary was running instead of Obama, I'd at least give you the benefit of the doubt. But golly gee wizzzz, there should be no question.