Far East Cynic

Speaking of a biased media…….

James Fallows has some questions about Saint Sarah and her supposed hatred of pork barrel spending:

In Governor Palin’s case, the more often she has repeated the story, the more abashed the press has seemed about pointing out its falsity. The accurate version would be more like: “I said ‘Yes, please!’ until the Congress said ‘Sorry, no.'” As best I can tell (from my distance in China), the right-wing press has played no part in this truth-squadding. The mainstream press has seemed to treat it as a “controversy” rather than a falsehood. And there is no evidence of Palin hesitating to use the story again and again.

There can’t be any difference in gender or race bias in treatment of these two cases: they both both involve successful, married white female politicians. There is no essential difference in the falseness of their claims, though there was a greater comic potential in the film footage of Sen. Clinton’s “harrowing” arrival. The major remaining difference is that one case involves a Democrat (though the more conservative of the primary-campaign finalists) and one a Republican.

So here are the controlled-experiment questions:

1) At any point will the right-wing press join the effort to hold Palin accountable for her false claim, as all of the press held Clinton responsible?

2)  If Palin keeps making the claim, will press critics redouble their debunking, as they did with Clinton, or taper off for fear of seeming biased or boring?

3) At any point will Palin herself — or, far more significant, McCain — acknowledge that there are such things as fact and fantasy, and stop making a demonstrably false claim?

I pose it as a set of questions rather than an assumed conclusion. For now.

Now tell me again, about how the the governor is just getting slimed by the liberal press.

  1. Not that I place any credence in what Matt Damon thinks, but in this case he asks some good questions and makes a few good points:

    “…I need to know if she really thinks that dinosaurs were really here 4,000 years ago. I want to know that. Because she’s going to have the nuclear codes. I want to know that and I want to know if she tried to ban books. We can’t have that.”

    The team Palin response: Maria Comella, a spokeswoman for Palin says “It’s not surprising that the Barack Obama and his celebrity supporters continue to tear down Governor Palin with little more than blatant name-calling.”

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26646843/

    What about answering the question, or is that somehow beneath contempt.

    According to fact check (dot) org. She hypothetically discussed banning some books from the Wilessa Public Library, but did not get into specifics nor implement and policies.

    Regarding creationism, her input was if it comes up in class, it is okay to discuss it. That seems reasonable since about 60% of americans believe in some form of creationism.

    Even though I was able to find those answers myself, many cannot. I think it is reasonable to request the the potential President of the United States explain a few things which on the surface look constitutionally questionable.

    Just sayin’

  2. Not that I place any credence in what Matt Damon says, but in this case I think he asks a few valid questions and makes some good points.

    “…I need to know if she really thinks that dinosaurs were really here 4,000 years ago. I want to know that. Because she’s going to have the nuclear codes. I want to know that and I want to know if she tried to ban books. We can’t have that.”

    The team Palin Response: Maria Comella, a spokeswoman for Palin says “It’s not surprising that the Barack Obama and his celebrity supporters continue to tear down Governor Palin with little more than blatant name-calling.”

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26646843/

    How about answering the question, or is that somehow beneath contempt. I think the potential President of the United States should clarify things and explain a few things that, on the surface, seem constitutionally questionable.

    For the record, I was able to find a few answers myself at Fact Check. org:

    While mayor of Wilessa, Palin did have a hypothetical conversation with the town librarian about banning certain books. No specifics were discussed, nor were any policies implemented.

    Also, when asked about teaching creationism, Palin stated that it was okay to discuss it in class if a question came up. That seems reasonable since >50% of Americans believe in some form of creationism.

    It gets back to the whole avoidance thing, rather that explaining actions, it is better to throw a temper tantrum and call the opponent a bully.

  7. Not that I am American so I really don’t give too much of a fuck save that the next US President and his running mate will have the power to heal the damage done in US-World relations or further divide it, but I do have one question…

    …she stands on a forum and lauds her daughter for choosing to keep her baby, but then wants to take that choice away from every other American woman…

    …isn’t that just a little hypocritical?

  8. Just a little bit……………

    But that’s what has happened to the politics in America these days. Private issues have assumed way too much importance in the public discourse.

    Which is why we spend our days worrying about how pigs look in lipstick.

  10. Indiana
    reminds me of what Eric Servereid said when watching Americans in Europe after WW2. The French and the Brits walk around like they own the world, the Americans walk around like they don’t give a damn.
    (paraphrasing, thats why no quotes)

  11. Hey Indiana, screw the rest of the world. We don’t give a crap what you think about us. Most of them are absolute savages and the rest cater to the most savage ones. What did your country ever do for the citizens of the world? Would your country be a russian speaking or a german speaking country now if Americans hadn’t taken an interest?

    Skippy, the most interesting thing I read recently was that 95% of the people that don’t think the MSM is biased pronounce themselves to be Democrat Party followers. That being the case, everything they see in the MSM is fair and balanced and so of course they see no bias. How could they when they agree with just about everything that appears in the MSM?